Huh, I think this is the first time we've ever really heard of anyone in the Order being owed by Dumbledore. Good on you, Ron!
I don't see how seeing Lupin lose control is any more indecent than seeing McGonagall lose control. It's not like Lupin has actually spent that much time with Harry.
"Hermione, had you not obeyed Snape and got out of the way, he probably would have killed you and Luna." -- Not to be pedantic, but I thought the big moral of the books was that one should choose what is right rather than what is easy. Getting out of the way? Easy. Opposing Snape? The right thing to do -- I mean, our maternal paragon within the books had exactly that choice, and died for it. Hermione shouldn't blame herself because she didn't know to, not because it would have gotten her killed. Okay, I lied, that was totally pedantic.
"The Malfoy boy" -- So, looks like Tonks doesn't even think of Draco as family. Not surprising, but good to know.
Yay, Fleur! You teach those petty witches, who have very clearly been demonstrating
( ... )
"The Malfoy boy" -- So, looks like Tonks doesn't even think of Draco as family.
I completely missed this last night; somehow, I can't help thinking that this is more a result of Tonks' upbringing than an issue Tonks has herself...maybe Andromeda decided to keep her away from the Black history? We know she is half a Black, at least as much as Draco is, yet she never seems to connect with this side of herself in the books. She may not even be aware that Draco is her cousin.
Dumbledore being the way he is certainly determaine much of the plot and things wouldn't have been the same if he was different. I guess what bothers me is that the book never address this issue. Dumbledore died as a complete martyr. He'll never have to answer for anything that he did. The morality of his actions is never questioned. There are a lot of intersting issues that can discussed relating Dumbledore behavior, but instead all we get is total admiration to Dumbledore and people actually taking pride when they stop thinking for themselves and do/think whatever Dumbledore wants them to
"No other headmaster or headmistress ever gave more to this school." -- Ah, Hagrid, the wise bastion of Hogwarts historical knowledge weighing in with his informed opinion. Oh wait.
Yeah, I think it became quiet clear in the fifth and sixth book that the school and the welfare of the students isn't and never was Dumbldore first priority, more like he USED the school. (we see in this book that teachers are not chosen for their teaching skills or for what they can do for the students, but for their importance to the order/Dumbledore. And the all school suffered last year because he played too many roles, in addition to being headmaster. Not to mention student were put in risk beacause he chose no to act against Draco earlier.
The thought wandered into my head today that it might be more fruitful to think of Dumbledore as kind of like Prospero from 'The Tempest' than as Gandalf or God or some nice beardy old bloke. Haven't you always loved that Hogwarts is such a dangerous place?! Without Dumbledore's bothersome risks and oversights there'd be no story. But I wonder if the HP books could be written with a totally professional-headteacher Dumbledore, or with no Dumbledore at all...
Dumbledore being the way he is certainly determaine much of the plot and things wouldn't have been the same if he was different. I guess what bothers me is that the book never address this issue. Dumbledore died as a complete martyr. He'll never have to answer for anything that he did. The morality of his actions is never questioned. There are a lot of intersting issues that can discussed relating Dumbledore behavior, but instead all we get is total admiration to Dumbledore and people actually taking pride when they stop thinking for themselves and do/think whatever Dumbledore wants them to
Without Dumbledore's bothersome risks and oversights there'd be no story.
That's pretty much the primary roadblock to all children's writers, imho. How to create a plot that a child could believably star in and solve the problem of, without making the adults thoroughly incompetent or evil. Obviously a lot of kidlit doesn't even bother -- just look at Roal Dahl, or Lemony Snicket. But I think HP had a different layer of requirement as a coming of age tale. Harry himself is becoming an adult, so you can't make out all adults to be useless/evil if you want him to be useful/good in the last book. So, basically, my gripe isn't that Dumbledore isn't good, it's that JKR wasn't a competent enough writer to both create a plot and convince me of his goodness (and I do think she wants me to think of him as good).
