I thought it was Harry's disarming spell beating the AK that did that and the epilogue from hell. Not to mention all the asspull plot twists.

 

I always wished there was a more in-depth explanation of Dumbledore's character. As for the fact that he's gay, I believe the only reason Rowling mentioned it is because there was going to be a line in the movie where he mentioned once having a crush on a girl. So she was like, "No, didn't happen, he's gay." It's not really relevant to the story, that's just how she thought of him as a character.

I think Dumbledore is in the really difficult position of having a lot of power. On the one hand, he's really uncomfortable with power, due to his past, but on the other he feels like if he has the power to do good, he should.

Sure, he's manipulative. But seriously, how would Harry have reacted if he was told the prophecy in his first year? He would have completely freaked out.

I think the problem is't that Dumbledore interfered too much, it's that he interfered too little. He should have at the very least improved the quality of education at Hogwarts (and the security). By trying to fight a war on top of all his other duties, he spread himself too thin, yet didn't get anything done.

I mean seriously, Binns? I understand Trewlawny, because of the prophecy, but History seems like it could be important, especially for muggleborns, but Binns guarantees no one will learn a thing.

And don't get me started on Snape. As Headmaster, it's Dumbledore's job to make sure the teachers behave. In the real world Snape would be fired, sued, and maybe thrown in jail for the way he treats his students.

 

I agree on the Snape issue. He would have been thrown in jail for child abuse.

 

I, being a full-blown Slytherin, personally despises Dumbledore. He was in Ravenclaw or Griffindor, I think, and yet he is Slytherin. Through-out the books, he shows utter negligence, and I don't understand why he's considered a good guy. I mean, he repeatedly sent Harry back to his abusive relatives, he would have known immediately that Quirrel was hosting Voldy due to Master Legilimens. it was obvious Lockhart was a complete fraud, and yet he was allowed to "teach" (for lack of a better word) students. He allowed Dementors to be placed about the school, with ELEVEN year olds running about. He has nothing but a door that can be unlocked by a second year charm between a Cerburus and a load of kids.
And then there's the fact that Dumbledore, as head of Wizengamot, didn't make sure Sirius got a trial, and after he escaped, didn't let him leave Grimmauld Place...
There are loads of things I can bring up that completly destroy Dumbledore's "good" image. ... You can really see why I go for Indepent!Harry / Manipulative!Dumbledore fics, eh?

 

Where Harry was treated like shit, but didn't have fanatical Death Eaters trying to kill him. Or even able to find him, if I recall correctly (could be mixing that with fanon). They certainly couldn't attack him. Not exactly the best solution, but the lesser of two evils.

Does he know that Quirrell is possessed? He's suspicious of him, we know that from DH, but I don't think he knows he's possessed. And there's several possible reasons for not doing anything: if you're paranoid, he knows Harry hasn't fulfilled the prophecy, and needs to get working on training - the obstacle course is dangerous, but ultimately under Dumbledore's control, should things get out of hand. He might feel that it's a good way to trap Voldemort in a dungeon, in a lesser wizard's body, and Harry's presence is an accident.

IIRC, nobody else applied for the job. Dumbledore could have done a better job, sure, but he's got things to be doing.

He didn't have much choice in the matter - it was Fudge's decision. In fact, Dumbledore ensured that the Dementors were stationed outside the school grounds.

Well, see above for possible reasons behind this. But you can't say he didn't warn them. I don't have my copy of Philosopher's Stone to hand, but he tells them something along the lines of "Anyone entering the corridor will suffer a most painful death."

Ok, not insisting on a trial is epic fail on his part, but he never claims to be perfect, no matter what other people think of him. And he doesn't let Sirius leave Grimmauld Place because he's a wanted criminal, and he'd be arrested/killed on sight.

 

I know, right? There's no place in reality where dangerous animals are kept locked up and are accessible to kids! No place where a determined 6 year-old would be able to confront them in a volatile situation.

Hold on... Zoos.

For example. Here too.

Considering the school is located next to a place called The Forbidden Forrest, I think that a three-headed dog being kept locked up in a room where any not-stupid kid wouldn't enter is pretty tame.

 

I know right! He's such a manipulative old bastard, he totally didn't tell Harry about his family vault! And he's stealing money from Harry!

/sarcasm


I won't lie, I enjoyed me some good ol' manipulative!dumbles back in the day when I was like 15. Now that I'm older though shit just annoys me to no end

 

Alright, on the subject of Albus Dumbledore, where to start? The man was a genius by anyone’s standards. According to the books and interviews with JKR, Albus Dumbledore spoke multiple languages, published papers on magic while still in school, made advancements in multiple fields of magic, and he defeat a dark lord who also happened to be a genius currently wielding the elder wand.

