Just In
OmnipotentUIJudgeOfCharacterOV PM
Joined Sep '14

IMPORTANT NOTICE- A mega troll user whose real name I won't mention because he doesn't deserve that kind of attention, has made an alt account called 'OmniputentUIJudgeOfCharacterOV' to both give me a bad name and to mock me, because the braindead idiot, pathetic moron has nothing better to do with his time. I now go by OmnipotentUIJudgeOfCharacterOV to avoid confusion. I'm the genuine article and the real deal. How can you tell this? Simple. The alt goes by Omniputent, notice the U in that word, and I go by Omnipotent, the O being the correct letter in the word. I repeat. O is the correct word. If the alt account does the opposite, don't buy into it. Good thing FanFiction doesn't allow users to share the same usernames with all the same letters. Another difference you will notice is the date of joining, Profile Picture and User ID. The forgery alt account copied my previous profile pic and the forgery alt account did not exist until October 15, 2021. I joined this site in September 10, 2014, which was 7 years ago. The date of joining and user ID is not something the alt account can mimick or modify, so I already won there. I changed my profile pic again to avoid further confusion. If the forgery troll account uses the same profile pic that I use now, that's the troll, not me.

So remember, if you get any messages or comments from the aforementioned alt account, it's not me. That's a forgery, a well made forgery. Don't buy its act and appearance. It can be very deceiving. The forgery alt even has my profile page copied for added insult and therefore being extremely petty as a result. You have been been warned. If you receive any comments or PMs from OmniputentUIJudgeOfCharacterOV, know right now that it's not me. The troll will do whatever it takes to ruin my image, going as far as to copy my profile pick up to this important notice. The forgery cannot beat the original.

Even when you can't see Him, GOD IS THERE!! If you believe in God, then put this in your profile.

If you believe in Jesus Christ put this in your profile and don't just ignore this; because in the Bible, it says that if you deny me, then I shall deny you before my Father in the gates of Heaven.

Albert Einstein was right. Human Stupidity is infinite.

As for the Universe, that is still up for debate.


My Faith = Jesus had no servants, yet they called him Master... He had no degree, yet they called him Teacher... He had no medicine, yet they called him Healer... He had no army, yet kings feared him... He won no military battles, yet he conquered the world... He committed no crime, yet they crucified him... He was buried in a tomb, yet He still lives today... Feel honored to serve such a leader who loves us... If you believe in God and that Jesus Christ is His son... Then copy and paste this into your profile If you ignore him, in the Bible, Jesus says.. "If you deny me before man, I will deny you before my father in Heaven..."

Dear bullies,

See that boy doing his homework in homeroom? Last night he Talked His friend out of suicide.

See that girl you just called fat? She is starving herself.

See that old man you made fun of cause of the ugly scars? He fought for our country.

See that young boy you must made fun of for always being sick? He has to walk home in the snow cause his family is too poor.

Re-Post this if u r against bullying. I bet 95% of u won't.

Your life would probably not be as harsh as theirs.

If you believe in Jesus Christ put this in your profile and don't ignore it because the Bible says that if you deny me, I will deny you in front of my father and the glory of Heaven.

This is a true story. A girl died in 1933. A man buried her in the ground while she was still alive. The murder chanted "Toma sota balcu" as he buried her. Now that you have read the chant, you will meet this little girl. In the middle of the night she will be on your ceiling. She will suffocate like she was suffocated. If you post this on your profile, she will not bother you. Your kindness will be rewarded.

The white man said, "Colored people are not allowed here." The black man turned around and stood up. He then said: "Listen sir...when I was born I was BLACK, When I grew up I was BLACK, When I'm sick I'm BLACK, When I go in the sun I'm BLACK, When I'm cold I'm BLACK, When I die I'll be BLACK. But you sir, When you're born you're PINK, When you grow up you're WHITE, When you're sick, you're GREEN, When you go in the sun you turn RED, When you're cold you turn BLUE, And when you die you turn PURPLE. And you have the nerve to call me colored?" The black man then sat back down and the white man walked away... Post this on your profile if you hate racism.


I was walking around in a target store, when I saw a cashier hand this little boy some money back. The boy couldn't have been more than 5 or 6 years old. The cashier said, " I'm sorry but you don't have enough money to buy this doll." Then the little boy turned to the old woman next to him: " Granny are you sure I don't have enough money?"The old lady replied: "You know that you don't have enough money to bye this doll, my dear." Then she asked him to stay there for just 5 minutes while she went to take a look around. She left quickly. The little was still holding the doll in his hand.

Finally, I walked toward him and i asked him who he wished to give the doll to. "It's the doll that my sister loved most and wanted so much for Christmas. She was sure that Santa Claus would bring it to her." I replied to him that maybe Santa Claus would bring it to her after all, and not to worry. But he replied to me sadly. "No, Santa Claus can't bring it to where she is now. I have to give the doll to my mommy so that she can give it to my sister when she goes there."

His eyes where so sad while saying this. "My sister has gone to be with God. Daddy says that mommy is going to see God very soon too, so I thought that she could take the doll with her to give it to my sister." My heart nearly stopped. The little boy looked up at me and said: " I told Daddy to tell mommy to not go yet I need her to wait until I come back from the mall ." Then he showed me a very nice photo of him where he was laughing. He then told me "I want mommy to take my picture with her so she wont forget me. I love my mommy and I wish she doesn't have to leave me, but my daddy says that she has to go be with my sister."

