#dumbledore meta

[thephiesintheforest]

I have been thinking today about Dumbledore's and Snape's roles in the story and why I personally, find one more compelling then the other.

(I think the reason why I've been thinking about that is because I follow a lot of great Snape blogs whose favourite is obviously Severus. And the thing is, I get why! I love his character too! But Albus just tickles my brain a bit more ...)

Anyway, in my opinion, the four main characters through which morality is explored in the books are Harry, Voldemort, Snape and Dumbledore. Voldemort and Harry make up one axis of morality. Their stories mirror each other in many ways, while their reactions to what happens to them stands in direct opposition to each other. One could go into detail here, but since this post is not supposed to be about them, I'll simply argue that this axis explores the concepts of deliverance through selfless love and sacrifice vs. damnation through selfish and self-centred hubris (oh the protestantism of it all...).

And then there's the axis that is Snape and Dumbledore. Again, two characters with remarkably similar backgrounds. (Broken families, intelligence, isolation and othering throughout their lives...) And, contrary to Voldemort and Harry, these two even make very similar choices that lead them into very similar catastrophes. (They react to their respective situation by radicalisation into very dangerous and violent ideologies, leading to a loved one's death.)

A part of their reactions to these are also similar. Both pledge themselves to some sort of penance, both are deeply changed and scarred. Both isolate themselves even more from the people around them.

BUT there is a difference and it's not a moral one. It's how they present themselves. It's how they appear to the rest of the world and thus how we first get to know them.

Severus is not a pleasant man. We can argue about just how much damage he did to his students and if he's actually as bad a teacher as he appears to be through Harry's eyes. But there is no doubt that he is just ... not nice. And not kind either. He's spiteful, often snide, makes openly hurtful comments and holds a grudge like nobody's business. And all of these things are VERY obvious.

Albus (barring some glaring exceptions that most people never see and we only get to witness very late in the game) is none of these things. He's gentle, quirky, humorous and sort of just distantly kind to his students. Everyone we meet that we are supposed to trust places him on a pedestal as a beacon of both morality and intellect, while at the same time, painting him as a bit of an eccentric. All of these things isolate him as effectively from other's as Severus unpleasantness. They serve essentially the same purpose, yet leave very different impressions on both a young Harry, and the reader.

In other words, both of these characters have built reputations around themselves that serves to distance themselves from others. They don them as masks because they do not want what's underneath — their humanity, their vulnerability, their love and pain — to be known.

Yet what's underneath is remarkably similar. The difference is that one mask is (to maybe stretch that metaphor a bit too thin) significantly more pleasant, more comforting than the other. So for one (Snape) what's underneath is beautiful by comparison. For the other (Dumbledore) it can only be hideous if what one is used to and expecting is the ideal of goodness itself. Dumbledore, who was previously a godlike figure, was torn down by his humanity. Snape, by contrast, was lifted up by his.

Aside 1: I think this is one of the reasons why so many fans hate Dumbledore to an almost comical extend. They haven't forgiven him for not having lived up to the ideal he projected of himself, the ideal of pure goodness that only ever was a facade to begin with. So when he makes a mistake (for example, when he hurts Harry through neglect bc he fears what will happen when he gets too close), it must be malicious instead of simply the human failure of a traumatised man.

Aside 2: I think Dumbledore recognises this too (that he was torn down by his humanity, where Severus was lifted up). The phrase "my word, Severus, that i shall never reveal the best of you" (quoted from memory) has always struck me that way. Albus views his own capacity to love as his downfall. In Severus, he sees it as his salvation. I wonder if there was ever resentment there...

Anyway, this is, imo what the moral axis of Snape and Dumbledore explores: The inevitability of one's humanity and goodness, not as an absolute transcendant ideal, but a conscious struggle within a complicated world.

I, personally, find the tearing down of Dumbledore as a god figure more emotionally and philosophically intriguing than the lifting up of Snape. Maybe because to believe in the lie of the benevolent god is so much more convenient and comfortable than to believe in the lie of the nasty and unpleasant children's book villain.

