The problem is that about 9/10 of Indy!Harry fics have Dumbledore repeating those exact two words about every three sentences, usually with the "Greater Good" capitalised and preceded with your choice of phrase, "It is all for the...", "But Harry, it was all for the...", etc.

 

When it is used as a justification to the exclusion of all else, yes, I agree that it is an annoying device. But when you truly think about Dumbledore's character that is what he thinks about - to the exclusion of all else. It is a poor sign of writing (and I think, personally, that is a fault of Rowling), and many amateurish fanfiction authors have picked up on that trend presented in the seventh book. Truly, everything Dumbledore does for Harry in the books if for "the greater good".

I am of the opinion that Dumbledore did genuinely love Harry all through the canonical timeline...and cared about moreso than he did for any other character. HOWEVER, he did, purposely, manipulate Harry through the books, all for the greater good. And it is my honest opinion that it was his love from Harry that prevented him from telling Harry about the prophecy. Telling Harry about the prophecy was the first break Dumbledore made from his plan. But that is purely conjecture.

What I'm saying is that there is canonical basis for this type of archetype. And while I agree it should be avoided by those who want to write a fanfiction which is above the norm, it can nevertheless be said that it is a necessary archetype when defining Dumbledore's character.

 

Utilitarianism isn't evil. All else equal, it's actually a good thing. But shitty fanfiction writers have no grounding in philosophy and systems of reasoning and so latch on to the cartoonish, Hitler-esque characterization.

 

The problem is that Dumbledore isn't utilitarian.

The canon Dumbledore is in one hand naive enough to let Draco use unforgivable curses and almost kill people in hope that he could be redeemed, and on the other hand manipulates Harry to first "not to have big head" and then to be killed by Voldemort. There's nothing utilitarian in Dumbledore's actions.

 

Having Dumbledore refered to as "The old man" should result in the author being shot

 

Agreed

ONLY Dumbledore can refer to himself as an old man.

 

Ah, the at once neglectful and controlling love of a manipulative old man who loves men for the teen boy in his care... is there anything else quite like it?

No?

Thank goodness.

 

I don't think he was neglectful. I think most people in the fandom underestimate Dumdledore's intelligence. He was /exactly/ aware of what he was doing when he sent Harry to live with the Dursley's. It's wasn't neglect (which holds the connotations of lacking in care for another person) it was very shrewd manipulation.

And, I think, that Dumbledore TRULY hadn't cared about Harry, then he wouldn't have told him about the prophecy. Think about it: in good conscience, Dumbledore couldn't (by his own hand) contribute to Harry getting stronger as that might interfere with his plans about using Harry as a sacrifice. However, I beleive that telling Harry about the prophecy was another manipulation to get him to train, to improve himself, to take some fucking initiative.

So in essance, Harry could kill Voldemort - and all of his horcruxes, and while there would still be a peice of one inside of Harry, the love which he inherently has (a là, The Prophecy) would cancel out the negative force of his horcruxes.

How Harry turned out in cannon is a fault of his own - not Dumbledore.

 

I strongly dislike chanting and the overuse of rune magic.

 

Oh yes.

The Greater Good. A discarded memento of Gellert Grindewald, an old philosophy that Dumbledore had rejected throughout the years of his life, through the way he was. He wanted for an individual to be happy, to give a chance for everyone, making himself into a flawed leader in terms of not being able to make drastic decisions - for he did not like to play with the lives of the people.

What measure is the Greater Good, if innocents suffer? What measure is the quest for a better world if you cannot show it to your youngest sister? What use is that better world, if to reach it, you have to dabble in the darkest arts?

What is right and what is easy - that was the core philosophy of Albus Dumbledore, the man who knows just what is the cost of that Greater Good, the man who has chosen the hard, the difficult path, never taking over, only helping.

The man, who could have taken power, could have sat in the Ministry of Magic as the new minister, having achieved greatness through the destruction of his old love. He turned it all away - because the Greater Good, in the end, is just the easiest excuse, the road to hell, paved with good intentions.

Thus, his character, his choices, his life and finally, the moment of his death.
We can't claim that he always made a right choice, but he did the best for an old man with countless wounds in his heart.



Get it right, for once.

 

I was always under the impression that "The Greater Good" was the moniker that Dumbledore and Grindelwald gave their wizard-supremacist philosophy. The death of his sister forced Dumbledore to recognize it for what it was, so he woke up, so-to-speak, and rejected it.

The Greater Good (capital letters) is not utilitarianism in the slightest, but Nazism directed at Muggles instead of Jews.

 

Not the way it's used in fanon. But yes, in canon, it's not a utilitarian concept.

 

I have never seen a utilitarian Dumbledore in fanfiction either. The fanon Greater Good is just a catchphrase for whatever utopian society Dumbledore has in mind. It might involve slightly utilitarian undertones in that usually Harry must be scarified so that the evil of Voldemort can be vanquished, but a utilitarian Dumbledore would be a lot more ruthless in his dealings with Death Eaters, too.

It's not philosophy if it's not applied consistently.

 

I don't think Dumbledore and Grindelwald intended to exterminate Muggles, so much as utterly dominate/enslave them. Just as a point of interest.

I've been reading Beowulf, and wow, didn't realize she had lifted Grendel...he's a lot easier to understand now, actually.

 

More than those, I dislike how the rituals and enchantments are typically used in fanon. The majority of the time I see the former, they're used as shortcuts to give Harry or another character a powerboost of some kind and rarely have any actual impact on the plot, and rarely mesh well with the rest of the story's magic or tone.

Enchantments are likewise annoying due to the lack of variety and utility they tend to provide. Considering the kind of enchanted objects we see in canon, and the manner of their enchantment - such as Dumbledor'es Deluminator and the various Mirrors - it disappoints me that most enchanted objects in fanon tend to be a magically sharpened sword or some such variant.

 

Pretty old pet peeve: Luna knowing things she shouldn't be able to know.

Insight into character - fine. Just don't overdo it, or make it a magical power. An observant, intuitive girl? That I can deal with.

But Luna who knows plot details? No. A particular offender here is when Harry time travels, and Luna "just knows".

ARAARAGHARAAGHAGHAGH

 

The funny thing is I know EXACTLY which fic you're talking about

 

Snape, on finding out the abuse dished out to Harry does a complete personality 180 and tuns into an understanding and caring individual. Hugs and kisses follow it, he becomes 'Sev' and a loving father figure to Harry.

YUK.

 

Hee, I have this trope intentionally. Luna knows about someone being a timetraveller because she's one herself and followed him.

 

Tell me this fic is available.