He was almost 150 years old during OOTP where he dueled the greatest dark lord to ever live. He managed to protect himself and Harry (who was completely useless) from being killed or even seriously injured by said dark lord while not once resorting to using lethal magic. Furthermore, he eventually pushed the dark lord onto the defensive to the point where the Voldemort attempted to possess Harry as a way to seize an advantage in the duel which is saying something considering Voldemort’s personality. If anything, the man wanted to show he was clearly better than others by facing them himself. Dumbledore had faced Voldemort more times than any other person, and Voldemort feared the man for a reason.

Now, if you consider something from the first chapter of the Philosopher’s Stone you begin to understand why Voldemort was so scared of the man. Professor McGonagall stated that Dumbledore was too noble to use the full extent of his power. Even in the face of murderous dark lords Dumbledore never once attempted to kill them. Voldemort was having difficulty dueling three competent wizards simultaneously whereas Dumbledore was known to take out multiple wizards with a single spell. As a seventh year, the Dumbledore was doing things which qualified NEWT examiners had never seen before.

I only state this because I think it as important baseline to establish about his character that even in his attempt to avoid power, he was still the top dog. Often times, I think he was forced into seats he never wanted. In OOTP, it doesn’t seem as if he cares what people say about him, or that they have taken away his titles. For all of that, he was afraid of the temptation to meddle too much in the affairs of others. See PS where he gave Harry just enough information that should he choose to act upon it, he would not be going in blind.

He did have a laid back policy towards his students. Some of the people on this forum have pointed out in previous posts that it would get him fired at any real school, but I find that this doesn’t come from looking at things in their proper perspective i.e. you are thinking like Marvin the Mad Muggle.

In wizarding society, near death experiences are considered normal. Flying on brooms is taught to a bunch of 11 year olds. They have sports where people actively try to knock you off your broom when you are flying around 150 mph very high off the ground. That is entertainment for them. The Triwizard Tournament made lots of adults wish they were back at Hogwarts just so they could watch it/participate in it. This tournament has a long history of people dying during it, but the only one who really seemed to be bothered by this was Hermione, a muggle-born. They said they made it safer than it was previously. Really? Dragons, going underwater facing who knows how many dark creatures, and that maze…if you get in trouble send up sparks, we will send someone after you is considered safer? Also, in the safer version, someone still died.

Look at the many explosions during potions classes, how mispronouncing one word in a spell could result in a buffalo crushing you (a first year spell at that), or the fact that is legal to sell all sorts of dark items (poisoned, cursed, hexed, etc.). It isn’t like the people in Knockturn Alley had them hidden away in back. That shit was on display as soon as you entered the shop.

How does this affect Dumbledore’s character you ask? Well, the man is a wizard. Wizards think that stuff is normal, and that a decent punishment for theft is to be locked in a vault they almost never check to see if anyone is locked in. So to imply that Dumbledore was remiss as an instructor or Headmaster of Hogwarts is insane given the wizarding world’s view on what is safe and what isn’t. If anything Dumbledore was one of the more safety-minded wizards unlike some who risk their relatives’ lives just to produce a bit of accidental magic from the poor kid.

So in summation, Dumbledore is a genius, but as he said his mistakes are often correspondingly quite bigger than most people’s mistakes. He is actually one of the more safety concerned wizards out there, and he isn’t perfect. We know he had suspicions about Tom, but we don’t know when these suspicions started to arise or how he treated Tom at Hogwarts.

Also, for those of you who haven’t figured it out yet the above comment about safety, followed by the stuff Umbridge did, and the fact that, the dungeons were still used as punishment up until Dumbledore became Headmaster should show you that someone like Snape would not be fired as well. In fact, Snape seems quite tame compared to the people who thought the chains in the dungeon were a great form of detention.

Edit: inb4 tl;dr

 

People always point to this as Dumbledore being irresponsible but we saw in the book that unless you actively attempted to go after the trapdoor Fluffy could not reach you. It's not like a student would immediately walk into the room and be face to face with the Cerebus.

I don't now if this has been mentioned because I just skimmed through some of the posts, but people always mention 3 first years were able to defeat his obstacle course and this is true. What they fail to see though is how the Mirror of Erised is the ultimate failsafe. If Harry had not gone down their Voldemort would have never been able to reach the stone at least without using some serious gris-gris, because he wanted to use if for himself. Sorry if this is a little off tangent but it has just always annoyed how many fanfics use this to support "manipulative Dumbledore" plotline.

 

Grindelwald was not a Dark Lord, he was a Dark wizard. There are no Dark Lord's other then Voldemort, who took the title himself.