The latter one demands forgiveness for the mask (and many can't forgive that either) but the former, demands forgiveness and sympathy for what's underneath. And that is, I think, significantly harder.

[iamnmbr3]

I find it incredibly creepy how Dumbledore views Riddle as being this sort of inherently seductive 'femme fatale' type. In book 6 he implies that Tom used his looks to endear himself to his teachers when he started school and hide his supposedly inherently evil and corrupt nature.

Like. Albus. DUDE. Tom was ELEVEN. Why would you assume that teachers would be swayed by or even paying attention to the attractiveness of an eleven year old?! WTAF?

And then he portrays the Hepzibah Smith memory as another example of Tom using his seductive charms for evil. But although he does bring her flowers he doesn't do anything else to encourage her and in fact seems uncomfortable and determined to keep the conversation focused on work.

She is actually the one who is being creepy here given the power differential between them. I mean, yes, Tom is putting up with her because it suits his designs for the moment and could and would kill her in a second if provoked. But even though we know that she certainly doesn't. As far as she knows she's creeping on this young store clerk without wealth or connections whose job depends on keeping her happy.

And certainly while she enjoys his looks and his attention she also seems quite happy with the persona he puts on where he addresses her in a highly respectful manner, not as an equal. She's certainly not complaining about how he calls her Miss Hepzibah or asking him to drop the honorific. She likes that. She likes that he addresses her not much differently than how her House Elf does. She likes his whole "I am only a poor assistant, madam, who must do as he is told" thing. And as far as she knows he is just that, with no particular special power or talent other than his good looks which she evidently appreciates. This is not him leading on and taking advantage of an innocent sweet old lady.

And yes he brings her flowers, presumably to keep her happy, but other than that he tries to keep the conversation professional and steer the discussion towards the purpose of his visit. He doesn't say anything overtly flirtatious or even try to prolong their discussion by asking to see some of her other things.

She brings that up on her own. Nor is there any indication that he is the one that decided to move their relationship in this direction. It seems more like she saw a young and good looking man, apparently far below her in terms of station and magical power, and made her move. He probably isn't the first.

The way she casually touches him is just so creepy to me. And though he tolerates it, he did nothing to encourage or solicit it. Riddle is someone who is in general quite averse to touch. We only see him voluntarily touch one person in 7 books and that's when he touches Harry, just for a second in book 4, just to show that he can. I don't think he enjoys this kind of attention. He was probably glad to kill her for more than just the purpose of getting the cup and the locket.

And yet none of her creepiness is acknowledged. Instead, Dumbledore draws our attention to how Riddle cruelly seduced and murdered a nice old lady whose affections he sought and then betrayed:

[duplicity-writes]

Tom has the mindset of a Muggle dictator... Tom Riddle was shaped by the poverty and hunger of Muggle life... In book 7, he uses Muggle methods to destroy Muggles.Dumbledore couldn't figure out Riddle for so long because Riddle was shaped by the trauma of rejection.

i had written out a lot and then tumblr mobile ate my draft so i'm a bit peeved. i also i spent so long on this one i had so many tangents... i cut down my response a little, and will save some for another post on another day.

first of all, i'm not sure what you're referring to with "Muggle methods to destroy Muggles". you'd have to cite some examples for me to understand your meaning better.

now it's important to point out that the books never deeply explore the impact of 1920s-1940s muggle or magical history on present day canon. we don't have canon content or context to comment on much.

sometimes fanon likes to portray young tom as a frightened boy hiding in a bomb shelter, plotting to murder his way into never dying because war is terrifying... here i will note that gellert grindelwald isn't even given any narrative importance until book 7 despite being initially mentioned in book 1. even canon history doesn't mean much in canon.

but we can decide to explore the possibility of it...

most of tom's childhood experience is heavily connected to his relationship with dumbledore, both through dumbledore's direct influence, and the fact that his story is told exclusively by dumbledore to harry.

in book 6's recounting of tom's past, one could argue that dumbledore is either deliberately omitting or subconsciously dismissing the influence of major historical events due to his complicated personal connection to that period of time. regardless, it's biased.

dumbledore regrets his past, and so his view of tom is partially shaped by his own trauma. his life post-grindelwald has been spent desperately avoiding power, mostly as a form of penance for his past transgressions.

for someone who claims love to be the most powerful, enduring force, dumbledore is heavily estranged from it. he spends his childhood trying to distance himself from his father's reputation and the shameful secret of his sister.

