The world is full wise old men who will tell you all the important bits of information that you need to complete your world-saving quest… if you live in a fictional epic about that sort of thing. Problem is, these wise old men never tell you the whole story, do they? They give you half. Or a quarter. They tell you the truth, but they reframe it like it’s an old story, or a play that they saw at this really good theatre once. They teach you lessons like they are doling out candy—too good to eat all at once.
But surely that can’t always be true.
Albus Dumbledore kept a lot of things from Harry Potter throughout his years at Hogwarts, and even after his death. But the hardest part about these secrets is that they were often revealed strategically, or Harry had to find them out for himself in the most traumatizing way possible. Here are the worst five. Well, maybe the worst. You can decide where your mileage is on that.
1. You’re A Horcrux, And That’s the Real Reason You Have to Die
Look, there is no kind way for Albus Dumbledore to tell an eleven-year-old child that he is eventually going to have to sacrifice himself for the greater good, to say nothing of explaining that part of a dark wizard’s soul resides in his person… but there is no reason that he couldn’t have clued Harry in on this issue a little bit earlier. Sure, the prophecy gets revealed at the end of Harry’s fifth year, but that doesn’t get into the horcrux aspect of his existence, which is kind of the most important part? At the point at which he’s training Harry in earnest to walk to his death, there should be an understanding that his death is a bit more complicated than Trelawney’s prediction suggested. Of course, revealing that goes against how we’re told these stories are supposed to work; we’re supposed to believe that the hero can only accept their fate once they’ve achieved a true understanding and appreciation for all that could go wrong if they walk away from destiny. But refusing to give the kid time means he really just walks into it blindly, on his gut instincts. He doesn’t get the chance to process those emotions. It’s kind of reflective of the love his mother protected him with, unthinkingly, when she died at the hands of Voldemort. That’s some poetic writing, for sure. Not very ethical, though.
Were all the secrets Albus kept from Harry the real smoking gun that ensured Voldemort’s defeat? It’s possible, certainly, but it’s still tantamount to press-ganging kids into the army. (Which is kinda what the books are about, to be fair.) Your drill sergeant only tells you what you need to know, but that’s a terrifying stance for an educator to take regarding the children at the school that he’s running. If you’re going to do that, maybe stop pretending that these kids are getting a normal childhood.
2. Professor Snape Loved Your Mom
So many problems over the course of Harry’s time at school occur because there is one teacher at Hogwarts who is permitted to outright abuse the students without any explanation whatsoever. It’s hard to say what’s worse about the Snape situation at Hogwarts—the fact that Dumbledore won’t give Harry a more concrete reason to trust the man besides “I’m telling you, he’s an okay dude,” or the fact that he doesn’t explain why Snape has it out for Harry in particular. Refusing to be honest on that front leaves Harry baffled for his first couple years at school, then makes Harry assume that it’s just because his dad was a big jerk to the guy. Which is still not a good reason for a teacher to abuse a student, fyi. It’s called professionalism, Severus.
But the real truth is that Snape hates Harry most of all because he loved Harry’s mom, Lily. And that’s… creepy as heck. And still not a good reason for a teacher to abuse a student. (That’s because there are no good reasons to abuse a student, in case anyone was unclear on that.) If Harry has to continually suffer through that, the least Dumbledore could do is give him an explanation for it. Granted, the better choice might have been to call the Potion’s Master up to his office and say “Hey Severus, if you don’t stop treating these kids like garbage, I’ll tell everyone that you had a crush on Harry’s mom,” but… you know, baby steps.
3. I Was Pals With the Biggest Wizard Fascist Alive Before Voldemort Even Showed Up
Grindelwald is clearly a sore spot for Albus, but that’s no excuse for keeping Harry in the dark about his attachment to one of the worst wizards of the modern era. While all the nastiness that went down with old Gellert deals with some very personal information that the headmaster might just as soon keep private, refusing to clue Harry in on that deeply dysfunctional and brief friendship is ultimately a selfish choice that damages Harry’s faith in him, and could have easily undermined his whole cause. Knowing that Albus Dumbledore was not a perfect guy might have crushed Harry for a little while, but knowing that his beloved mentor trusted him enough to tell him some pretty awful secrets could have kept everything on track better than overhearing some nastiness at a wedding and then reading a trashy tabloid biography.
He didn’t even have to tell Harry the whole story. Just “hey, I get that you’re having a hard time keeping Voldemort out of your head. Evil wiggles in, and I should know—I was BFF with a really bad dude once upon a time, and got obsessed with finding the Deathly Hallows. What are those, you ask? Don’t worry, I left Hermione a book that she’ll probably get the chance to read in another year or so.” Oh, and while we’re on the topic of Albus’s impending death, here’s another thing he might have wanted to tell the kid—
4. Draco Has Been Ordered to Kill Me, Don’t Worry, I Have A Plan
Okay, fine, if Dumbledore tells Harry that Snape is going to have to kill him later in Draco’s stead, that’s not going to work out well. Distracting the kid with his mentor’s own impending death could have very easily derailed their training, and made the entire sixth year a bust. You know what also doesn’t help? STALKING A FELLOW CLASSMATE FOR A YEAR AND THEN NEARLY BLEEDING HIM OUT IN A BATHROOM USING A SPELL YOU’VE NEVER CAST BEFORE.
