kerravonsen | Thought For The Day

You're viewing

kerravonsen's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

I think the most unforgivably manipulative thing Dumbledore did was when he told Harry that the reason Snape hated James was because James saved his life. It's about on par with Obi-Wan Kenobi telling Luke that Vader killed Luke's father: that is, it's only true if you squint your eyes and look at it from a particular direction; technically true, but essentially deceptive.

In both cases, the result was to make the mentor's young charge hate someone that they might otherwise be conflicted about. I can understand Obi-Wan's motives - Vader was dangerous, and the enemy - but it begs the question as to why Dumbledore would want Harry to hate Snape even more. Or is it that Dumbledore thought it was more important for Harry to idealize his father than it was for him to understand Snape? Foolishness, either way: the fruit of that manipulation led to the death of Sirius.

Darn, this is another piece of evidence in the "evil, manipulative Dumbledore" stakes, isn't it?

Current Mood: thoughtful
Crossposts: http://kerravonsen.livejournal.com/747074.html

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

ysabetwordsmith

I'd go for the scene on the Astronomy tower. #1 way to break a hero is prevent him from saving someone. Dude: friendly fire isn't. That's usually what the villain does.

From:

kerravonsen

I'm not sure I agree with that.

1. Stopping Harry from saving Dumbledore wasn't manipulative, per se. The timing was terrible, yes, because Harry was with Dumbledore when the Death Eaters broke in. I doubt very much that Dumbledore knew the exact time when they were going to do so, just that it was going to happen. What would you expect Dumbledore to do? Allow Harry to be killed or kidnapped by the Death Eaters? Allow Harry to sacrifice himself for Dumbledore when Dumbledore was dying anyway? There wasn't time for Harry to get away, so Dumbledore did what he could to keep Harry safe. The fact that it was traumatic was unavoidable.

2. Setting Snape up to kill Dumbledore was manipulative, but the person they were manipulating with this conspiracy was primarily Voldemort, so I wouldn't class it as "unforgivably manipulative".

From:

selenak

I haven't got my copy of Philosopher's Stone in hand, but I think Dumbledore on that occasion said this to give Harry a reason why Snape behaved rottenly towards him yet still saved his life (after revealing Snape did save his life). He compares young Snape and young James to Harry and Draco, saying it was that kind of school rivalry. Mind you, I suspect JKR did develop the details of her backstory after writing the first book - I mean, she obviously had the rough outlines in mind (Sirius is mentioned in PS which would be pointless if she hadn't already plans for him, etc.), but as to how exactly the thing with Snape and the Marauders went down, I think that was probably not more defined than "school rivalry" until she wrote Prisoner of Azkaban.

On a Watsonian level, and leaving aside Doylist explanations, Snape himself had explicitly requested that Dumbledore should NOT tell Harry the truth as to why Snape was protecting him. Page 545 of Deathly Hallows:

"Very well. Very well. But never - never tell, Dumbledore! This must be between us! Swear it! I cannot bear... especially Potter's son... I want your word!"
"My word, Severus, that I shall never reveal the best of you?" Dumbledore sighed, looking down into Snape's ferocious, anguished face. If you insist..."

So basically the Lily backstory was taboo as of Snape's own request, and Dumbledore had to tell Harry something at the end of PS. As for why he didn't simultanously say "the one who behaved like Draco at first was actually your father, not Severus, he was more the you in that comparison" - well, this was directly after Harry had seen his parents in the Mirror of Erised for the first time, and Dumbledore had witnessed the tremendous impact that had on Harry. He had actually heard bad things about both his parents for eleven years. The idea of having parents who were good people, not people to be ashamed of, was new, not what he was used to. Getting told James used to be a prat until he grew out of it could wait under these circumstances.

From:

kerravonsen

Ah, you have a good point there about Snape not wanting Harry to know about Lily. I can see why Snape asked for this - because he is still so conflicted and guilty about Lily - and yet it is also an unfortunate decision.

From:

jhall1.livejournal.com

Could it be that it was a case of Dumbledore deluding himself, and being unwilling to admit what a nasty piece of work the young James had been (to the extent that one wondered what such a good person as Lily could have seen in him)? James and Tom Riddle seem to have been rather similar as teenagers: bags of charm, but rather nasty underneath. Of course the big difference was that James grew out of it (perhaps reformed through his love for Lily), wheras Riddle didn't.

Or maybe Dumbledore just hadn't been in possession of the full facts? Though he liked to give the impression of being omniscient, he clearly wasn't.

I can't see any good reason why Dumbledore should have wanted Harry to hate Snape. Indeed it seemed rather counterproductive. And to be fair, the way that Snape acted towards Harry, Harry had good reason to hate him. I think that, while Snape recognised Harry's importance, he couldn't help hating Harry and so treating him unfairly, as the child of the man who had taken the woman he loved.

(Stepping outside the HP universe, I suspect that JK Rowling's ideas of what went on between Snape and James developed over time, and that she might later have wished that she could go back and alter what Dumbledore told Harry.)

From:

kerravonsen

Though he liked to give the impression of being omniscient, he clearly wasn't.

Indeed.

He seems to have been unable to conceive that certain people actually were malicious: the Marauders and the Dursleys. If anyone tried to tell him, he dismissed their concerns.

From:

jaxomsride.livejournal.com

Either that or he didn't want Snape and Harry to be close. Though whether that was jealousy or due to Snape's links with the Death Eaters. After all Snape and Harry at odds makes it easier for Snape NOT to get his hands on the boy and hand him over to Moldyswart.

From:

kerravonsen

After all Snape and Harry at odds makes it easier for Snape NOT to get his hands on the boy and hand him over to Moldyswart.

Not really; after all, Snape is a teacher and Harry is a student: their attitude to each other is completely irrelevant as to whether Snape could trap Harry with a portkey.
But then don't let me get going on Portkeys and the whole stupidity of the plot of The Goblet of Fire...