Then he looked again at the doll with sad eyes, very quietly. I quickly reached for my wallet and said to the boy: " Suppose we check again, just in case you do have enough for the doll?" "OK ," he said , " I hope I do have enough." I added some of my money without him seeing and we started to count it. There was enough for the doll and even some spare money. The little boy said: "Thank you god for giving me enough money!" Then he looked at me and added, "I asked last night before I went to sleep for God to make sure I have enough money to buy this doll so that mommy could give it to my sister. He heard me!" " I also wanted to have enough money to buy a white rose for my mommy, but i didn't dare ask God for too much. But he gave me enough to buy the doll and a white rose."

A few minutes later, the old lady returned and I left with my basket. I finished my shopping in a totally different state from when I started. I couldn't get the little boy out of my mind. Then i remembered a local newspaper article two days ago, which mentioned a drunk man in a truck, who hit a car occupied by a young woman and a little girl. The little girl died right away, and the mother was left in a critical state. The family had to decide whether to pull the plug on the life sustaining machine, because the young woman would not be able to recover from the coma. Was this the family of the little boy?

Two days after this encounter with the little boy, I read in the newspaper that the young woman had passed away. I couldn't stop myself as I bought a bunch of white roses and I went to the funeral home where the body of the young woman was exposed for people to see and make last final wishes before her burial. She was there in her coffin, holding a beautiful white rose in her hand with the photo of the little boy and the doll placed on her chest. I left the place teary-eyed, feeling that my life had been changed forever... The love that the little boy had for his sister and his mother is still hard to imagine. And in a fraction of a second, a drunk driver had taken all of this away from him.

You have 2 choices:

1) re post this story

2) ignore it as if it never touched your heart!

Month One

Mommy I am only 8 inches long but I have all my organs. I love the sound of your voice. Every time I hear it I wave my arms and legs. The sound of your heart beat is my favorite lullaby.

Month Two

Mommy today I learned how to suck my thumb. If you could see me you could definitely tell that I am a baby. I'm not big enough to survive outside my home though. It is so nice and warm in here.

Month Three

You know what Mommy I'm a boy!! I hope that makes you happy. I always want you to be happy. I don't like it when you cry. You sound so sad. It makes me sad too and I cry with you even though you can't hear me.

Month Four

Mommy my hair is starting to grow. It is very short and fine but I will have a lot of it. I spend a lot of my time exercising. I can turn my head and curl my fingers and toes and stretch my arms and legs. I am becoming quite good at it too.

Month Five

You went to the doctor today. Mommy, he lied to you. He said that I'm not a baby. I am a baby Mommy, your baby. I think and feel. Mommy, what's abortion?

Month Six

I can hear that doctor again. I don't like him. He seems cold and heartless. Something is intruding my home. The doctor called it a needle. Mommy what is it? It burns! Please make him stop! I can't get away from it! Mommy! HELP me!

Month Seven

Mommy I am okay. I am in Jesus's arms. He is holding me. He told me about abortion. Why didn't you want me Mommy?

Every Abortion Is Just . . .

One more heart that was stopped. Two more eyes that will never see. Two more hands that will never touch. Two more legs that will never run. One more mouth that will never speak.

Put this on your profile if you think abortion is wrong.

Morals: Good Vs Neutral Vs Evil(Basic Definition)

Lawful Good. Lawful good characters have a strict moral code, usually coinciding with societal mores, and they almost never break it. They favor order, structure, and upright behavior. They will desire to help others when the opportunity presents itself, unless doing so would conflict with their moral code. These characters would not break the law except in very rare circumstances. They do not feel that the ends ever justify the means.

Neutral Good. Neutral good characters always do what is good, right, or helpful which is why this alignment is sometimes called True Good. Unlike lawful good characters they are more flexible in their day to day actions. A neutral good character would consider bending the rules to do what is right.

Chaotic Good. A chaotic good character acts as her conscience directs her with little regard for what others expect of her. She makes her own way, but she's kind and benevolent. She believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. She hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. She follows her own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society.

Lawful Neutral. Lawful neutral people tend to be dispassionate and calculating. They have a set of behavioral guidelines but these guidelines allow for some good and some evil behavior. A lawful neutral character tends to care a lot more about the letter of the law than the spirit. An ideal judge would be lawful neutral, making all rulings based on the letter of the law without an eye towards helping or hurting others or their personal feelings.

True Neutral. Neutral characters are hard to play because they lack defining moral values. This is essentially a person who evaluates each situation independently and makes a decision, but the criteria might be different in each different situation.

Chaotic Neutral. A chaotic neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last. He values his own liberty but doesn't strive to protect others' freedom. He avoids authority, resents restrictions, and challenges traditions. A chaotic neutral character does not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy. To do so, he would have to be motivated either by good or evil. A chaotic neutral character may be unpredictable, but his behavior is not totally random. He is not as likely to jump off a bridge as to cross it.

Lawful Evil. Lawful evil characters are in essence, tyrants or dictators. They have a code of laws that is generally oppressive and brutally enforced. Lawful evil characters do not tolerate anyone questioning their authority, nor will they share their authority. A lawful evil character is out for personal gain, but is more given to scheming and intimidation than to random bloodshed.