Harry’s suspicion of Draco is a huge time suck and causes a myriad of problems in what turns out to be his final year at Hogwarts. But the real problem is Dumbledore continually insisting to Harry that Draco is totally fine and nothing that he’s doing should bug Harry all that much… because Draco is acting really suspicious all year. So telling the most curious mystery-solving kid at your school (who also happens to hate this specific student) that nothing is wrong? When said kid’s dad is currently in wizard prison for hanging out with some extremely nasty people? There had to be a better way to handle this. Maybe even a way to play up Harry’s sympathies or at least hint that there was a master plan going down that he needed to steer clear of.
Oh, and here’s an extra one that has nothing to do with human decency. It just would have been nice:
5. I’m Gay!
This one is really just a personal suggestion, seeing as it’s kinda crap that there are no visible queer characters in the Harry Potter books. There aren’t any solid hints that Albus Dumbledore is gay in all seven tomes, but Rowling has confirmed it regardless. There’s a load of subtext, for sure—his adoration of Grindelwald seems a tad fervent and obsessive in a distinctly not-friendly way—but nothing by way of him ever saying so.
And it would have been such an easy thing to slip into casual conversation, too!
“The password is ‘sherbet lemon’ which is coincidentally the name of my favorite gay bar.”
“Sorry, Harry, there are no lessons this evening as I have an unexpected hot date with the fellow working the register at Honeydukes.”
“Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! I fancy blokes!”
Yeah. That would have been awesome.
Emmet Asher-Perrin is happy that Albus enjoys his knitting patterns, though. You can bug her on Twitter and Tumblr, and read more of her work here and elsewhere.
Great article! Dumbledore’s secret didn’t bothered when I was reading the book but an article (I think it was one here) about the reasons why Obi Wan shouldn’t have kept Luke in the dark made me rethink them, and now I completely agree that Dumbledore should have told SOMETHING to Harry.
About the gay representation, I agree that it would have been nice to have a queer character in Harry Potter. Honestly, I prefer the canon confirmation than a casual mention because it seems like an after thought and that the author couldn’t bother to develop the character (Although your casual mentions made me laugh!).
1. No, that is the sort of thing a character should reason out for himself also anybody told they ‘have’ to die is either going to give up then and there or run like hell.
2. Can’t, not his secret to tell.
3. How is this Harry’s business? Dumbledore had no reason to believe that it would ever be relevant.
4. There you got me.
5. Again, none of Harry’s business. Seriously you think a teacher should discuss his sex life with a pupil? Really?
@1 I’m pretty sure that Star Wars post was another one of Emily’
My irritation was always with Dumbledore NOT EXPLAINING why Harry had to go back to his aunt and uncle’s every summer.
I personally think that #3 and #5 could have been linked together in a way that would have been very powerful in the narrative. As I read it (and YYMV), part of the reason why Dumbledore was suspectible to Grindlewald’s facist ideas was that he (Dumbledore) was attracted to Grindlewald. Once Dumbledore knew he was going to die, he must have suspected his association with Grindlewald would come out (I made a pun!) and Harry might hear about it. If Dumbledore told Harry he (Dumbledore) was gay and infatuated with Grindlewald, that would both allow for explicit Queer representation in the books and also help Harry negotiate his feels about how the man he admires so much could abscribe to a hateful ideology.
Lots of Queer people in the “real world,” even now, remain “closeted” for various reasons. Having Dumbledore discuss this all with Harry could have opened up some really interesting subtext about that. Has Dumbledore stayed “in the closet” (and yes, I know it’s possible he is open about his sexuality with other characters, but we see none of that in the text) because he feels ashamed of what his attraction to Grindlewald led to? (It had some pretty horrible consequences, but that in no way means the *attraction* itself was horrible). IIRC, parts of the “Harry Potter” series symbolically refer t the years of Thatcherism. Margaret Thatcher proposed some *incredibly* notorious anti-Queer laws, including *detention camps* for Queer people. (I am NOT making this up.) Under Thatcher, being Queer was cast as immoral and anti-British. Rowling could have used Dumbledore’s own Queer identity as a way to explore how people internalize those sorts of moral judgements and the effect that has on their lives.
