The Romulan Republic wrote:ray245 wrote:Well, technically, the only form of encouragement is not punishing Harry after Harry and co. has make those stupid mistakes and decisions. His mentality of why should we punish those kids when the damage has been done is faulty, that's for sure.
Dumbledore was clearly trying to mold Harry into someone who could carry out his mission. For the "greater good", and all that.
Actually, wasn't that his slogan back when he was a racist little kid and boyfriends with Grindlewald? It makes you wonder how much he ever really changed. Part of why I feel let down by the last book is that it built up some interesting questions around moral dilemmas the characters faced, but then I felt like it sold out at the end. Sure, people questioned Dumbledore, but at the end it seemed like neither Rowling nor Harry had a problem with some of his more questionable choices. Or Harry becoming more and more ruthless, more and more like the people he's fighting, but then (at least as I recall), its implied to be just Voldemort's presences corrupting his soul. It just felt like their were ethical questions and character build up that were then Deus ex Machinad away in the end. But maybe I'm wrong.
What can be achieved if Dumbledore didn't bother to prepare Harry to face Voldermort? I mean Voldermort didn't give a damn if he was going to kill of an one year old baby, what makes you think Voldermort or any of his inner circle is going to wait until Harry is a legal adult? On one hand, Dumbledore's belief that children should get to enjoy their childhood is a good mindset, but his execution of his belief is faulty. How do you balance a child's childhood when a mass murderer very focused on killing him?
The threat to Harry is constant, ever since he was marked by Voldermort. I mean Dumbledore never really bothered to involve anyone outside of Harry's circle of friends, which really makes me question, would Dumbledore bothers to prepare Harry and Co. in any meaningful way?
Fred and George was not allowed to be part of the order even when they want to, until they are 17, and if I recall things properly, Lily and the Marauders was not recruited by Dumbledore until they are of age.
In regards to the concept of greater good, what is wrong with that view? Just because someone called it a greater good does not necessarily mean the end result is really a greater good. If Voldermort can be taken down, and get the chance to revive himself again and again, the discrimination against muggleborn would not be in the interest of anyone. Preventing racism or stopping racist from spreading and acting on their belief is a greater good while racism isn't.
Moreover, racism is not considered to be a greater good, unless there is any real benefits to society. The only thing racism does is basically creates more disruption within the society, making the community have a harder time working with each other.
True. I mean, I'm sure you could make a case that Dumbledor's actions were nessissary, and that he ultimately was helping prepare Harry. Doesn't stop him being a cold, manipulative son of a bitch though.
Almost all political actions seems cold to begin with. Political actions is also make to benefit the entire society as a whole as opposed to one specific person or group. Sacrificing the pawn to save more chess pieces.
Certain 'feel good' policies like seeking peace even when it is stupid to do so and tax cuts for instance makes you seems like a warm and caring person, even though the end result is a greater harm.
I feel that Dumbledore is a person who adapts to the situation more often that he seek to manipulate the situation. Although, a person that is unable to manipulate or control and change the situation tend to lose in a war.
If Dumbledore is really that good at manipulation, he could have manipulated Tom Riddle onto the good path so to speak. Although it is funny to see so many time-travel fic complaining about Dumbledore manipulating things when Harry or the time traveller is doing the same thing as well.
He actually reminds me of Palpatine's "Jedi Trap" in the RotS novelization. In that every time he sends Harry into danger, whatever happens, he wins. Harry wins, and that's another battle won (also elevating Harry as a symbol of hope while painting an ever-bigger bulls-eye on him). Harry dies, and its one more Horcrux gone (for more on this type of strategy and what inspired this comparison, look up the section entitled "Xanatos Gambits" on the TV Tropes site) Obviously Dumbledore preferred for Harry to live, and after book four at least he seemed to guess that Voldemort using Harry's blood would allow him to survive, but he seemed more than willing to let Harry die if nessissary.
Didn't all of Dumbledore and Harry's action causes them to lose popular support? If I remember things correctly, it is the Ministry as opposed to Dumbledore who wish to paint Harry as a poster boy.
Its been a while since I've read the book, but his guilt in the afterlife sequence near the end seemed primarily to be about not trusting/lying to Harry, not using him as a human weapon. And Harry speculated as early as book one that Dumbledore was letting him face Voldemort. Also, he never shut down the DA, or did anything to discourage them.
I think the reason why he felt this way is basically he is a micro-manager as opposed to a macro-manager in a war so to speak. Like how RTS fans love to micromanage because they don't trust the unit AI to handle complex actions and response to an enemy attack and how certain generals in real life wants to micro-manage his army in a war. When you realize the units or friends you are commanding are able to handle themselves on their own without you controlling every single move, you may feel regretful of you lack of trust towards your friends.
Harry's speculation can't be used as a justification or example that Dumbledore really thinks like that. Also, in regards to the DA, the primary purpose of the DA is not a child army per say, but as a self-defense and study group. The is no real reason to shut down a self-defense group when war is around the corner, and when the death eaters would hardly give a damn about killing kids if they deem it necessary.
Moreover, it seems that by the six book, the DA is considered inactive except for Harry's inner circle of friends. The ones that seek adventures after adventures is really Harry's inner group of friends as opposed to one entire group. So, shutting down the DA is unnecessary when the DA function is not to be an army and seek Death eaters on purpose. The only people who did that tends to do those things even before the DA is founded.