Neutral Evil. Neutral evil characters are essentially pure evil. They do not follow any set of laws, nor are they concerned with obtaining power. They tend to be the kind of people who enjoy hurting others. They are not concerned with the law in the slightest.

Chaotic Evil. Chaotic evil characters are psychopaths. They do not care for anything but themselves. They kill indiscriminately and for fun. They can only be controlled by threats and force and will probably kill anyone who controls them the moment they think they can. Chaotic evil characters are almost always solitary.

Know your character

Good, Neutral or Evil(Detailed Definition)

Lawful Good:A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. He combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. He tells the truth, keeps his word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished.

Lawful good is the best alignment you can be because it combines honor and compassion.

Lawful good can be a dangerous alignment when it restricts freedom and criminalizes self-interest.

Neutral Good: A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them.

Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias for or against order.

Neutral good can be a dangerous alignment when it advances mediocrity by limiting the actions of the truly capable.

Chaotic Good: A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he's kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society.

Chaotic good is the best alignment you can be because it combines a good heart with a free spirit.

Chaotic good can be a dangerous alignment when it disrupts the order of society and punishes those who do well for themselves.

Lawful Neutral: A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government.

Lawful neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you are reliable and honorable without being a zealot.

Lawful neutral can be a dangerous alignment when it seeks to eliminate all freedom, choice, and diversity in society.

Truly Neutral: A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn't feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil-after all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she's not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way.

Some neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run.

Neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you act naturally, without prejudice or compulsion.

Neutral can be a dangerous alignment when it represents apathy, indifference, and a lack of conviction.

Chaotic Neutral: A chaotic neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last. He values his own liberty but doesn't strive to protect others' freedom. He avoids authority, resents restrictions, and challenges traditions. A chaotic neutral character does not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy. To do so, he would have to be motivated either by good (and a desire to liberate others) or evil (and a desire to make those different from himself suffer). A chaotic neutral character may be unpredictable, but his behavior is not totally random. He is not as likely to jump off a bridge as to cross it.

Chaotic neutral is the best alignment you can be because it represents true freedom from both society's restrictions and a do-gooder's zeal.

Chaotic neutral can be a dangerous alignment when it seeks to eliminate all authority, harmony, and order in society.

Lawful Evil: A lawful evil villain methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. He is loath to break laws or promises.

This reluctance comes partly from his nature and partly because he depends on order to protect himself from those who oppose him on moral grounds. Some lawful evil villains have particular taboos, such as not killing in cold blood (but having underlings do it) or not letting children come to harm (if it can be helped). They imagine that these compunctions put them above unprincipled villains.

Some lawful evil people and creatures commit themselves to evil with a zeal like that of a crusader committed to good. Beyond being willing to hurt others for their own ends, they take pleasure in spreading evil as an end unto itself. They may also see doing evil as part of a duty to an evil deity or master.

Lawful evil is sometimes called "diabolical," because devils are the epitome of lawful evil.

Lawful evil creatures consider their alignment to be the best because it combines honor with a dedicated self-interest.

Lawful evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents methodical, intentional, and frequently successful evil.

Neutral Evil: A neutral evil villain does whatever she can get away with. She is out for herself, pure and simple. She sheds no tears for those she kills, whether for profit, sport, or convenience. She has no love of order and holds no illusion that following laws, traditions, or codes would make her any better or more noble. On the other hand, she doesn't have the restless nature or love of conflict that a chaotic evil villain has.

Some neutral evil villains hold up evil as an ideal, committing evil for its own sake. Most often, such villains are devoted to evil deities or secret societies.

Neutral evil beings consider their alignment to be the best because they can advance themselves without regard for others.

Neutral evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents pure evil without honor and without variation.

Chaotic Evil: A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal. If he is committed to the spread of evil and chaos, he is even worse. Thankfully, his plans are haphazard, and any groups he joins or forms are poorly organized. Typically, chaotic evil people can be made to work together only by force, and their leader lasts only as long as he can thwart attempts to topple or assassinate him.

Chaotic evil is sometimes called "demonic" because demons are the epitome of chaotic evil.

Chaotic evil beings believe their alignment is the best because it combines self-interest and pure freedom.

Chaotic evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents the destruction not only of beauty and life but also of the order on which beauty and life depend.

Proverbs 29:11- A fool gives full vent to his anger, but a wise man keeps himself under control.

Proverbs 29:15- Correction and punishment make children wise, but those left alone will disgrace their mother.

Proverbs 29-17- Correct your children, and you will be proud; they will give you satisfaction.

1 Peter 2:15-16- It is God's desire that by doing good, you should stop foolish people from saying stupid things about you. Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as an excuse to do evil.

John 3:16- For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten son, and whoever that believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.