@princessroxana: I don’t think that a teacher should discuss their sex life with a pupil. But there is a big difference between discussing one’s sexual/gender identity and one’s sex life. I believe that sometimes, especially with older students, it is appropriate for a teacher to “come out” to their students. (And, by the standards of the wizarding world, Harry was approaching adulthood at the time Dumbledore knew he was dying and might have come out to Harry.) For example, I am Queer and I teach Queer literature at the college level. Sometimes I come out to my students. It depends on the specific class. Sometimes I’ll have a class where I honestly think it helps the class dynamic and empowers the students to know that their professor is Queer and thus connects with the literature I’m teaching on a personal level, like many of them do. However, I would NEVER go into details with any student about what happens behind the closed door of my bedroom! ;)
I agree with you on #3; the rest, I’m kinda okay with Harry being left in the dark. What really gets me–and has for years–is Dumbledore not telling Harry that Voldemort was after a prophecy at the beginning of Book 5. He didn’t even have to go into details. Instead, he lets Harry come up with some fantastical weapon that is the object of Voldemort’s attention. Just a little info and Harry would still have had his godfather. Also, letting SNAPE teach him Occlumency is perhaps Dumbledore worst idea EVER. His excuse is he wanted to protect Harry by ensuring that Voldemort wouldn’t come to find out how much Dumbledore cared for Harry. No, Dumbledore, that is a lame excuse! I could go on with his decisions in OOTP–because they were all horrendous–but I’ll stop there.
@3 Yes, she was the author. Thank you. I searched it and read it again!
The occlumency thing was indeed a mistake but I suspect another part of D’s reason was that Snape was a past master of the art capable of blocking the Dark Lord himself. Learn from the best. I also suspect that he hoped the enforced closeness would enable them to understand each other better and maybe make a truce. Harry pretty much destroyed that possibility when he pried into Snape’s memories.
With respect jaimew, and not saying you are in any way wrong in your own decision, I maintain that Dumbledore discussing his private life with Harry would be hugely inappropriate. On the other hand expressing his regrets over his infatuation with Grindlwald to McGonagle or Snape would be appropriate as both are adults and deeply in his confidence, the subject is even relevant to Snape’s motivations and regrets. It’s not the homosexual part I have a problem with it’s the appropriateness of such personal confidences in what’s a fairly intense mentor relationship. It’s a question of boundaries. I concede there can be other opinions on where those boundaries should be set.
There’s an in-story reason for Dumbledore’s behaviour. In the words of his brother: “He learned secrecy at our mother’s knee. Secrets and lies, that’s how we grew up, and Albus… he was a natural.”
@jaimew, the way I read it, Dumbledore was not susceptible to Grindelwald’s ideas because he was infatuated with him, at the least not only that, possibly even the reverse: that Dumbledore fell in love with him because they shared similar ideals. Dumbledore had that whole situation with his father and Ariana that would make him be open to the idea that wizards should rule the world. After all, he would have more reason than most to want to vilify muggles. And when a wizard comes along who was just as intelligent and talented as him and who holds the same beliefs, it would be impossible not to form a strong bond that develops into more romantic feelings.
@@@@@ 6 – My main problem with the prophecy is that it’s a complete manpower sink for the Order in book 5 for no reason whatsoever.
There is an item, a not indestructible item, in a not remotely secure government building, that is of value to your enemy but not to you (in this case, because you already know what it says). What do you do?
Step 1 – Infiltrate government building.
Step 2 – Destroy item.
Step 3 – Leave government building.
Step 4 – Cup of tea. Maybe a biscuit; you’ve just saved yourself nearly a year of suspicious loitering, treat yourself.
To say nothing of the fact that from a strategic point of view the second part of the prophecy that Voldemort has not heard adds absolutely no value and will not change his proposed course of action. What does V try to do before he hears the whole prophecy? Kill Harry. What would he have tried to do if he had heard the prophecy? Kill Harry. Making sure he didn’t hear it was definitely a good use of everyone’s time, then, and keeping it from Harry so that V couldn’t read it from his brain definitely didn’t lead to Sirius’ utterly pointless curtain death.
Nope; I’m a teacher.
A teacher’s sex life and preferences isn’t the students’ business.
The basic trouble with Dumbledore isn’t that he’s not telling Harry he’s gay, but in not telling him information that the poor kid may need to stay alive, although I’m not entirely sure exactly what that is. In a somewhat broader conquest, Harry’s an orphan staying with abusive family members (where’s the wizard world’s equivalent of NSPCC?) and in a “school” which seems less concerned with his education than setting him up to die.
Not taking either side on the whole telling Harry about his sexual preferences topic, I think there is one thing that is missing from most people’s reasoning’s that have been posted so far. Dumbledore isn’t JUST Harry’s teacher. As other articles have stated, he’s one of the father figures in Harry’s life. He is an intricate part of raising Harry, both in and outside of Hogwarts. Comparing him to anybody who teaches in the here and now, and saying that his relationship with Harry is the same as a current teacher’s is to one of their students, is an incorrect association. Unless that teacher is preparing their student to die, has controlled the living conditions and arrangements for their student, leave that student in mortal danger as tests, watched and influenced that student’s life from birth, and then knowingly entrusted them with the fate of the world (or at least the world for the next 50 or so years). If so, please call social services.
I do want to reiterate that I am not taking either side, as I can see the reasoning for both. I just think it’s good to keep in mind that this isn’t your normal public school homeroom teacher and student relationship.
@tkThompson: I’d argue that, at least, Dumbledore’s infatuation with Grindlewald kept him from realizing earlier how horrible Grindlewald’s ideas were.