 

That was due more to Harry's protection that he gave everyone in Hogwarts by his willing sacrifice then to any of Voldemort's abilities. It seemed to imply that had Voldemort been dueling even Ginny Weasley, he would not be have been able to harm her.

 

Indeed, Voldemort was landing multiple hits on them, it was just that they were doing nothing.

 

I never managed to finish the second chapter of DH, and so I never read that particular scene. But if what you say is true, why didn't Voldemort just banish stuff at them of conjure buffalos above them? Even if he couldn't directly affect anyone with magic, that should be only a minor inconvenience for a wizard of his caliber.

Then again, Molly killed Bellatrix...

 

Voldemort didn't know that Harry was still alive and didn't realise that the people of Hogwarts were protected from his curses by the power of Harry's willing sacrifice.

I guess, even if he knew Harry was alive he still wouldn't have understand the consequences of his actions.

 

Hmm, I don't recall reading this then again I read DH as quickly as I possibly could because well it sucked hard. That's a pretty cheap idea though, and it makes me hate DH even more now. Harry wasn't dead so where is teh awesome sacrifice. All he did was prove he was willing to sacrifice everything not that he actually did sacrifice anything unless you count choosing to stay alive instead of taking the easy route of dying as a sacrifice.

Furthermore, you would think that after last time with Lily, Voldemort, a genius in his own right, would have picked up on that. Why weren't Voldemort's curses rebounding on him? They did the last time a sacrifice was in play. Also, Harry died to protect the people in the castle from Voldemort and his death eaters so why weren't the death eaters similarly affected by the power of love?

 

I believe they were. I don't recall any of the defenders being killed after Harry's sacrifice.

Probably because there was no prophecy involving the Hogwarts defenders. Rowling herself stated that magic gets imprecise and that there is no set formula concerning the effects of the prophecy, love, sacrifice, and Voldemort's horcrux in Harry. So everything becomes fuzzy and illogical in that regard.

Yea DH canon is pretty much shit.

 

I don't think this makes sense in the slightest. I mean if the curses of Voldemort and his death eaters were harming people then they wouldn't have to worry about shielding which means a purely offensive attack would have at the very least caused the death eaters to drop like flies especially if people were tossing around the killing curse like it was going out of style.

I also do not by the whole magic being imprecise bull that JKR spews. Yes, I think to an extent she is correct, but a shield is still a shield and shit rebounds off a shield. I really hate that aspect of JKR's writing more than anything else. Since she couldn't be fucked to come up with a decent theory of magic she cobbled shit together that makes no sense.

 

I hate to interrupt your nerd rage, but it's magic. It's not supposed to make sense.

 

Keeping with the tangent, I would disagree. We have seen rules for magic before, things like Gamp's laws for transfiguration and the dangers of mispronunciation. It is only reasonable to assume that there are sets of rules under which magic, if not operates, at least is used. They may be more flexible than conventional science, but just saying 'magic is unpredictable' is rather odd. If that were the case, then it would be difficult to create a planned environment in which to study/teach it. And if it can have rules, then it should make sense within the parameters of those rules.

So yeah, magic being 'imprecise' is just a cop-out.

Back on topic, I personally dislike the character of Dumbledore. This is actually not because I think that he is evil, but because everyone in the series seems to treat him like some sort of demigod. Yes, he is powerful and knowledgeable, but he himself has admitted to making mistakes. It just annoys me that no-one is willing to actually question him on his decisions, even though he admits that they are usually monumentally bigger than those of most people.

(In the interest of carrying on conversation, please don't point out that Fudge and Umbridge question him on his decisions. We all know that was just attempts at discrediting him, not a true attempt at rational discussion and refinement of plans that discussion with, say, McGonagall would have been.)

Of course, we look at the series through a completely different and far more knowledgeable perspective, but I still think that someone who is truly as competent as Dumbledore is portrayed would accomplish things far more efficiently. I think the problems rise, however, not from an incorrect interpretation of his character, but from plot holes and contrivances to make Harry the hero of the series. I may not like him very much (in stark contrast with characters like Shezza's Dumbledore, who is not too bad), but I don't really think of him as evil.

And I really would have expected Voldemort to figure something was up if none of his spells was affecting the rescuers, as seems to be implied. AFAIK, this would be pretty unusual, and so he would (given his supposed intellect) connect this with the last time it happened. Maybe he was reluctant to use Transfiguration against Mcgonagall, seeing as that is one of her strengths, but for a wizard of his caliber, no spells working at all should surely worry him. But maybe we all (and all of the wizarding world) merely overestimated his intellect. That would be pretty sad though...