OK, CHALLENGE TIME. Now one thing I like to make clear is that I've seen my fair share of crossovers. Many were fantastic beyond comprehension, some were meh, and the rest are*cringe* a Work In Process. Now back to the main point, I like shows like OPM(One Punch Man), MHA or BnHA(My Hero Academia or Boku no Hero Academia) and Sekirei. SO I have to wonder, why isn't there a freakin' crossover between OPM and Sekirei or MHA and Sekirei, hmmm? Considering each Anime and their manga/web-comic counterparts are extremely popular in Japan and common knowledge in the States and the rest of the world, I'm surprised no one in FanFiction gave it a shot. So if you're reading this, I challenge any author out there with sufficient knowledge on One Punch Man, Sekirei and Boku no Hero Academia to publish OPM/Sekirei and MHA/Sekirei crossover FanFiction Stories respectively.

Update: there is currently one Crossover fic called The Game Changer, a One Punch Man/Sekirei Crossover fic published by FanFiction Author Stylus Opium that I would like to recommend for reading. The fic was published in December 22nd, 2018 and last updated in May 27th, 2019 with 4 chapters currently up. It's also M-Rated, so you'll have to single it out with the FanFiction filter, as usually only K, K-Plus and T-rated fics are displayed automatically. There is also one other OPM/Sekirei Crossover fic I recommend for reading called The Hero of The Birds published by FanFiction Author juanime77, though it's written in Spanish, it can be translated to English by the FanFiction website. This Crossover fic is pretty recent as it was published in August 14th, 2021 and last updated in September 17th, 2021. Please enjoy. :)

Albus Dumbledore: Callous Manipulator or Kindly Fool? Nov. 24th, 2012 08:55 pm


One of the things that bothers me about the Harry Potter series is the role of Albus Dumbledore, or, more specifically, Dumbledore's actions and motives in regard to Harry and the war in general. Especially the reasons behind his actions. Because I keep on having to toss my hands in the air and exclaim, "What was Dumbledore thinking?"

I find it very difficult to come to a conclusion about what motivated Dumbledore. I am certain that he meant well, but beyond that, I am baffled. He said one thing and did another. He was supposedly wise, and yet did incredibly foolish things. Why? It's not enough to say "he wasn't perfect" or "he was only human"; this isn't a question of imperfection, but inconsistency. In the light of what we know at the end of the series, a number of Dumbledore's actions really do not fit with someone who is both wise and loving. Because if he was loving, he was incompetent, and if he was wise, he was callous. Was Dumbledore aware of the likely consequences of his actions or not? Was he blindly optimistic, a well-meaning incompetent, a bit senile? Was he as cunning as a fox? Did he consider any price worth paying for the greater good, even if he wasn't the one paying the price? Did he genuinely love the ones he claimed to love, or were they all pawns?

I'm not going to attempt to come to a conclusion. What I am going to attempt is to list the problematic incidents and give a range of answers as to why Dumbledore did what he did. And in some cases, not give any answers at all, because I can't think of any.

Tom Riddle:

Tom Riddle may or may not have been a psychopath. Perhaps there was no better way of dealing with Tom than by threatening him as soon as Dumbledore met him. But I can't be sure of that.

The Marauders:

The relentless bullying of Snape by the Marauders is something the staff of Hogwarts should have stopped, rather than dismissing. Dumbledore should have acted as Headmaster, McGonagall should have acted as Head of Gryffindor, Slughorn should have acted as Head of Slytherin. Or maybe to a point, they were right, it was just pranks. Consider also that Hogwarts was an old-fashioned school and as such, perhaps they didn't consider bullying to be a problem at all, but merely something that "toughened up" their pupils; something character-building.

However, Dumbledore's actions in regard to the Shrieking Shack incident were unconscionable: threaten the victim with expulsion, and give the perpetrator a slap on the wrist. Why did he do it?

1. For the "greater good"; that he considered saving two lives worth a bit of injustice. Because justice would have had Sirius expelled and possibly sent to Azkaban, and Lupin would probably have been killed.
2. To cover his own ass; because he probably didn't have the approval of the Board of Governors for having a werewolf in the school, and he would have been dismissed as Headmaster if it got out.
3. That Dumbledore considered Severus a lost cause because he was a Slytherin and all Slytherins were not to be trusted.

The Prophecy:

We'll put aside the problem of why everyone involved (Dumbledore, Snape, Voldemort) believed that it was a true prophecy without question. We'll also put aside the problem of why Dumbledore would be interviewing potential teachers at the Hogs' Head rather than at Hogwarts.

Snape heard part of the prophecy, and then was caught eavesdropping by Aberforth. Snape then ran, and told Voldemort, who believed it completely. And we all know what happened because of that: Voldemort decided to go after James and Lily, Snape changed sides, James and Lily went under Fidelus, Peter betrayed them, Voldemort killed them, his curse rebounded off Harry and made Voldemort into a wraith. And all because of the Prophecy.

Some fans feel that it couldn't have happened so neatly without help; without Dumbledore's help, either by ensuring that Snape wasn't caught and Obliviated, or by setting up the whole thing by colluding with Trelawny to make up a fake prophecy and ensuring that Snape overheard it.
On the other hand Prophecies are tricky things, and self-fulfilling prophecies tend to appear in places and times designed to ensure their fulfillment.

End of Voldewar I:

On the night of October 31st, 1981, James and Lily Potter were murdered, Harry survived with a lightning-bolt scar, and the house was greatly damaged by the rebounding of Voldemort's curse.

Were there any witnesses? In the movieverse, Snape was there (he wept over Lily's body) but in the bookverse, it appears that the only people there were James, Lily, Harry, and Voldemort.