@princessroxana and swampyankee: Would you then say that a teacher (Queer or not) should never mention having a husband, wife, fiance/e, boyfriend, or girlfriend? Even at the elementary school level, I remember having teachers who occasionally mentioned their husband or wife. If a teacher who identified as female (as in, told us to call them “Mrs.” and “her”) mentioned her husband, even very briefly, that was essentially “coming out” as liking men to us students. Even an elementary school teacher telling her students to call her “Mrs. Doe” is “coming out” as (1) having a female gender identity and (2) married or previously married.
I think that there is a fine line here and those of us who teach have to be careful. I mentioned I teach at the college level; I think there is also a big difference between teaching minors and teaching adults. I also teach in the humanities (composition and literature). In the course of my classes, students sometimes share very personal information with me, both in their writing and in person. (As a former scientist and science teacher, I’m aware that is not always the case in STEM classes). Sometimes I honestly feel that it is appropriate to acknowledge the “gift” students give me of their trust by revealing a little more of myself to them. However, as I said, to me there is a BIG difference between telling a student I am Queer and telling them the details of my Saturday night!
Teachers (and mentors) are not robots. Nor do we live in bubbles. Some of my best memories of my favourite professors are those moments when they revealed something of their “personal” selves to me because it really DID feel like a gift. For example, one of my favourite professors during my English undergrad years invited the entire class to a BBQ at his and his wife’s house at the end of class. There were obviously boundaries; we were only allowed in a few rooms in the house, there was a very definite end time, and no alcohol was served. But I was *thrilled* to be able to “socialize” with my favourite professor. It was also a good lesson in how to interact with other professionals and colleagues in a social setting (we were all about to graduate). And since his wife was present, he WAS revealing something about his sexual identity to us.
Yes, we have to be careful. But I’m not sure that remaining constant “blank slates” is helpful to students. For that matter, if it’s verboten to bring up anything about our sex/gender identity, isn’t it equally as problematic to mention things like personal taste in general? I have a Dr. Who t-shirt that I’ve worn to teach my Science Fiction class. Is it inappropriate to let my students know I’m a Dr. Who fan? When I give my students examples of the five-paragraph thesis-centered essay, I usually give them an example based on the “Harry Potter” series. Is it inappropriate for me to tell my students that I like Harry Potter? I have used my cats as examples when we discuss Darwin’s theories in class. Should I be concerned that I’m overstepping boundaries when I tell my students I’m a cat person? I’m not trying to be snide here; rather, I think there is some value in letting students have some insight into us instructors as people WHILE still maintaining the student/teacher boundary
My deep, pervasive loathing of Dumbledore has little to nothing to do with the secrets he keeps and everything to do with his abusive nature. In the real world, I firmly believe the worst thing someone can do is be aware of an abusive situation and do nothing to act on it. Dumbledore is aware of (and personally responsible for!) not one but THREE: Harry’s situation with the Dursleys, Sirius in Azkaban, and actively abusive teachers at his school. The narrative can provide as many excuses as it wants, but as a reader I can’t condone or agree with him.
Bsically, Dumbledore literally makes me nauseous and I’m always here for articles criticizing him.
I personally don’t believe Snape hated Harry because he loved Lily. He hated Harry because he hated James Potter. This was very evident in The Half Blood Prince when while reading Snape’ s mind he discovers James was a bully intent on humiliating and making his life at Hogwarts a living hell because he was in love with Lily.
@jas195: You make an excellent point. Dumbledore really is in the position of the “uber-father” in the narrative. Rowling knows her mythology; this is kind of the male “hero’s journey” in which the hero has to break from the father/male mentor in order to achieve his goals. There is a touch of the Oedipal here as well; Harry has to come to grips with the flaws of both his own father (James) and his surrogate father (Dumbledore). So yeah, these teacher/student comparisons are not necessarily that accurate. ;)
I also think that Rowling was engaging with the tradition of British literature discussing British schooling. I’ve read a *bunch* of novels and short stories that portray British schools as abusive on both the part of the students and the teachers. You see this all over the place in Roald Dahl’s works: see “Galloping Foxley” for a good example. (That is NOT to say that kind of abuse is okay, of course!)
In terms of teaching ethics in the Harry Potter universe, I think McGonagall is probably a better example than Dumbledore.
Dumbledore didn’t tell Harry the great secrets for the same reason he didn’t make him a Prefect. Right or wrong, he cared too much about Harry to put those burdens on him. He said so himself at the end of book 5.
I wondered about thing myself but figured everything was plot driven.
It would have been great in school to find out stuff about jobhunting!!!
When I was in school, every now and then a prof would mention spouse/kids/hometown, or dissertation topic and there were a few students-at-meal-at-prof’s house. I taught for a while and didn’t usually mention anything unless there was a context, as when I asked a student who was from the same town what area he lived in, or the day I lectured on a Fitzgerald story and took a photo of a Jazz Age-era photo my grandparents had taken of a couple in a canoe listening to a Victrola (portable music in 1928!!!)
