Harry's alleged debt to Dumbledore and Snape WAS: Re: Chapter Discussion

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 190833


> 
> > Alla:
> > <snip>
> >  It is because I consider him a hypocritical manipulator, who would IMO sacrifice anybody's life and happiness to achieve his goals. Even if the goal is noble, as in to fight against Voldemort, but the way he did it, makes him really not that much better than Voldemort in my eyes.
> > 
> > Pippin:
> > I don't know about JKR's ethics, but IMO, you are harder on Dumbledore than Jewish ethics would be.  In Jewish law, any commandment may be broken except those against murder, idolatry,  and sexual crimes, in order to save a life.  And  if it is done to stop someone who is pursuing another to take their life,  the sacrifice of life is not only permitted  but required.
> > 
> >  Harry and Dumbledore agree that Dumbledore never killed unless he had to, which would mean he did not commit murder. 
> > 
> > Dumbledore never idolized anyone after Grindelwald, and fanfic aside, I think it is safe to assume he didn't commit any sexual crimes either. 
> > 
> > Dumbledore admits to selfishness, but he only admires himself when his plans work, and when his plans work they save lives.
> > 
> > Nikkalmati
> 
> I am not sure I follow you.  Do you mean any action DD took to save lives (in his own opinion) was justified?  I am not sure ethics allows you to sacrifice a third party to stop a killer from pursuing someone you think is more important. 

Pippin: 

I agree that you can't sacrifice one innocent life to save another. You can't save the person you think is more important, though in RL nobody would blame you if you tried -- I was just reading about an Israeli mother and politician, who said that she would fight tooth and nail to get her son a deferment from the army -- but she would  want the government to turn her down flat. 

You can, if you have the rightful authority,  order soldiers to die to defend their country from an invader. Or you can ask that the strong choose to die to protect the weak, which is the essence of chivalry, not a Jewish concept  but not incompatible, IMO.  

 Most people don't choose Gryffindor, the house of chivalry  (in the books -- I'm not talking about fans playing let's pretend.)  But some do. Was Dumbledore supposed to brainwash them out of their choice, like he should have (according to some fans) brainwashed the Slytherins out of being bloodists, or brainwashed the House Elves into wanting their freedom,  or the Dursleys into being better parents, on the grounds that some people are just too ignorant and childlike to know what is good for them? 

Dumbledore didn't brainwash Harry into wanting to save people. Harry wanted that for himself. All Dumbledore did was show Harry how it was possible for him to do it and still become the person he wanted to be, instead of the K**a** wizard some of the readers thought he should be. 

Nikkalmati:
> DD's problem was an enormous ego and a lack of trust in other people.  

Pippin:
Interesting... I wouldn't consider those ethical issues, per se, though certainly they might be a serious obstacle to ethical behavior. 

 Generally, when somebody tells me I have a moral duty to trust other people (frail as we all are), I decline the Kool-aid, check to see that I've still got my wallet and  head for the nearest door. <g>
 

Nikkalmati:
Ironically, he apparently trusted SS more than he did anyone else, but never told even him about the Horcruxes.  He concealed information in order to manipulate people because he did not trust them to make the right decisions. 

Pippin:
The knowledge was Dumbledore's, right?  I mean, he wasn't researching Voldemort's history or  horcruxes or the Hallows on the Ministry's sickle, or Snape's for that matter. He had every right, IMO, to decide what he was going to do with the information once he'd discovered it. He was taking a lot on himself by telling Harry about the horcruxes, since that subject was forbidden to teach.  He held off, in fact, until he was sure that Harry would be able to save lives if he knew.  

Nikkalmati:
 He did not trust any wizarding family to raise Harry properly;

Pippin:
On the contrary, he admits that there were many wizarding families who would have taken Harry in. He did not think they could keep Harry safe from Voldemort and his agents as well as the Dursleys could. In a way, that could be Lily's fault. If she had thought to cast her spell of protection over everybody, the way Harry did, instead of only over her child, then perhaps Dumbledore wouldn't have needed a blood affinity to set up the protection. 

Don't you think Peter Pettigrew would have been at Privet Drive if he could?


Nikkalmati:
 He did not trust Harry with knowledge about the Hallows because he feared he would forget about the Horcruxes

Pippin:
That is true, and Dumbledore admits his error and begs Harry to forgive him for it. But that did not cost any lives, though Harry did have to go through a lot of  angst trying to figure things out and  wondering why Dumbledore did not trust him enough to tell him the truth straight out. 