"You know how my poor father sought revenge, and paid the price, died in Azkaban. You know how my mother gave up her own life to care for Ariana."

to dumbledore, the threads of duty and sacrifice are entwined with love. he protects harry just his parents protected his sister, often by making decisions on harry's behalf and enduring whatever cost to ensure that harry remains as sheltered as possible.

"Do you see, Harry? Do you see the flaw in my brilliant plan now? I had fallen in to the trap I had foreseen, that I had told myself I could avoid, that I must avoid. [...] I cared about you too much," said Dumbledore simply. "I cared more for your happiness than your knowing the truth, more for your peace of mind than my plan, more for your life than the lives that might be lost if the plan failed. In other words, I acted exactly as Voldemort expects we fools who love to act."

dumbledore holds harry at arm's length while simultaneously claiming to care deeply for him. he believes that this is in harry's best interests, just as he believed in leaving harry with the dursleys. harry nearly dies as a result of dumbledore's decision, but that is not the only consequence of the battle at the ministry.

sirius' death is an interesting parallel to what happened to ariana. they were both trapped, they both died after trying to intervene in a dangerous situation. like aberforth, harry is left to mourn and move on, but unlike aberforth, harry receives an apology -- dumbledore admits culpability in the tragedy.

it is implied that aberforth never knew the painful depth of his brother's guilt and regret until harry tells him about the events of the horcrux cave. dumbledore chose to let aberforth hate him and blame him rather than reconcile, and this, too, is a misguided form of protection.

now with this context, we fast forward to when dumbledore visits wool's. tom is giving red flags galore, but he is also clearly just... a troubled child.

"I returned to Hogwarts intending to keep an eye upon him, something I should have done in any case, given that he was alone and friendless, but which, already, I felt I ought to do for others' sake as much as his."

dumbledore cites tom's cruelty as a factor in his mistrust, but let us not forget that dumbledore was "alone"*, "friendless"*, and much older than eleven years old when he sided with grindelwald on the subjugation of muggles.

(*true to how dumbledore felt at the time, having been denied his opportunity to travel abroad. much like tom, his talents are being "wasted" post-graduation...)

"I had proven, as a very young man, that power was my weakness and temptation. I was safer at Hogwarts. I think I was a good teacher."

dumbledore thinks highly of his own self-awareness, which makes it all the more interesting when tom returns to britain and requests the DADA position... only to be denied.

it can be assumed that by that time, tom has done far worse things than simply plan to take over the world, but nevertheless, dumbledore's treatment of tom seems rather hypocritical.

"By the end of his first year, [Dumbledore] would never again be known as the son of a Muggle-hater, but as nothing more or less than the most brilliant student ever seen at the school."

sound familiar? i don't believe dumbledore sees grindelwald in tom. that would credit dumbledore with the ability to truly understand those around him.

as we've seen, it isn't only tom that he misunderstands:

there is aberforth. there is sirius. and harry, who was not trusted with the necessity of his own death until the penultimate moment, who in the end extends more empathy to voldemort than dumbledore ever managed.

a great deal of effort is spent on researching voldemort's pursuit of immortality and covering the timeline of his horcrux creation. of course, dumbledore is more than capable of the clever detective work required to piece voldemort's checkered past together.

yet is it not telling that he never expands more on what is arguably the very foundation of tom riddle's character by posing the basic question: why does voldemort fear death so much?

