Dumbledore/LONG and bad, SKIP if you do not feel like reading it :-)

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 191023

 
> > Pippin:
> > Saying you don't care about canon facts does not make them go away:)  This one shows that Tom Riddle was not remembered as a pitiful human who had sociopathic tendencies.  Dumbledore could not get anyone to believe that when Riddle was at Hogwarts, so how was he to get anyone to believe it later? He has no proof. Known is better than unknown indeed, but not if what everybody "knows" is a lie. 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Right, however he was not remembered as a mystery creature who cannot be defeated either. IMO it is easier to fight against human wizard than against a mystery.

Pippin:
So where is the canon that anyone thought Voldemort was a mystery creature and that's why they couldn't fight him? They couldn't fight him because everybody who tried got killed. 

 Harry concludes that giving yourself a fancy title and trying to hide your past  just shows how pathetic you are. Even Frank Bryce wasn't impressed by this "Lord" business. But that didn't save him. 

> Alla:
> . To me the bigger problem is that nowhere in the book as far as I can see it says that Dumbledore could not visit Dursleys and put considerable pressure on them to treat Harry better. And no, I do not care how much threat of blackmail and/or physical damage he would apply to make Dursleys obey him. He took a responsibility upon himself to rule the fate of the innocent baby, and if he can only protect him by threatening Dursleys, I say so be it. As I also mentioned before, we see that Petunia obeys the letter in OOP, period. I do not see why he could not do the same thing decade earlier. 
> In other words the choice you are describing is a false dishotomy for me, because I interpret that Dumbledore COULD make Harry's life easier even with Dursleys and did not do so. The pain and damage in my view was not necessary to keep Harry safe. I mean, to take Dursleys in his life, maybe, but not to tolerate the way they treated Harry. 

Pippin:
LOL! This was precisely Dumbledore's reasoning when he and Grindelwald were going to force the Muggles  into submission along with any wizards who didn't agree with what they were doing -- it was all going to make life easier for Arianna and she wouldn't have to be locked away any more. 

Only it didn't work. Dumbledore learned he could not predict when people will decide they have had enough and strike back against a tyrant and there is no predicting who is going to get hurt once a battle begins. Dumbledore never thought his own brother would oppose him, he never thought Grindelwald would lose control of himself, he didn't think *he* would lose control of himself, and he never thought Arianna would get involved in the fight. 

So maybe you can predict  that  the Dursleys would never find a way to fight back and never decide that Harry wasn't worth the trouble of keeping him, and maybe you trust that Dumbledore or someone he trusted would never lose control of themselves and hurt Harry by accident  -- but Dumbledore knows he's not so skilled. Divination is not his strong suit. 

And you said yourself that the worst of it was that other wizards were influenced by what Dumbledore  planned to do. That would be a nice example for Lucius -- Albus Dumbledore demonstrating exactly how you can torture Muggles and get the Ministry to approve. 
 
> Pippin:
> >  It's very possible that if it had known the truth,  the WW would have given up on Harry the way it would have given up on Arianna. Do you think they would have trusted Harry with a wand at all, much less a  wand that was brother to Voldemort's, if they knew that Harry had a bit of Voldemort's soul inside him? 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> LOL. Dumbledore had no problem not giving information to so many people, why would you think that if he gave Harry to wizarding family, like I don't know, Weasleys, he would have suddenly decided to share such information.

Pippin:
LOL. Harry is the most famous person in the WW and inquiring minds want to know how he survived the killing curse. Give them half a chance and they'll  try to examine Harry  whether Dumbledore lets them  or not. I always wondered why Dumbledore didn't have Harry checked out by a healer when he started complaining about his scar. 

> Alla:
> 
> Yes, but I thought I already explained that I am still confused and not sure how that [Harry's blood in Voldemort's body] actually works. 

Pippin:
We don't know how any of the magic actually works. Time Turners, Hallows and Wands, oh my!

But when has Dumbledore been wrong about what it does? He says explicitly that Voldemort kept Harry from dying by taking Harry's blood, and that he guessed it would happen. Further, when he told Snape Harry had to die, he had his hands over his eyes. 

Not that you'd know that from Harry Potter and the Incredible Box Office.  Make it visually explicit, and even a baby would guess Dumbledore was playing peekaboo with the truth. 


> Alla:
> 
> Unfortunately him asking Dumbledore's opinion about the wand and whether he did right thing to me contradicts what you are saying. I think it shows that he is still measuring himself against Dumbledore and wants his approval. Thus I would have to fight really hard not to be contaminated by this scene lol, I just sighed happily when I saw it.
> <snip>
> 
> But he does do exactly what Dumbledore says, thats my problem. Heh, I always like talking to you too :).


Pippin:
Thank you:) 
But if Harry changes his mind  because Dumbledore agrees with him, then he's still measuring himself against Dumbledore, just in a contrary way.

Pippin