Agree with Emily and various commenters that, for items 2-4, Dumbledore not only had plenty of opportunities to be more forthcoming but also, if he felt that certain topics were not age-appropriate, had the skill to drop hints that Harry could have figured out as he matured. Yet if Dumbledore was a cagey bastard it arose from some very relatable human flaws, without which the story and character would have been less interesting.
The ethics surrounding the (lack of) revelation of Harry’s status as a horcrux and his need to eventually sacrifice himself are a bit more nuanced; the answer likely depends upon your interpretation of what exactly occurred during the critical moments in the Forbidden Forest, and what Dumbledore believed would be required. If it were simply a matter of destroying the last horcrux (and perhaps the necessity of Voldemort being the one to cast the curse) then yes Harry should probably have been informed earlier, at least to the possibility of everything coming down to that. But what if the more important aspect of the strategy was the effect of the counter-charm resulting from Harry’s willing sacrifice? And especially if the ability to cast that counter-charm depended on who and what were in his mind and heart during those final moments? From the first book onwards, Dumbledore indicated that what Lily achieved required a very special convergence of circumstances; he could have reasonably believed that Harry’s ability to form the personality and relationships necessary to find himself in a situation equivalent to the one his mother faced would have been compromised by the fatalism arising from foreknowledge of the need to make the same direct sacrifice. If that’s the case, then Dumbledore’s choice would fall more into the realm of the Trolley Problem (and the baggage of The Greater Good, just to make things a bit more fraught!)
#4 How could he tell Harry that he knew about Draco’s plot? If he had, he would have had to reveal a whole lot of other stuff like the fact that Snape was loyal to him. As Harry is so terrible at closing his mind, any occlumens within ten fee would have known as well.
@@@@@ jaimew (14)
I teach high school; I’m also a fairly private person. My students know that I’m married (they asked) and have children (I volunteered). They don’t know my dating history, nor shall they.
@@@@@ jaimew (17)
I’ve read Lord of the Flies and seen references in other books to the nastiness of British (or at least English) public schools. I’ve also read To Serve Them All My Days, which portrayed a very different environment. I don’t have any particular liking for boarding schools in general; after some scandals (see this and this), it dropped. (I was a long-term sub at a non-boarding private school, which was a wonderful experience. The staff there also had friends and family working at boarding schools; they observed that all boarding schools had a problem with drug abuse)
More generally, and directed to the wider audience, I’ve not read the Harry Potter books recently enough to try to understand Dumbledore’s view of his relationship to Harry, but it seems to be less like a father figure than a spymaster, an SOE executive sending Joes on their one-way flights into occupied Europe.
@swampyankee – I’m not trying to single out English (or British – I’m a U.S.ian so my usage of those terms is probably not fully correct) boarding schools in particular – CERTAINLY boarding schools and elite colleges in the U.S. have their own history of hazing and bullying and brutality! Actually, in the university system in which I teach, some fraternity members are currently facing serious legal charges because of their involvement in illegal hazing that led to the death of a young college student.
Rather, I was referring to a trope I see in a lot of English literature. I might also reference the “Narnia” series as well as Neil Gaiman’s (a British author) depiction of boarding school abuse in one of his issues of “Sandman” (it is from “The Kindly Ones” graphic novel but I am afraid I don’t have the exact issue to hand). Again, as a U.S.ian, I don’t know to what extent this is a realistic protrayal of the English school system. Ramsey Campbell wrote about bullying in English schools in a couple of his short stories. Again, as a U.S.ian, I don’t know how actually true this is. However, it is a trope I have noticed and one with which I think Rowling may be engaging.
For all that I flatter myself that I know a wee bit about WWII history, I’ve got to admit that I had never thought of Harry as a “guided missile.” But now that you’ve mentioned this, I kind of can’t “un-see” that interpretation. Obviously WWII was very different in the U.S. than in Europe. But I’ve read enough to know that, on both fronts, young men were *encouraged* to go to war and honoured if they did. IIRC, if they didn’t or couldn’t, they were publically shamed and labelled cowards. Here in the U.S., the second World War is still often referred to as the last morally defensible war we’ve fought.
This is also making me think of something else: the supposed witchcraft attack on the Nazis on August 1, 1940, at Highcliffe-on-Sea. According to the stories, the witches in Britain assembled to raise a cone of power to prevent the Nazi powers from invading England (which they never did, by the way). This sounds a wee bit like the Battle of Hogwarts, doesn’t it?
The Letter Dumbledore writes to Grindelwald ir the clue!!!
I remember I thought that the moment I read it, so I wasn’t´t surprised when JK confirmed it.
@jaimew (23)
I’m USian; I’ve gotten to read the news about hazings in frats and team sports.
“Joes” were agents parachuted into occupied Europe, sent either by the British Special Operation Executive or its US counterpart, the OSS. I’m aware of this operation because one of my uncles flew with the Carpetbaggers for the USAAF, and the groups mission was to deliver those agents. Dumbledore may be portrayed as a kindly father figure, but he’s really not behaving much differently than “M” from the James Bond universe, which would be all well and good if Harry was a 25 year old volunteer, but deliberately and knowingly sending children into highly dangerous situations is not.