(this is the question that fanon often attempts to answer with the inclusion of world war ii, which sometimes -- sorry! -- feels like a cheap cop out lol. it's not that we aren't allowed to have cheap cop outs in fanfiction, but if we're discussing a true interpretation of his canon character, i would rather explore the depth of that, and not reduce his fears to a product of his environment being "war scary". but my beef with fanon being shallow is another fight for another day...)

much in the way voldemort dismisses love, dumbledore dismisses this fear of death. for dumbledore, i believe death truly was a relief. through self-sacrifice, dumbledore seeks and achieves the absolution he so desperately craves. as his parents gave their lives for his sister, dumbledore gives his life for the greater good.

a common thread between harry and tom is that they are both orphans, but dumbledore is also orphaned after graduation.

"I resented it, Harry. I was gifted, I was brilliant. I wanted to escape. I wanted to shine. I wanted glory. Do not misunderstand me. I loved them... but I was selfish... So that, when my mother died, and I was left the responsibility of a damaged sister and a wayward brother, I returned to my village in anger and bitterness."

all this to say, dumbledore's perspective is heavily filtered through this self-righteous belief system built on sacrifice, through his high regard of his own cleverness, through his conviction of love as the ultimate saviour.

dumbledore loved his family, and that love is what saved him. it is his grief that pulls him away from grindelwald. it is his guilt that pushes him to dedicate his life to education instead of politics. dumbledore punishes himself over and over for his past. he believes this suffering is what proves his remorse, proves his love. we hear this belief echoed whenever james and lily are brought up around harry.

tom has no experience with family or love. he lives in an orphanage. he has no one to care for or protect but himself, and nothing we see in his past suggests that he ever had the cause or opportunity to connect with anyone else in that way -- certainly not when he meets dumbledore for the first time!

no loving family stands in the way of tom riddle becoming voldemort.

this is why dumbledore fails to truly see tom. he sees someone who lacks both care and capacity for meaningful emotion, someone who would enslave muggles and muggleborns without a shred of remorse.

when dumbledore sees tom, he sees that someone as a version of himself. he sees voldemort.

[inthemoodforblastt]

what’s your opinions on dumbledore and snape’s relationship

Well, I think I’ve talked about this before, but honestly, I see it as a relationship built on absolute grooming from Dumbledore’s side towards Severus. Like, I genuinely think he saw this completely desperate, terrified, emotionally shattered 21-year-old boy —and yes, I’m sorry, but at 30, a 21-year-old is a boy to me— showing up willing to do literally anything to fix the disaster he had caused, and Dumbledore immediately took advantage of that.

That moment where he asks him, “What would you give me in return?” and Severus basically says “Anything”? That is an insane power imbalance. And what does Dumbledore do with it? He pushes him into becoming a double spy and, on top of that, forces him to work as a teacher in the same place where he experienced some of the worst abuse and humiliation of his life. That is manipulation. Full stop.

Dumbledore is not just an adult in that situation, he is a man with over a century of life experience, an incredibly intelligent strategist, someone who understands perfectly how people work. And Dumbledore, fundamentally, sees people like chess pieces. He has an extremely militaristic mentality when it comes to “the greater good,” plans, sacrifices, and war strategy. So yes, I absolutely think he manipulates Severus into becoming his puppet. And the thing is, Severus is someone who desperately needs a parental figure. In the same way I think Voldemort exploited that need for validation and belonging, I think Dumbledore exploited it too. The difference is that Dumbledore did it better, more subtly, and for much longer.

I do think Dumbledore eventually develops some level of affection for Severus, but I don’t think he ever truly confronts how many of Severus’ worst decisions are indirectly tied to the failures of the adults around him, including himself. And honestly? Even if someone had pointed it out to his face, I don’t think he would have accepted responsibility for it.

What frustrates me most about Dumbledore is the way he consistently minimizes Severus’ trauma. Not his abilities —Dumbledore clearly knows Severus is brilliant and talented, just like Voldemort recognized that talent too— but his suffering. He constantly frames the abuse from James and Sirius as some childish “rivalry,” when it was very obviously bullying and abuse. And I genuinely think Dumbledore either refuses to fully acknowledge it because he doesn’t want to admit he failed to intervene, or because he has such a detached, paternalistic perspective on trauma that he simply does not take it seriously enough. And honestly, this is not just a Severus issue. Dumbledore is emotionally irresponsible with Harry too. He is irresponsible with Sirius. He treats people according to what role they can fulfill in the war effort. Again: chess pieces.