And yet, by the very next morning, November 1st, the entire Wizarding world appears to know that Voldemort is dead and that Harry Potter survived the killing curse; not that Lily saved her son, but that Harry saved himself. There are owls flying everywhere, shooting stars, and Wizarding folk wandering around Muggle parts of England, celebrating. The Boy-Who-Lived mythos was born in a scant few hours. Who told them?

Dumbledore? He's the most likely person to know what happened, but why would he broadcast it across the Wizarding world? And why do so even before Harry was retrieved?

1. Because the war was more important than any individual, and people needed hope.
2. Because Dumbledore intended to use and manipulate Harry Potter, and Harry wouldn't be of much value as a pawn unless Harry was famous.

The attack occurred in the night, and Hagrid was sent by Dumbledore to pick up Harry, and Hagrid borrowed Sirius's motorbike... and yet Hagrid doesn't arrive at #4 Privet Drive until the evening of November 1st. Was Harry sitting in the ruins of the house all that day? Or did Hagrid take an entire day to get from Godrick's Hollow to Little Whinging? Neither of those scenarios makes sense.

We also have the problem of Sirius Black. Hagrid borrowed the flying motorcycle from Sirius, which implies that Hagrid trusted Sirius. On the other hand, Dumbledore had ordered Hagrid to take Harry to Privet Drive, which means that Dumbledore didn't intend to honour James and Lily's wish that Sirius (as Harry's Godfather) be the one to look after Harry in case of their death. Why?

1. Dumbledore assumed that Sirius had betrayed James and Lily. But if so, why did he say nothing about it to Hagrid?
2. Dumbledore didn't want Harry cursed with the fame that would be his if he was brought up by anyonein the Wizarding world. (But then who caused Harry to be famous in the first place?)
3. Dumbledore wouldn't be able to use and manipulate Harry if he was being brought up by Sirius, so best to get him out of Sirius's hands and then deal with Sirius separately.

What was Dumbledore doing all day on November 1st?

Why was Minerva McGonagall hanging around #4 Privet Drive all day on November 1st? It's pretty clear that Dumbledore wasn't expecting her to be there.

What actually gave Dumbledore the right to place Harry with the Dursleys in the first place? Why didn't the Ministry equivalent of Child Services take care of Harry's placement?

1. The Dursleys were Harry's closest kin, so the Ministry saw no need to interfere, once Sirius was eliminated as a suitable guardian.
2. Dumbledore used his influence to ensure that nobody questioned it.

Why did Dumbledore leave Harry Potter on the Dursleys' doorstep with a letter, rather than telling Petunia in person that her sister was dead and that Harry needed her?

1. Dumbledore was an ignorant Pureblood and he thought that foundlings were always left on doorsteps in Muggle custom.
2. He didn't want to give Petunia a chance to refuse.
3. He wanted to give Harry as bad a start with the Dursleys as he could, because he wanted the Dursleys to hate Harry, because that would make it much easier to use and manipulate Harry by the time he came to Hogwarts.

So then we come to Sirius Black, who, instead of looking after Harry, goes off to confront Peter Pettigrew. The street is blown up, Peter sacrifices his finger, and Sirius is framed. How was Sirius arrested so quickly? Why did Sirius never receive a trial?

1. Everyone was so upset, they just assumed Sirius was guilty, including Dumbledore.
2. Dumbledore wouldn't be able to use and manipulate Harry if he was being brought up by Sirius, so as Head of the Wizengamot, he ensured that Sirius wouldn't get a trial or even be questioned under Veritaserum.

The Cupboard Under the Stairs:

Why did Dumbledore never check up on how the Dursleys were treating Harry?

1. Dumbledore assumed he wouldn't need to. They were Harry's kin, of course they would treat him with love.
2. Mrs. Figg did check up on them and she never noticed anything wrong. Mind you, she only ever saw Harry infrequently.
3. Mrs. Figg did notice something was wrong, and wrote to Dumbledore, but Dumbledore assumed that she was exaggerating and did nothing about it.
4. Mrs. Figg did notice something was wrong, and wrote to Dumbledore, but Dumbledore passed the letters unread to Minerva to deal with, and Minerva assumed that Dumbledore had read the letters and had some wise and secret plan and knew what he was doing. (Kudos to the person who wrote the fic this idea came from.)
5. Plausible deniability; if Dumbledore didn't know anything was wrong, he wouldn't have to do anything about it. Thus, he could use and manipulate Harry with impunity when Harry arrived at Hogwarts.
6. Mrs. Fig did notice something was wrong, and told Dumbledore, who Obliviated her. After all, a little abuse would make Harry much more grateful to Dumbledore for rescuing him.

Why did nobody notice that Harry's first letter was addressed to "The Cupboard Under the Stairs"?

1. The Hogwarts letters were addressed by an automated spell and nobody actually checked the addresses.
2. Dumbledore did notice and was glad that his manipulative plan was working even better than he'd expected.

Why did nobody come and explain magic to Harry or give him some sort of Muggleborn orientation?

1. The system had him down as a half-blood and thus not in need of Muggleborn orientation.
2. Dumbledore assumed that the Dursleys had explained magic to Harry. After all, he'd given them a letter.
3. Dumbledore thought that Harry would be easier to use and manipulate if he was ignorant of magic.