This is a great list! One of the many many things that bothered me about Harry Potter was the way that everyone constantly refused to tell H.P. *anything.* So much of the drama could have been avoided (admittedly making these very short books) if people had just been more forthcoming. “Oh Harry I’m going to make you feel like @@@@@#% by withholding this crucial fact from you, but don’t worry it’s for your Own Good as well as the only way we can defeat whats-his-name.” bah.
@15, Dumbledore didn’t know Sirius was falsely imprisoned. Everyone at the time, even Dumbledore, thought that Sirius was the secret keeper on the Fidelius charm keeping the Potters hidden. Only Sirius and Pettigrew knew about the switch.
Heh, ya, he could have shared more info, but if he told Harry that Draco had been order to kill him, Harry would have not been able to stop himself from going full bore on Draco no matter what Dumbeldore said. I mean, he got a pretty decent understanding of this bull headed kid in 1st year, maybe that’s why he doesn’t tell him everything.
I think telling him no.4 could have turned out worse. Remember that before the whole Dobby situation in the last book Harry ALWAYS acts. Telling him to do nothing about it would not have worked. If Draco was not in a position to take ownership of the elder wand or Voldemort had Narcissa killed the ending might not have been a happy one.
One big problem here: Snape did NOT love Lily. Someone who loves someone else does not do the things he was willing to do to her. Kill off her husband and infant son, treat said son like a piece of crap even though you’re supposed to be his teacher.
@Grrarrggh (31),
I think Snape, despite his sense of duty to Dumbledore, was basically not a person of good character. The way he treated Harry was appalling, and when an adult does that to a child over whom he’s in authority, it’s a sign of basically bad character.
@31 Love can be abusive as well as positive. Snape did love Lily, but not in the positive way. Snape was a screwed up person that nobody ever took the time to try to unscrew.
#1: You just doomed the world. If Harry goes into the forest to die because it will let him kill Voldermort, instead of to protect his friends, he doesn’t invoke the protective Magic, so most of the students are killed in the fighting, including Nevil, who never has a chance to kill Nagini.
Nearly all of the characters in the Harry Potter novels are completely unrealistic as people; Rowling’s strengths are plot and world-building, not character development.
If Harry Potter had actually been abused by the Dursleys from ages 1 – 11 — the way he is in the books — he would not be as well-adjusted as he is in the books. Severus Snape is wonderfully complex and interesting, but I don’t actually believe in him for a minute; his set of characteristics just doesn’t hang together well.
So Dumbledore does what he does because he’s not much of a character; the plot makes him do whatever the plot requires, and he doesn’t have enough reality to resist it.
I should add that I adored the Harry Potter books — even though I usually love character development above all — and saying that Rowling wrote characters who were completely unreal is not to say that her books are bad. Obviously, her books are beloved, and for good reason. But her ability to create living, breathing, believable people isn’t one of those reasons. :-)
In re Point 1: If you think a Drill Sergeant tells you only what you need to know, you’re doing a disservice to Drill Sergeant and Drill Instructors everywhere. The reality of Drill Sergeants is not like that BS in Full Metal Jacket – at least not now, if it ever was.
Also, in re Point 1: Certainly, Dumbledore should have let Harry know that he was a horcrux. More over, he probably should have done more to find out about possible ways to remove them – as far as we can tell from the books, it’s heavily implied that he discussed it with nobody. Moreover, he should have let Harry know that ONLY an Avada Kadavra would give Harry any chance of surviving in the long run – a cutting curse to the throat, or a piercing curse to the heart, and it would not have mattered to Harry that the horcrux was broken.
In re Point 2: No, Snape did not love Lily. He might have, at some point, but by the end – no. He was obsessed with her and any love that he might have had before was corrupted no end.
In re Point 3: No, Harry really didn’t need to know about Dumbledore’s relationship with Grindlewald. It made great background information for the story, but over all, it really wasn’t relevant to the story itself.
In re Point 4: Oh, HELL yeah, Dumbledore should have told Harry more than “Don’t worry, I have a plan”. Didn’t he learn from First Year, when probably 80% of the upper classes had visited the end room of his gauntlet of fear, that telling kids to stay away from somewhere means they’ll go right on ahead and do it? And seriously – the Weasley Twins. Do you think THEY didn’t at least get through to the potion puzzle, at a minimum? Cerberus – which even MUGGLES know about, Devil’s Snare for Neville, Flying Keys for Harry, Chess for Ron, Potion Puzzle for Hermione – the troll was probably the only REAL protection in the whole thing, and Harry and Ron had already demonstrated how to handle them. Meanwhile, the Brat From Hell is doing all kinds of strange things, and Dumbledore is just calmly going “Oh, I have it under control”? After having shown how little he had things under control with Umbridge in the castle? Hell, she was a seriously incompetent witch, and she still had Dumbledore stymied. And of course, Malfoy did have a plan, that did work, and which ended up with Dumbledore dead – and of course, it mattered little because Dumbledore had already committed slow-motion suicide! You think Bill Weasley, Curse Breaker for Gringotts, would have screwed up with that ring? Aside from the “nobody can know about horcruxes” thing – couldn’t Dumbledore have just said “we need to retrieve this artifact, nobody can know about it, don’t worry about what it does, and I’d like some backup”? And it’s not like Dumbledore was actually training Harry in any real way – that whole examining memories thing could have been done in a couple of weekends.
In re Point 5: Meh. Might have been nice from a certain point of view, but really, not that important for the story itself. Heck, Dumbledore could have been bi and banging McGonagal every night for all it matters to the story. (Maybe Dumbledore’s animagus form was himself as a female!)
There’s a large segment of the Potterverse fanfiction community that is divided on one point: whether Dumbledore was monstrously incompetent, or if he was monstrously evil. Personally I think he was monstrously incompetently evil.
I agree with this post for the most part; except for the part about Snape. I recently reread the first book and Dumbledore does not only not tell him about Snape’s love for Lily but fed Harry’s mistrust in him. Harry asked him why Snape didn’t like him and instead of telling him the truth just told Harry that his dad saved Snape and Snape doesn’t like to owe people. Not only that but compared the relationship to Harry and Draco’s with no clarification that it was JAMES that was Draco and not Snape. So for 3 books we get this image of Snape that he’s like Draco and it isnt only slightly challenged until the 3rd book and then not completely shattered until the 5th book. So for 5 books we see Snape as Harry does; cruel, evil, and a bully (like Draco).
So, with the 3rd person limited perspective we have a boy who thinks this man is being petty and doesn’t see all the good things he does and so us as readers don’t as well. We get the perspective of him smirking, glaring, and being mean. He’s mean but is he the only one of the Professors? McGonagall pulls Draco by his ear, but because we see McGonagall as good and Draco as bad we’re okay with a teacher physically abusing a student. We see her give harsh punishments but again because we see her as caring about Harry those punishments are seen as ‘tough love’ unlike Snape who gets the label of abusive. I get a teacher should be more adapt at teaching kids how they learn, but some teach how THEY were taught. The Obelisk Gate by N.K Jemisin shows us that might not always be the correct way but it CAN come from meaning well. Does it make it right? No, but because we will never know because of the way the book was written and JKR uninterested in clarifying anything in books.
Sorry this is so long! Great list and shows communication is key to a lot of things in life!
First off, Voldemort spent a lot of time Harry’s head, so let’s remember that.
1. He didn’t dare tell Harry, because Voldemort was an accomplished Legillimens and thus could have picked it from poor Harry’s brain. Heck Snape could have picked it up and in his dislike for James and his anger that he wasn’t Harry’s father could have told Voldemort. “Hey boss, you can’t kill Harry, he’s part of why you can’t die.”
2. He gave Snape his word that he would never tell that secret. And in any case, as stated by others, it wasn’t his secret to tell.
3. That Dumbledore knew Grindewald is a given, he’s the one who defeated him and it’s on his chocolate frog card. On the other hand, knowing that Dumbledore was not always so good and “perfect” might have caused Harry to doubt what Dumbledore wanted him to do.
4. No way should he have told Harry that Draco is supposed to kill him. By this point it is very clear that when Harry believes strongly in something he DOES NOT LISTEN. Which means the moment he knew for sure that the man he looks up to the most is supposed to die, all the rest of what he might be told flies right out the window and Harry’s already plotting how to make sure it doesn’t happen.
5. Oh sure, as close as Harry has grown to Dumbledore and with all the attention that Dumbledore gives him, compared to the other students, let’s add that little bit of news. Let’s add to the young hetero male’s concerns the question of WHY Dumbledore is really so attentive to him. Is he paying attention to me to help me fight Voldemort or is he doing it because he’s taken a fancy to me?
While these items may seem important and things that Harry should know, they really aren’t. Harry’s personality and ability to keep a secret from a wizard or witch who knows how to “read your mind” especially if it’s something he’s unable to put on the back burner means Harry’s the last person to be told these things, and not until it no longer matters. Dumbledore hinted at the horcrux situation by mentioning that they had a connection that had something to do with the scar.
Telling Harry any of those things, rather than letting him learn it on his own, was a very bad idea. Would have been nice to know but Harry wouldn’t have done well with it.
Grrarrggh (31),
There was a Tumblr post that went something to the effect,
Step 4: Realizing Dumbledore was manipulative and abusive as well and not the infallible person everyone believed him to be.
Yep. The books point out VERY WELL that human beings are human beings, full of foibles, inconsistencies, and madness.
All this extra stuff is interesting, but really only mental masturbation.
@34/Jade Phoenix: Harry learned from Dumbledore, via the pensieve, that he was a horcrux and decided only afterward to sacrifice himself.
@38/Sunfire: Snape raised the legilimency risk with Dumbledore, who dismissed it on the grounds that Voldemort was unlikely to probe Harry’s mind following his experience in the Dept. of Mysteries; the narrative of the last two books indicate he guessed correctly.