The tragic thing is that I think Severus spends years searching for redemption, but not just morally. He wants Dumbledore’s approval specifically. Dumbledore becomes this symbolic moral authority in his head, almost a God-like figure whose acceptance validates his worth as a person. And because Severus is so starved for affection and validation, he keeps clinging to that dynamic even when part of him clearly recognizes how unhealthy it is. That is why, even though Severus occasionally questions Dumbledore —especially regarding Harry— he never truly confronts him. Because emotionally, Severus is still that damaged child trying to prove to a father figure that he is worthy of love and acceptance. That is why I’ve always said Severus fits extremely well into the Christian imagery of the prodigal son: the child who strays, returns, is forgiven by the benevolent father figure, and then dedicates the rest of his life to service and penance.

So no, I do not think their relationship is based on mutual respect. From Severus’ side, it is desperation for validation, emotional anchoring, and the need to feel less alone. From Dumbledore’s side, it is the exploitation of a traumatized young man whose wounds never healed —wounds Dumbledore himself helped keep open —because those wounds made him useful for the war Dumbledore wanted to win.

[firendgold]

I was listening to HBP in the car yesterday and I got to the end of the cave and it just hit me again. Harry reassuring Albus, telling him "It's going to be alright, I can get us back. Don't worry" (quoted from memory, so not word for word) feels so ... intimate. I remember reading this for the first time as a kid and being touched but also kind of cringing. Because that's not something you tell your teacher. It's something you tell your child or your sibling or a friend or maybe, eventually, your parent, in that moment when you habe to support them for the first time instead of the other way around. Because that's what this scene is, a son supporting his father for the first time.

And then I thought about it from Albus perspective and my heart broke all over again. Because when do you think did he last hear words like this? Maybe on can imagine him having such a relationship with the Flamels but I don't think it's likely. So it was probably his mother who last told him that things will turn out alright, that he doesn't have to worry. Just think about what that must have meant to Albus. On his last night on earth, to experience once more what it's like to be cared for emotionally like that, even if it was just for a few moments before he had to take charge once more.

I don't know man, I'm just emotional over Albus and Harry and their last night today :')

That is a really intimate moment for them!!

Harry is used to doing things himself but, paradoxically, also quick to rely on others once they've proven themselves to be reliable. And subconsciously, there are few he relies on more than Dumbledore. Dumbledore is always patient with him, always calm, in control, in the know. To have him be none of those things in the midst of a very terrifying mission must have done numbers on Harry's psyche.

ALSO you hurt me by reminding me that Albus has been the one people (the Ministry, his staff, his current and former students) lean on for ages! And Harry saying "lean on me, sir" was probably the first time he'd heard anything like that from anyone since childhood, maybe. And I would think it would be really early childhood. We (STILL SOMEHOW) do not know much about Kendra Dumbledore, but I could see her parentifying Albus at a really young age to keep things stable, even if that only took the form of "keep our family's secrets and make sure you only bring positive attention to our name". Aberforth is rough and honest but not really someone you can rely on in times of trouble, because the only person he never gives up on is Ariana. And once Gellert ran away from Godric's Hollow... yeah, I can see how Albus would have put up walls for decades because he was so used to not having anyone to depend on.

It's honestly a crime how there's not more meta pieces on how much the scales (at least TRY to) balance between Harry and Dumbledore in HBP. Even though they're at vastly different levels of power and influence, Dumbledore still treats Harry with respect, still listens to his thoughts, debates him, indulges him, and (finally) trusts him in a moment where he can no longer trust himself. That's huge for someone who's bottled themselves up for almost nine decades!

It may have been a tragic night for both of them, but Harry did gain something that few others ever had. It's what I try to think of whenever I (inevitably) have Sad HBP Thoughts.