Why was Hagrid sent to deliver Harry's letter rather than McGonagall, Snape, Flitwick, Sprout, or Dumbledore himself?

1. Dumbledore knew there had been trouble delivering the letter, and Hagrid was intimidating enough to cow the Dursleys, while kind enough to charm Harry. Flitwick and Sprout weren't intimidating enough, McGonagall and Dumbledore were too busy, and Snape was too intimidating.
2. Dumbledore wanted Harry to be indoctrinated into a "correct" (pro-Dumbledore, pro-Gryffindor) view of Hogwarts. Plus, Hagrid was someone who would obey Dumbledore without question, and who wouldn't notice anything wrong with Harry's situation. Also, he didn't want to give Snape the chance of actually liking the boy.

The Potter Vault:

Why did Dumbledore have the key to Harry's vault in the first place? What right did he have to it?

Why did Dumbledore have James's invisibility cloak? Did that make the difference between James being alive and dead at Godrick's Hollow?

The Death of Unicorns:

So something out there is so dangerous and evil that it is killing unicorns, so Dumbledore sends off two first years with a (technically wandless) gameskeeper and a cowardly dog to look into it. Into the Forbidden Forest. After dark. What was he thinking?

1. He was high on Felix Felicis.
2. Harry needed toughening up with a bit of adventure.
3. ???

The Philosopher's Stone:

So Dumbledore retrieves the Philosopher's Stone from Gringotts, brings it into the school where it could be more easily be stolen by one of Voldemort's followers, brings lethal creatures into a school full of vulnerable children and makes a maze simple enough for first years to get through. Why?

1. He was simply doing a favour to an old friend. If students got killed, it was their own fault for not listening to him, wasn't it?
2. Harry needed training up in his role as Prophesied Hero, but Dumbledore wanted him to remain ignorant and innocent of his fate, so he had to make the training look like an accident.
3. For the greater good, Dumbledore wanted to bait a trap for one of Voldemort's followers. The war is more important than the good of the school; to worry about the children is such a short-sighted goal.

House Cup, First Year:

Why did Dumbledore postpone giving a huge amount of points to Gryffindor until after everyone had arrived for the Leaving feast, thus publicly humiliating Slytherin?

1. Dumbledore just hadn't gotten around to it.
2. Dumbledore wanted to manipulate Harry towards his role as Prophesied Hero by rewarding his heroism in as public a manner as possible.
3. It never occurred to Dumbledore that the Slytherins would be upset, or that his actions could be considered unfair.
4. The thought did cross his mind that the Slytherins would be upset, but Dumbledore considered it "character building".
5. Gryffindor always deserves to win, no matter what.
6. Slytherin always deserves to lose, no matter what.

The Chamber of Secrets:

Let's put aside the question of how a huge monstrous snake could fit into the Hogwarts water pipes and not be seen by anyone.

Why on earth couldn't the staff of Hogwarts figure out that they were dealing with a Basilisk? There surely can't be that many creatures or spells that can petrify someone.

The Prisoner of Azkaban:

So Dumbledore agrees to allow Dementors surround a school full of vulnerable children, in order to "protect" them from an escaped prisoner who had already proven able to evade Dementors... said Dementors which are barely under control, having attacked students on the train even before school got into session.
What was he thinking?

The Goblet of Fire:

How on earth could Dumbledore allow an underage student, who couldn't legally enter the competition in the first place, who didn't want to compete in the second place, still be forced to compete in a tournament which was potentially lethal? Why didn't he investigate what had Confounded the Goblet?

1. But it was a magical contract! Even though Harry hadn't signed anything, or even touched the paper that had his name on it.
2. More "hero training". Harry probably won't get killed.

Why did nobody notice for an entire year that it wasn't the real Moody? At least Dumbledore, Snape and McGonagall supposedly knew the real man; why didn't they think anything was wrong?

Why did nobody comfort or counsel Harry after Cedric's death?

The Order of the Phoenix:

Why was Harry completely isolated and kept ignorant over the summer?

Why did Dumbledore refuse to teach Harry Occlumency?

1. He didn't want to chance Voldemort seeing into his mind. Even though he had a Pensieve where he could have put memories.
2. He didn't want to chance Harry seeing into his mind. Couldn't let Harry know that he was being set up as a Martyr.
3. He thought that it might force Harry and Snape to come to an understanding.
4. Snape was a better Occlumens than Dumbledore, and Dumbledore assumed that he would therefore be a better teacher.
5. It had been such a long time since Dumbledore had learned Occlumency, he wasn't sure how to teach it to someone else.

Why did Dumbledore tell Harry about the Prophecy just when Harry was feeling vulnerable and devastated by Sirius's death?

1. Dumbledore had already put it off too long, so he suddenly decided Harry had better know after all.
2. All the easier to manipulate Harry into his Martyrdom.

The Half-Blood Prince:

Why was Dumbledore taking Harry down memory lane instead of actually telling him what he needed to know?

Why was it so important that Dumbledore get Slughorn's memory, when Dumbledore already knew they were dealing with Horcruxes?

Dumbledore knew that there was someone attempting to murder him, and he did absolutely nothing to protect the children. Then again, that's completely consistent with his behaviour since the beginning.

Why did Dumbledore order Snape to kill him?

1. Just as he said, he wanted to spare Draco from the taint of murder. And to improve Snape's status in the Death Eaters. Besides, Dumbledore was dying anyway.
2. He wanted Snape to become the Master of the Elder Wand, and do it in such a way that Harry would be so insanely full of hatred that he would kill Snape as soon as he saw him, thus guaranteeing that Harry would become the Master of the Elder Wand.

The Deathly Hallows:

Okay, so Dumbledore's great plan for the defeat of Voldemort is to have Harry on the run with no clue as to where the rest of the Horcruxes are and no way of finding out where they are either, to set up Hermione to delay Harry, try to manipulate people from beyond the grave so that Harry would become the Master of the Elder Wand, and also have Harry martyr himself.

Um, what?

DISCUSSION/THEORYDumbledore: Cold and manipulative? (self.harrypotter)

submitted 2 years ago * by [deleted]

Lets discuss a bit about how Dumbledore manipulated everyone around him and how cold he seemed at times:

1)He used Lily to manipulate Snape and make him a servant

When Snape asked Dumbledore to help Lily, Dumble coldly replied "and what will you give me in return Snape?" and Snape desperately answered "Anything" basically making himself a servant.

When Lily died, Dumble used Lily to manipulate Snape once again and make him protect Harry.

"Her son lives. He has her eyes, precisely her eyes. You remember the shape and color of Lily Evans's eyes, I am sure?"... "You know how and why she died. Make sure it was not in vain. Help me protect Lily's son."

2) He used Harry to manipulate Slughorn.

Not only did he use Harry to get Slughorn back at Hogwarts but he also tried to turn Harry into a manipulator to get the memory. The most stupid thing is that Dumbledore already knew about the horcruxes anyway.

3)He was never completely honest with Harry.

Especially in OoTP. In my opinion it's partially Dumbledore's fault that Sirius died and that Harry didn't bother to learn occlumency as he never bothered to explain anything to Harry and left Snape to teach him such an important thing even though he KNEW Harry and Snape didn't get along and that Harry didn't trust Snape. He also never told Harry he needed to die and left Snape to do the dirty work.

4)He kept Draco at Hogwarts during the 6th year

Ok, so Draco would get killed if he got expelled...but what about all those people who ALMOST got killed because of Draco, like Katy or Ron or the others who got in danger when the Death Eaters got into Hogwarts. Dumbledore never bothered to talk to Draco before it was too late even though he KNEW what Draco was up to and he KNEW people almost got killed because of him. He could have talked to Draco earlier and try to persuade him but instead he left Snape to do the hard work again.

5)He left Harry with the Dursles supposedly to keep him safe

Was Harry safe with the Durlseys? Nope. His cousin would beat him up at every chance he got and his uncle and aunt were starving him. He also forced the Dursleys to keep Harry when they obviously didn't want him, so in a way the Dursleys were Dumbledore's victims too.

I will not even talk about how he was a dick in his youth and planned world domination with whateverhisnameis.

The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore

Submitted by: Theowyn

The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore
By Theowyn

Albus Dumbledore is perhaps the most enigmatic character in the world of Harry Potter. J.K. Rowling once called him the epitome of goodness,1 but Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows refuted that notion. Rita Skeeter's breathless tell-all about Dumbledore's shady past shocked wizarding Britain and gave us a new and disturbing look at the venerable old wizard. Yet in the end it is not Dumbledore's youthful flirtation with pure-blood supremacy that lingers to tarnish his image, nor even his resentment of his sister, Ariana. He repented those terrible mistakes a hundred years ago and learned from them at great personal cost. Rather, it is Dumbledore's actions in the latter years of his life that impugn his character.

Dumbledore was a good man in many ways. He was firmly dedicated to the Light and he was capable of great patience and gentleness, but he was also aloof and often demonstrated a callous disregard for his fellows. Rowling herself acknowledged this and called Dumbledore "isolated" and "detached." 2 We see this clearly in his treatment of Sirius in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. It was cruel to keep Sirius locked up in a house that he hated; however Dumbledore was only concerned with keeping Sirius safe and believed that confining him to number twelve, Grimmauld Place was the best way to do so. Sirius's feelings were unimportant.

Of course, keeping Sirius safe was only one of myriad problems facing Dumbledore. His over-arching concern was the defeat of Lord Voldemort and looking back on his actions throughout the series, it is clear that all of his efforts were aimed at vanquishing the Dark wizard once and for all. This was a worthy goal and Dumbledore was more than willing to give his own life in its pursuit. Nevertheless, while the struggle to defeat Voldemort brought out the best in the old wizard, it also brought out the worst. Rowling called Dumbledore "Machiavellian" 3 and indeed, in his desire to vanquish his enemy, Dumbledore used others without compunction, even to the point of plotting a child's death.

This was always for the greater good and never selfish, but while many might argue that Dumbledore was merely a pragmatic general making the necessary sacrifices demanded by war, this is not true. Dumbledore can be forgiven for making mistakes as he did with Sirius. He can also be excused for asking great sacrifices of his followers and even for grooming Harry to die. That was the only way to destroy Voldemort and a general must put victory first.

However, Dumbledore crossed the line from being a stoic leader to a calculating manipulator because he never gave his followers all of the information they needed to make a free choice. He gave them only enough to maneuver them into doing what he wanted them to do. This was especially true of his two most valuable assets: Harry Potter and Severus Snape.