Nikkalmati:
 he did not tell Snape about the wand even though he intended Snape to end up with the wand (did he intend for LV to kill Snape too as a "necessary sacrifice"?);

Pippin:

Dumbledore and Snape both knew that Voldemort, murderous and irrational, might kill Snape at any time for any reason or no reason at all. Facing that danger was Snape's choice, not an order.  "If you are ready? If you are prepared?" 

We don't know what Snape was supposed to do with the Elder Wand -- but that doesn't mean that Snape didn't know, only that it wasn't necessary for the story JKR wanted to tell. 

I imagine Snape was to check that it had indeed lost its powers, as Dumbledore hoped it would if its master died undefeated.  Snape would abandon it once he was sure it could not be used, and it would have been broken and entombed with Dumbledore. If Voldemort wanted to claim the pieces as a trophy he'd be welcome to it. 

But   Draco became master of the  wand  because Dumbledore froze  Harry to keep him out of the fight rather than defend himself. So there is an instance where Dumbledore sacrificed his plan in order to save Harry, who was in the most immediate peril. 

Nikkalmati:
  He could have told Harry that he had to sacrifice himself in that last year and I think Harry could have accepted it.  

Pippin:
You've missed something. The reason Harry couldn't know he had to sacrifice himself was not that he couldn't have accepted it, though that's the reason Dumbledore gave Snape. The reason Harry couldn't know was so that he could, in setting out to die, use the magic of willing sacrifice to save those whom he loved, that is, everyone who was willing to oppose LV. Once Harry had done that, Voldemort had no more power to hurt anyone who opposed him. 

Dumbledore gave Harry a clue: "If I know [Harry], he will have arranged matters so that when he does set out to meet his death, it will truly mean the end of Voldemort."

I confess, may JKR forgive me, that for a long time  that didn't make any sense to me at all. 

I remember my confusion as I read it the first time. Harry only gets the message if Voldemort has started to protect Nagini, right?  So how can Harry setting out mean the end of Voldemort ?  Harry can't kill him and  all the horcruxes haven't been destroyed.

But JKR wasn't being incoherent, as I thought. There actually was  a way, and Harry found it, as Dumbledore expected he would. That's why King's Cross Dumbledore hasn't got anything to say about arranging for Harry to think he would die, except that he knew all along that Harry wouldn't. Harry has already figured out the rest, though the reader doesn't know that yet. 


Nikkalmati: 
> By not confiding in other people, he took terrible risks and caused others to take risks they were not aware of.  He was very lucky that Harry was able to find the Horcruxes and that SS was able to deliver his message to Harry before he died.

 He was lucky that Lupin never bit anyone while a student (or a teacher).  It has been pointed out that he took risks with the students that last year by not expelling Draco. (example, Katy and Ron). I cannot see DD as any kind of a moral model.  

Pippin:
Yes, the plan was terribly risky for Harry and Snape, and for all the members of the Order, but they volunteered to risk themselves on others' behalf. They all knew there was stuff they weren't being told. They could trust Dumbledore, or they could leave the Order and fight on their own. That was their choice. 

The literal meaning of Knight is not soldier -- it is servant. The knight goes into harm's way, just as in the chess game in PS/SS, so that other people do not have to.

Lupin was in no danger of biting anybody if Lupin had done as he agreed to do. So that was a case of DD trusting Lupin.  It is true that the WW has been brainwashed into thinking you can't trust werewolves, and if Lupin failed in his trust because he was a werewolf then DD was wrong. 

 But Lupin did not fail in his trust because he was a werewolf, IMO. He failed because he was a coward, and there is nothing, as far as I know, that forbids cowards from attending Hogwarts, and even from becoming Gryffindors if they desire, though the Hat probably told Lupin he should consider another House. 

Dumbledore judged that Draco would be in immediate peril if he were expelled, and not an immediate peril to anyone else if he was watched closely. So DD's moral duty, according to this system of ethics, was to protect the person in more immediate peril.

 He might have been wrong and he nearly was,  about how well he could protect others from Draco, but he was the Headmaster, so he was responsible for the safety of the students and it was his choice to make. Since it does not say anywhere that Hogwarts is a democracy, I don't see why that decision should have been subject to a vote.

 Dumbledore did warn everyone that they were in more  peril than usual that year. Some families chose to heed his warning and kept their children home. Some didn't. Some trusted they were still safer at Hogwarts than anywhere else. That was their choice. 

Pippin