Varying Views of Characters - The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 190920



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bart at ...> wrote:
>
> Steve:
> > Harry was a soldier, Harry had a duty, part of the duty was to die at the right time; he did his duty like countless other soldiers that have been marched to their own death.
> >
> > As for Dumbledore sending him, that is the duty of a General, to send good men to their death, if it advances the cause of victory.
> 
> Bart:
> Except for one little detail: Harry lived. And, at KC, we see 
> that Dumbledore was as sure as he could get of such things that
> Harry WOULD live. That's a point I've been making continually in
> this conversation: paradoxically, the only way for Harry to 
> survive was for him to believe he was sacrificing himself.
> 
>      Bart
>

Steve replies:

I don't disagree with you, but I fear I may have gotten so long winded that I obscured my own point.

Some people were complaining that discussions were painting Dumbledore as a least a bad person, if not an evil person.

But, I don't think those discussions are attempts by anyone to define Dumbledore in his totality. They are discussing one aspect of Dumbledore, and just because someone is discussing aspect they feel reflect badly on Dumbledore, does not mean they regard Dumbledore as bad in his totality. 

Yes, Dumbledore did terrible things, he was forced to make decisions that we would dearly hope that we never have to make in our lifetime. But, for better or worse, those were decisions Dumbledore had to make. These dark decision are part of the responsibility of leadership. Old men send young men to die; that's why the call it War. 

Keep in mind, we have discussed very minute aspect of these stories in unbelievable detail. Go back a few years and read some of the post, and you will see that detail. 

After you've cover the obvious aspect in deep detail, you start looking at and discussing some of the less obvious aspect, like dark and terrible things Dumbledore was forced to do, such as sending Harry to his death, or seeming death. 

But, because that was pointed out and discussed, does not mean that discussion completely defined Dumbledore. We are sufficiently versed in Potterlore to see that all characters are multi-faceted people, each faced with no easy choices. 

I fear I may have again rambled on too long, but the point is, just because we fall into a discussion of one aspect of a character, doesn't mean we see that character as that one single aspect.

Steve/bboyminn