Re: Rambling a bit, I fear.cadesamaSeptember 19 2005, 02:40:09 UTC
But are Dumbledore's flaws acknowledged by the text? He certainly has them, and they certainly affect things, but does anything ever circle back around to him? That is something that will be answered in the next book (will anyone admit that Dumbledore died because of his own hurbris?), but from where we stand right now, I'd say that his flaws aren't acknowledged, by and large. A few are, but they are carefully worded to sound like virtues. The fact that Dumbledore gambles with humans lives doesn't earn him the disapproval of the Order. The fact that he allowed a child to be abused doesn't. The fact that Dumbledore makes as many political sacrifices as Fudge did doesn't. This is why I see him as a Mary Sue. He warps characters who would normally dislikes someone who has acted as he had into liking him, with no explanation except that he's Dumbledore. His vices are painted as virtues (He loves Harry too much to tell him the truth! He's so trusting that he gave Snape a second chance!), and no character ever honestly sees his
( ... )
Re: Rambling a bit, I fear.cadesamaSeptember 21 2005, 04:09:45 UTC
So, yes, D. flaws that come along with the incompatibility of all those qualities become virtues as well, even though it makes no sense. And, as a consequence, to me he doesn’t look like someone almost perfect, but as a hypocrite.
Exactly. That's why I tend to refer to my problem as being that JKR didn't successfully cross the gulf with Dumbledore from being a plot device (in the first four books) to being a character (in OotP and HBP). As long as he's a simply a force in the books, we don't have to analyze his motives, his actions, or any contradictions between them. But when he's a character we have to look at those things, and it begins to grate that none of the other characters seem willing to do so, and that the image the author apparently wants to foster just doesn't line up with those things. It's pretty much the exact same problem that many people have with Ginny. We get told that she's funny, and that's she's nice, and the main characters clearly like her -- but we see that she behaves toward Zacharias Smith in a manner
( ... )
I don't see how seeing Lupin lose control is any more indecent than seeing McGonagall lose control. It's not like Lupin has actually spent that much time with Harry.
"Hermione, had you not obeyed Snape and got out of the way, he probably would have killed you and Luna." -- Not to be pedantic, but I thought the big moral of the books was that one should choose what is right rather than what is easy. Getting out of the way? Easy. Opposing Snape? The right thing to do -- I mean, our maternal paragon within the books had exactly that choice, and died for it. Hermione shouldn't blame herself because she didn't know to, not because it would have gotten her killed. Okay, I lied, that was totally pedantic.
"The Malfoy boy" -- So, looks like Tonks doesn't even think of Draco as family. Not surprising, but good to know.
Yay, Fleur! You teach those petty witches, who have very clearly been demonstrating ( ... )
Reply
I completely missed this last night; somehow, I can't help thinking that this is more a result of Tonks' upbringing than an issue Tonks has herself...maybe Andromeda decided to keep her away from the Black history? We know she is half a Black, at least as much as Draco is, yet she never seems to connect with this side of herself in the books. She may not even be aware that Draco is her cousin.
Reply
Reply
Yeah, I think it became quiet clear in the fifth and sixth book that the school and the welfare of the students isn't and never was Dumbldore first priority, more like he USED the school. (we see in this book that teachers are not chosen for their teaching skills or for what they can do for the students, but for their importance to the order/Dumbledore. And the all school suffered last year because he played too many roles, in addition to being headmaster. Not to mention student were put in risk beacause he chose no to act against Draco earlier.
Reply
Reply
Reply
That's pretty much the primary roadblock to all children's writers, imho. How to create a plot that a child could believably star in and solve the problem of, without making the adults thoroughly incompetent or evil. Obviously a lot of kidlit doesn't even bother -- just look at Roal Dahl, or Lemony Snicket. But I think HP had a different layer of requirement as a coming of age tale. Harry himself is becoming an adult, so you can't make out all adults to be useless/evil if you want him to be useful/good in the last book. So, basically, my gripe isn't that Dumbledore isn't good, it's that JKR wasn't a competent enough writer to both create a plot and convince me of his goodness (and I do think she wants me to think of him as good).
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Exactly. That's why I tend to refer to my problem as being that JKR didn't successfully cross the gulf with Dumbledore from being a plot device (in the first four books) to being a character (in OotP and HBP). As long as he's a simply a force in the books, we don't have to analyze his motives, his actions, or any contradictions between them. But when he's a character we have to look at those things, and it begins to grate that none of the other characters seem willing to do so, and that the image the author apparently wants to foster just doesn't line up with those things. It's pretty much the exact same problem that many people have with Ginny. We get told that she's funny, and that's she's nice, and the main characters clearly like her -- but we see that she behaves toward Zacharias Smith in a manner ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment