Ends justify any means to you then? Who is to say that Dumbledore wasn't just concerned about Harry dying without defeating Voldemort? By your argument it could just as easily be seen that Dumbledore set Harry up to sacrifice himself only so that Voldemort could be defeated. After all, if you believe Dumbledore's account of Harry's original survival, it was Lily's sacrifice that defeated Voldemort the first time. In both defeats, Voldemort lost to self-sacrifice. One by a mother's own free-will. The second and final defeat by a child who was brainwashed and manipulated into sacrificing himself.

The historical evidence (parts of previous books) is what damns Dumbledore most. Dumbledore knowingly left Harry grow up knowing only "neglect and often cruelty" at the Dursley's hands. (HBP) He then allowed Snape to continue to batter the boy's self-esteem while he was at Hogwarts. He needed Harry with little or no self-esteem and subservient to the will and well-being of others. In doing so he proved that he cared nothing for Harry beyond his prophesied ability to kill Voldemort.

You are only proving my point about people being willingly blinded to anything but what they want to see. NOWHERE is it stated or shown that what you assert is what was intended. You are merely speculating and coming up with theories to defend a man who is shown unequivocally to have manipulated a child into killing himself for what he believed to be "the greater good." You will never convince me that he truly cared for Harry after allowing the Dursleys and Snape to thoroughly destroy his sense of self-worth over the course of 16 years just so that he would so easily sacrifice himself. He needed Harry to believe his life held no value beyond his service to others and that is what he got through inflicting upon him 16 years of neglect and cruelty.

To believe that his intentions were truly noble would have meant that he somehow knew his plans to be absolutely fool-proof and would go off exactly as he envisioned. However, even he admits that plans don't always work out. So realistically, following your logic, he took a gamble with someone else's life that was not his own to decide and brought a great deal of suffering to Harry through that gamble.

I guess it really comes down the question, what right did Dumbledore have to play God with other people's lives - most notably Harry's? Did Harry's parents leave Dumbledore as his guardian? No, they left Sirius. Unless I am mistaken, a man who tried to claim Harry that night and was refused by Hagrid per Dumbledore's orders. A man then so blinded by rage that he tries to hunt down the traitor responsible and then mysteriously winds up in prison with no trial while Dumbledore is Chief Warlock of the Wizarding Court leaving Dumbledore unopposed in his control over Harry's life. All Dumbledore had was a prophecy that said Harry would have the power to kill Voldemort. He then took it upon himself to come up with a plan to brainwash and manipulate the child into sacrificing himself to kill Voldemort after causing that same innocent child to grow up hated and abused. If you so believe that others have the right to take your children and brainwash them into serving their plans then you would have fit quite nicely in Hitler's regime. After all, what Hitler did was indeed for the good of Germany, or so he believed.

In the end, all that was shown was that Harry was no hero but rather the puppet of adults. His free-will was tainted by his controlled upbringing and manipulations by an old man who was using him to fulfill a prophecy.

 

Did Harry survive and have a happy life or not?

It was down to Dumbledore, and Dumbledore alone, that this happened.

And yes, Dumbledore sought to kill Voldemort through Harry. Yet, as the prophesy says, "Neither can live while the other survives." Harry would never have been happy until Voldemort was dead. Dumbledore empowered Harry to do what he wanted to do: defeat Voldemort. If a little misdirection was needed along the way, then there's nothing wrong with a little white lie.

I'm not sure where your objection to Dumbledore lies.

You say this:

Yet if Dumbledore hadn't manipulated Harry, then Harry would have died, as would all of his friends.

 

I dunno Taure, being married to Ginny for a decade plus can't really be considered a 'happy' life.

 

Two words: The Longbottoms.

Harry's self-esteem wasn't touched by Snape. He's an arrogant little shit most of the time. He gave back as good as he got when it came to Snape.

Did you read the chapter, King's Cross? I suggest you go back and do so.

And once again, you have missed the point. Harry didn't die. He only thought he was going to die, because that's what Dumbledore maniplulated him to think. Had Dumbledore not done so, then Harry would have died. So effectively, Dumbledore saved Harry's life.

The Dursleys are preferable to being totured and then dying at the hands of the Lestranges and Crouch Jr.

As for Snape, you are exagerating the situation.

And again I say: harry never lost his sense of self-worth. He's full of himself.

It was a gamble, but as Dumbledore said, his guesses usualy are right. The horcruxes were a gamble too, and he was right about those. He was right about this too.

Let's see. He was a friend of his parents, the only wizard capable of casting the magics needed to protect Harry from Voldemort and the Death Eaters, and in fact the only wizard who was capable of protecting Harry at all. He's also the only one who possesed all the information about Voldemort.

Canon proof? None.

As you said, there was no trial, so Dumbledore would have had no control over the decision.

Plus, all trials at that time were conducted by Barty Crouch Sr., Dumbledore was just an ordinary Wizengamot member.

I'm gonna stop now, cos you've mentioned Hitler. Godwins law and all that.

I knew someone would say that.

 

Goddamnit!! Get the fuck off DLP you little abused bastard. Dumbledore's a cruel bastard.. Wah wah wah

your previous dribble

Get over your abuse issues you whiny little bitch

Fuck I hate you

madeyemoody

 

I'd like to add to Madeyemoody's and Taure's posts by saying that Harry obviously didn't think that Dumbledore and Snape were all that bad, as he named his son after them. And he was an adult, in a powerful position in life and lots and lots of free will when he did it. I dislike Dumbledore too, yeah, but it's because I don't like the wise-old-man archetype in general. Your rant read like a bad Indy story.

 

He didn't think they were that bad, after the fact. Not that he ever thought Dumbledore was bad. He was Dumbledore's man, through and through; until all the speculation came up about Dumbledore's involvement with the Dark Arts and Grindewald.

I suppose it's plausible, and canon, to assume that Dumbledore cared about Harry. As well, his manipulations were vital, if not solely responsible, for Harry's survival.

Dumbledore spent his life after Grindewald fighting against the Dark Arts. After his sister's death he began to campaign for all the things later in life he became famous for. He tried, everyday, to redeem himself in his own eyes. To give some meaning to his sister's otherwise meaningless death.

That's what gave him the assumed right over all of this. He felt he was responsible for creating Voldemort out of Tom Riddle. Even if there was a Prophecy naming Harry as his defeator, it didn't stop him from keeping the mission soley to himself. That's what gave him the right, or atleast the self-assumed right, to do all of the manipulative things he did in Harry's life.

Though.. if you ask me... Harry did not have a happy life afterwards if he was spent it with Ginny.

Way to fuck up, Dumbledore.

 

While I agree with you, all of the reasonable facts that you've exposed in your post could be thrown down the bridge by saying that canon Harry is, after all, a pussy.

 

A pussy with a massive masochistic streak, imo. Both Dumbledore and Snape could have been a lot more help in the fight against Voldemort. They basically left it to the kids, and this is an ugly image.

This naming his kid Albus Severus is simply too much. If there's one thing the namesakes of the poor kid haven't earned its being considered as a role-model.

Snape didn't deserve it because he used Harry's existence to ground himself. He never protected Harry for Harry's sake, he did it to preserve his own very shaky self-image of a man who might still be worthy to be loved by the woman he loved. Or maybe his very shaky self-image of a man who might be worth something at least.

About Dumbledore and his amazing ability to figure out how to make the most of other people's love and their self-sacrifices: That's actually the most damning thing about him. He understands the power of love like no other - on an intellectual level. So well in fact that he is able to figure out almost immediately what caused Voldemort's first 'demise' at Godric's Hollow and how to use the side-effect in order to create a powerful protection for Harry that is based on love, but doesn't need the actual presence of love. Amazing, yes, but also ... a bit off.

He's able to figure out how Harry might survive in the end, but he also takes very sloppy measures to ensure that this was what would happen; the chances that Snape would be able to communicate with Harry at the relevant stage plus that Harry would actually believe him were very slim indeed. As were the chances that Harry would manage to destroy the other Horcruxes plus actually survive for the need of that communication to ever happen. We don't know whether Dumbledore tried to account for this possibility at all because he cared for Harry, or because he thought that if it ever came to this, it's because the blood-protection prevented Harry's (the Horcrux-carrier's) death in some way and that he needed to find a way for the Horcrux inside Harry to be destroyed circumventing the blood-protection.

On the whole, I think the question whether Dumbledore ever really cared is quite a tricky one. I think he really wanted to be a caring person, and managed to do the things expected of a caring person most of the time, but I got a feeling it didn't ever come naturally to him. And he easily forgot about people as soon as something more interesting caught his attention.

 

All I have to really say is, "anyone" who lets a child live with abusive people should burn in hell. NO child deserves to be abused, they're innocent. Unless you're Draco Malfoy who was brainwashed...then I won't give a shit. The little cockroach will think differently after being abused. And Snape is just an immature little fucktard who'll burn in hell for all the student's careers he ruined by his lame childish grudges. All Dumbledore really cared about was "the greater good" and "redeeming" Death Eaters. And besides...Potter didn't owe the Wizarding World shit, they owed him, not the other way around. Just cuz of some supposed "prophecy" was made, doesn't make him responsible for other people's lives.

Then there's the "Nature vs Nature" argument you most likely read in the story "Do Not Meddle In The Affairs Of Wizards" that the lawyer brought up in that court hearing. If a parent would allow their own child to be abused for 16 years for the "greater good"...then said parent doesn't honestly care for their child. If someone gave me that speech about my child, I'd tell the person to go fuck themselves and burn in hell, I would never put my child in that circumstance, EVER! Even if you held him at gun point or killed him, I'd still tell the person to go kill themselves for even suggesting that. Any parent with common sense would do the same thing. Period, end of discussion.

As for the "love/hate" fighting, its another huge argument to deal with. Using either of these emotions will give you the same end results. Both emotions can be equally as powerful as the other. There is no such thing as a feeling being more powerful than the other. I remember watching a Batman cartoon episode where Batman was fighting in his old Dojo with another fighter, the fighter won over Batman, but then the old master kicked his ass. The older fighter said that "there is always someone better than you." Which is 100% correct, there is no such thing as "the greatest" or "the worste". Why? Because there is "always" going to be someone better than you at it. Sure, you might have won the Olympics, and got the gold, but it doesn't honestly mean shit. You only won because you were the best of the ones who applied, you weren't bested because the other better person wasn't there to go against you.

Anyway, to get back onto topic, I honestly don't think Dumbledore cared about Potter at all. He left Potter with abusive relatives. Anyone who does this in my honest opinion, should be shot in the head. I don't give a shit who it is, and I don't care "what" reason it is. Add to that, he KNEW Potter was being abused there all 16 years, yet, didn't do anything. Thats all I have to say on that subject...

Richard.

 

Well, after Order of the Phoenix, I took everything Dumbledore did with a pinch of salt... After reading Deathly Hallows, I re-read the series again and I've come to the conclusion that Dumbledore cares about Harry, but would willingly sacrifice him for the greater good. I refuse to believe that Dumbledore knew that Harry would come out unscathed... There were too many unknown factors that if he cared about Harry that much I doubt he would gamble with his life like that. That's not to say he didn't care, but... I wouldn't say he loved him... He loved Grindelwald... Heh...