Resolutions (was: Epilogue (was Re: Ron and Parseltongue)/Slytherins are Bad

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 183452

> Julie:
> Again I agree with you, Magpie :-) I argued vehemently for
> a truly caring Dumbledore who gave out second chances primarily
> for the sake of the person desiring/needing that second chance,
> and who believed even the most damaged souls deserved to be 
> saved. The Tower scene in HBP sealed it for me. And then DH
> unsealed it, when we learned that saving Draco's soul is just
> part of a strategic plan. 
> 
> Yes, Dumbledore suggests Draco's soul isn't as tainted as
> Snape's, but it still read strongly to me that Dumbledore 
> isn't so much in the saving souls business as he is into 
> carrying out his grand plan to defeat Voldemort. And I can't
> say we weren't clued in, as Dumbledore had expressed little 
> interest in any of his students' souls before, never making
> an observable effort to prevent any student from joining 
> Voldemort's camp, not when Snape was a student, nor in 
> Harry's student days when Voldemort makes his triumphant
> return and everyone knows he is actively recruiting new
> DEs, particularly the already primed children of his current
> DEs (Slytherins, for the most part). 

Pippin:
If he didn't care about the students, why remain headmaster when
Voldemort was taking over? It would have been far easier to organize
resistance to Voldemort as Minister of Magic. 

You're also forgetting his speech in GoF, where he begs the school to
unite and tells them all, looking at the Slytherin Table, that they
will be welcome at Hogwarts at any time. 

Slytherins want to win, so the way to recruit them is to convince them
that Voldemort is going to lose, or that they will lose by joining
him. Dumbledore never misses an opportunity to emphasize that. He
wants them on his side, unlike McGonagall, who loses trust in Snape
once she learns that he was a Death Eater, and who who takes the first
opportunity to get rid of the Slytherins once she's in power. 

But DD's not about to indoctrinate people against their parents. And
he isn't about pity either. Dumbledore's own father was an outlaw and
so was his brother; he knows exactly what it's like to grow up being
treated like you come from a family of criminals. He doesn't pity the
Slytherin kids because he didn't like being pitied himself. Who would?

People keep thinking that "epitome of goodness" is synonymous with
sainthood, and it's obviously not. A saint is a living example of
holiness, as George jokingly reminds us in DH. That's as far beyond
ordinary goodness as Voldemort is  beyond ordinary evil. 
 
Dumbledore is the epitome of ordinary goodness; he expects to do well
by doing good. He grasps that there is something beyond that, but he
seldom gets there. There were always hints that he wasn't  as saintly
as people thought he was. But we're meant to understand, IMO, that he
used his last moments well. 

Yes, Dumbledore had a material as well as a moral reason for planning
to let Snape to kill him instead of Draco. But that plan was spoiled
when he lost the wand. At the moment  on the tower when
Dumbledore decides to talk Draco out of killing him, the plan looks
completely trashed.

DD hasn't been able to send for Snape. If he talks  Draco down but the
Death Eaters  reach the Tower, both he and Draco will probably be
killed. There's no chance of disabling the Elder Wand, no chance of
giving Harry vital information about the sword.  If by some miracle
Snape arrives, there'll be no concealing from the WW or Harry that
Snape is a "murderer", no way to follow through on the offer to give
Narcissa and Draco protection from Voldemort.  And it looks like DD's
about to die anyway. No wonder that  Snape  hesitates. They are way,
way  off plan.

But with all this going on, Dumbledore chooses to save Draco's soul,
the action with the most moral importance but the least obvious
benefit to the war. If it had turned out that saving Draco had some
major material benefit, we would think that Dumbledore could have
foreseen it, as he did with Pettigrew, and that would diminish the
moral impact of his choice.

It could have been powerful and dramatic for Draco to do something
positive to help Harry. But it would have been completely off message,
IMO, both in showing us through Dumbledore what moral behavior is
supposed to be, and in showing us through people's reactions to
Slytherin how morality can be subverted.

There are many characters in the book whose role is to show us how
unfair it is to expect less of people because of the group they belong
to. With the Slytherins,  JKR is more interested in the ways that
decent people can be persuaded to ignore that message. One of them is
to slant everything that they hear about a certain group towards
making them think that group is both scary and inferior. IMO,
Slytherin is her thought experiment for that. 

Pippin