From these, it seems to me that Dumbledore, without too much risk to the plan in either direction, could have said “it is possible, Harry, that you are the final horcrux” once he had impressed upon Harry the need to seek out and destroy all the others. Couching that revelation as a hypothetical would have been technically true (Dumbledore suspected but did not know) and allowed Harry the ability to explore his options in a less manipulative way.
@38/Sunfire: That Snape and Lily were close as children but had a falling out later in their Hogwarts years was common knowledge. For Dumbledore to tell Harry that much, while suggesting that the break may not have been permanent, would have given Harry important context without really violating the promise to Snape.
@35/Corylea: Funny, I’ve long felt the primary characters were developed believably and it was the world-building that was wobbly in many places. Always interesting how people can derive diametrically opposite conclusions from the same text!
I don’t feel Snape thought he was entitled to Lily at all. He was all too painfully aware that he’d lost her through his own actions. And yes he was a bully and a pitiful case of arrested development as for that matter was Sirius. Both were in serious need of psychological help. Or a good slap upside the head. Or both.
@@@@@ princessroxana
Yep, lots of people in the Harry Potter could have used a dope slap. When I was reading the books (simultaneously with my children ;)), I was beginning to wonder if JK Rowling was deliberately showing the real reason that wizards didn’t take over the world: they make muggles look like organizational geniuses by comparison. Heck, they’d get out-organized by a random bunch of ten-year old muggle kids putting together a pickup game of football/baseball/soccer/cricket/hockey/basketball.
There also can’t be too many of them — based on the enrollment of Hogwarts, there can’t be many more than 20,000 wizards in all of the UK. No wonder they can’t get decent teachers for what is ostensibly the school of British wizard-dom. There’s not enough candidates to fill a puddle, let alone a pool.
“a pickup game of football/baseball/soccer/cricket/hockey/basketball” <— That’s a blending of game rules that sounds fun…maybe the beginnings of Calvinball! (Actually, that’s one sport at which wizards might have an advantage over muggles… :-)
@42, @43: In examining the flaws and failings of the significant characters, good case studies can be made regarding the value of not only actively dealing with mental/emotional health issues, but also approaching learning and law in ways that are more systematic than “hey, these guys seem to know what they’re doing, let’s just do what they say!” I’m not so sure that JKR deliberately set out to examine either, but on several occasions Hermione does lampshade the latter so maybe the author noticed the emergent theme at some points.
Note that Dumbledore was abusive to Snape, as well–‘so what, you were almost eaten by a werewolf, but his education is more important than your insignificant life, so STFU, and we’ll just all laugh whenever James Potter strips you naked for fun’. Do note that nothing was done about the Dursleys till Snape got some of Harry’s memories. And that even when Dumbledore knew Sirius was innocent, he a) didn’t make sure Sirius had a trial and b) kept Sirius practically a prisoner at Grimmauld Place.
Oh, and one more thing–he didn’t tell Harry that he’d kept the Cloak that might have saved Lily.
As for the Horcrux, why didn’t anyone suggest surgery? Or would that be too simple?
In hindsight, it might have helped to inform Harry of some of the secrets (the personal ones to Dumbledore’s are unnecessary though), but it might have shortened the story or made it even worse. However, you must remember, Dumbledore thought he could weaken and kill Voldermort himself without involving Harry so that explains why he kept most of his actions to himself. I mean, you are one of, if not the, most powerful wizard so why should you think a teenager is going to be integral to the plan despite getting some lucky shots along the way. I guess he realised it later as Harry got more powerful, but Dumbledore was still trying to find a way to get rid of Voldermort himself.
As for Snape, not only is Harry now another person that had Lily’s love, but also Harry would have looked almost exactly like a young James Potter, a bully to Snape, and sometime acts like him, so it is not wonder that Snape could not bring himself to treat him as just another student.
@45, I think it’s because magic ability seems to be positively correlated with stupidity. It’s also likely that turning Harry into a horcrux doesn’t involve some physical object. Of course, on the other hand, I think Voldemort and his followers tend to underestimate the effectiveness of a 12.7 mm sniper round fired from a kilometer away.
Most wizards know nothing of Muggle medicine.
@45 — Why not surgically remove the horcrux from Harry? Because souls are not material objects; they’re immaterial bits of spirit. I mean, if you wanted to remove somebody’s soul, where would you cut? :-)
Personally, I think one of the things on this list should have been Your Dad Was Actually Kind of a Dick to Snape and that’s why he has such a grudge. Maybe even moreso than knowing Snape was in love with his mom (which is really nobody’s business but Snape’s). As it is, Harry was in for a nasty shock when he realized all the hero worship heaped on his dad wasn’t actually the whole story in book 5. I always hated how Dumbledore downplayed what the true relationship between Snape and James was when he tells him why Snape has a grudge against Harry in book 1.
None of this is not to say that Snape’s love for Lily was very twisted and that he himself was not a very flawed, broken individual.
And agreed with above who said Dumbledore should have at least given Harry a reason for having to put up with the Dursley’s abuse (if not been a bit more proactive about preventing it). As an adult reading the books to my kid, I definitely have a bit more of a perspective now on what Dumbledore tolerates.