Dumbledore questions...

[Barry Arrowsmith]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "susiequsie23" <susiequsie23 at ...> wrote:
SPOILER.........................................
SPACE.............................................
THE...................................................
BOUNDARY....................................
BETWEEN.......................................
INNOCENCE..................................
AND..................................................
DISILLUSIONMENT......................

> 
> 
> 
> With Dumbledore, however, I could use some help from others.  
> 
> I know that many adult fans wanted a DD who was more puppetmasterish, more 
directing-weapon!Harryish, more culpable, more flawed, less 'epitome of goodness' than 
what we'd seen on the surface through 6....  And, well, obviously, we got that.  We got a 
DD who kept many secrets, who, according to Snape, *used* him (and others), who 
dabbled in things and espoused things we might never have expected.  
> 
> This probably pleases many.
> 

Can't speak for others, obviously.
But I think the fans pleasure isn't because DD was flawed, but because
they correctly sensed that you only become as DD became by living 
through bitter and probably hurtful experiences. To believe, as some 
did, that DD must have been a fount of sweetness and light ever 
since he first grasped a wand doesn't seem credible given the way he
behaved. He's a man who realised that choices were difficult, had 
consequences that may not be pleasant, and you had to live with those
consequences afterwards.

He's a bloke who's been there, done that and got the T-shirt.
And having lived through all that, he knows that others will probably also
have to suffer before the goodies can win. But it has to be done and it's 
down to him to make certain it's done.

IMO that's much more admirable than a saintly do-gooder bleating about 
doing good.

There's a painting, once ascribed to Rembrandt, though the authenticity
is now disputed. It's entitled 'The Man in the Gilt Helmet' It's a  head
and shoulders of an old warrior, and you can see deaths, defeats and
all the sorrows of the world in his eyes. Even so, he's still a warrior, 
and he will do what is necessary. His experiences made him what he is.
That's the image I've always had of DD. 

As to what Jo intended us to think - dunno.
Seemed a bit woolly to me.
And the back-story she dumped on him looks as if it was designed
to shock fans into a re-assessment of him and his motives rather than 
to enlighten.
Not that I think it's a *good* back-story, anyway.

Kneasy