[pangaeaseas]

idk if it's because of marauders vs snape discourse that focuses on the first war to the exclusion of all else or evil dumbledore discourse that often frames snape as like, the good guy in dumbledore's camp and makes dumbledore the root of all evil or WHAT but this fandom is really sleeping on snape/dumbledore parallels. brilliant but lacking in high positions in society, seeming like outsiders, and possessing high ambitions, both had close intense friendships as kids/teens that shaped their lives, both explored dark magic, and both killed people they loved in the pursuit of ideals they later decided were evil, and then dedicated the rest of their lives to counteracting the harm they had caused at the expense of any kind of personal life--dumbledore's whole life is mostly wrapped up in hogwarts, he lives not far from his brother but barely talks to him, while snape still lives in the town he grew up in, hates it but cannot move on, they don't really have close friends who know anything about them. they also treat their redemptions as often very theoretical: they do harm in the course of trying to do good, and focus on the abstract greater good rather than the specificity of being kind to others. they both believe the end justifies the means. and are distant from their past while obsessed with it. and of course schoolteachers! though dumbledore is a better teacher--not as much though because he kinda treats tom riddle like a young grindelwald just as snape treats harry like young james. they treat other people like pawns and inconveniences, they devote themselves to spy games and manipulation, they both do agree to killing voldemort at the potential expense of harry's life (snape protests but doesn't actually stop it! he gives harry the memories that convince harry to sacrifice himself, acting out dumbledore's desgins even in death). they are experts at legilimency! they have arcane knowledge of magic. they are both important mentor-type figures for harry in their different ways. and of course snape essentially replaces dumbledore in DH, literally as headmaster but also as the instrument of dumbledore's last plans and as someone in possesion of extra information that the order fears--just as dumbledore held cards no one knew he had in every other book, snape is thought of by the order and the characters as someone with extra knowledge (like how they're afraid he'll show up at grimmauld) and then does play the same role as dumbledore at the end as the revealer of secret, plot-crucial knowledge. and of course they are the two most important mystery-box characters, where 'what is up with snape' and 'waht is up with dumbledore' are the two most crucial character questions of the series. the revelation of their secret pasts even happens in the same book! not very far away from each other! and they are two of the most controversial characters in the series in terms of fandom reception. i don't like the name albus severus, but it does make sense as drawing a parallel between two characters who harry previously saw as opposites but comes to see as quite similar...

[nettedtangible]

Something just occured to me!

So we see Dumbledore wearing the Gaunt ring all throughout HBP, right. And we know he put it on and got his hand all burnt because he was desperate to use the stone to see his sister and mother again.

So like, all throughout HBP, was Dumbledore just casually seeing his dead sister and mother all the time. He had the stone. He wore the ring, even after it wasn't a Horcrux anymore. Which if anything was a more dangerous move than just putting it away somewhere as Voldemort could've seen it in the memories of anyone's mind he read who had come into contact with Dumbledore and seen him wear the ring. So there's literally no reason to wear it unless he's still using the stone to see his mum and sister.

But also! The whole thing about the stone is that it calls you to your own death, right? And Dumbledore knows he's dying and that he doesn't have long left. So I just imagine every single interaction he has with Harry, Ariana is just standing at Harry's shoulder, staring at Dumbledore with big eyes, because here's another child that's going to be sacrificed by his actions.

And maybe when he drinks the drink of despair, that's who he's apologising to. Not the visions of the past, but the wraiths in the present, standing grey and ghostly by him as he pleads with them to understand that he's doing what needs to be done, even as Harry is nearly killed by the teeming dead in the cave.

[purpiesaint]

The issue is Albus was never allowed to fully publicly grieve anyone.

He wasn’t allowed to grieve his father publicly because his father was seen as a muggle hater who committed a hate crime. He had to be silent about his complex feelings.

Wasn’t allowed to grieve his mother as he immediately had to become the man of the house, had to hid how truly devastated he was.

Wasn’t allowed to grieve Ariana because of the extreme guilt that came with it.

Especially wasn’t allowed to grieve the loss of Gellert. The world saw him as a violent mad man so Albus could never admit he loved him and missed him.

Didn’t even have time to grieve the deaths of members of The Order because he had so much work to do in taking down Voldemort.

Albus Dumbledore the man unable to show the extent of his grief.