Child of Prophecy

In Deathly Hallows, Dumbledore's brother, Aberforth, talked of Albus's faults while trying to dissuade Harry from following Dumbledore's orders. "Secrets and lies, that's how we grew up, and Albus he was a natural." 4 Indeed he was and his greatest secret centered on Harry Potter.

It is fairly clear that Dumbledore's plan for Harry to sacrifice himself to defeat Voldemort was conceived long before Harry arrived at Hogwarts. While we are not told this explicitly, we can deduce it. Some may argue that Dumbledore didn't realize that Harry was a Horcrux until Harry handed him Tom Riddle's diary in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. But while this may indeed have been Dumbledore's first indication that Voldemort had intentionally created Horcruxes, it doesn't adequately explain his knowledge of Harry as a Horcrux. Only moments after hearing the story of the diary, Dumbledore had a crucial exchange with Harry:

"You can speak Parseltongue, Harry, because Lord Voldemort ] can speak Parseltongue. Unless I'm much mistaken, he transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar." ]

"Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?"

"It certainly seems so." 5

Even Dumbledore would have been hard pressed to put two and two together that quickly. It is much more likely that Dumbledore had realized that Harry was a Horcrux before this conversation, and Deathly Hallows gives us a clue as to when this might have been. During "The Prince's Tale" Dumbledore told Snape:

on the night Lord Voldemort tried to kill him, when Lily cast her own life between them as a shield, the Killing Curse rebounded upon Lord Voldemort, and a fragment of Voldemort's soul was blasted apart from the whole, and latched itself onto the only living soul left in that collapsing building.6

Dumbledore closed his eyes as he recounted this information as though he was reliving a memory. And he painted the scene with the detail and confidence of one who is certain of his facts. There was no guesswork here. He knew what had happened that night at Godric's Hollow and he demonstrated this same certainty in the aftermath of James and Lily's deaths. Dumbledore knew that Voldemort had not died in the attempt to kill Harry and he also knew that Lily had given her life for her son.7 This is how he knew that Harry's safest home would be with his mother's blood.

The question is how could Dumbledore have known these things? Harry was the only surviving witness to what had occurred that night, so the most plausible explanation is that Dumbledore used Legilimency on the baby to discover what had transpired ’ a completely reasonable course of action. From Harry's memories, he would have discovered the means to protect the child and also the terrible truth that a bit of Voldemort's soul had lodged itself in Harry, forming that unique scar and preventing Voldemort from dying. There is really no other way that Dumbledore could have discovered this information except from Harry himself.

And so it is nearly certain that from the night James and Lily were killed, Dumbledore planned for Harry to die ’ and not only to die, but ideally to sacrifice his life willingly as Lily had done in order to afford the Light side the greatest chance of destroying the self-proclaimed Dark Lord. Consequently, Dumbledore had to not only keep Harry safe, but to cultivate in him the willingness to lay down his life when the moment was right.

To begin with, Dumbledore left Harry with the Dursleys. As with Sirius, it was the child's life, not his happiness that mattered. Dumbledore berated the Dursleys during Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince for mistreating Harry, yet he himself left the boy to their care and admits to Harry in Order of the Phoenix that he knew he was condemning the child to "ten dark and difficult years." 8 He was no less culpable than the Dursleys and he knew it. He had little choice, of course. While there might have been other ways to keep Harry safe, leaving the child in the Muggle world prevented him from becoming spoiled by fame and ensured that he would be utterly ignorant of Voldemort and the wizarding world ’ a formless piece of clay without pretensions or preconceptions, ready to be molded by Dumbledore when he arrived at Hogwarts.

Dumbledore wasted no time in doing just that. As early as Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone it was apparent that Dumbledore was preparing Harry to face Voldemort. Even Harry understood this in his own innocent way. "I think he sort of wanted to give me a chance. ] It's almost like he thought I had the right to face Voldemort if I could " 9

The prophecy alone does not explain the risk Dumbledore took in allowing an eleven-year-old child to face an adult wizard possessed by Voldemort. If Dumbledore had believed the prophecy and therefore that Harry would need to kill Voldemort or die by his hand then surely setting up such an unequal confrontation between the two adversaries would have promoted the latter outcome ’ a reckless and unnecessary risk. Dumbledore didn't believe in the literal interpretation of prophecies though10 and keeping Harry alive was not his primary concern. He was honing a weapon and if Harry should die, it would be no great tragedy as that fate awaited him anyway.

Looking back on the books now, it is chilling to see how Dumbledore maneuvered Harry from the very beginning. He played the role of wise, kindly mentor for the boy who was desperate for an approving adult whom he could trust. He played the role so well in fact that neither Harry nor his best friends would ascribe any but the most altruistic motives to the old man.

In Deathly Hallows Aberforth Dumbledore warned Harry that his brother was not entirely scrupulous: "people had a habit of getting hurt while he was carrying out his grand plans." 11 Hermione protested that "Professor Dumbledore cared about Harry, very much' but Aberforth wasn't impressed. "Funny thing, how many of the people my brother cared about very much ended up in a worse state than if he'd left 'em well alone." 12 "How can you be sure, Potter, that my brother wasn't more interested in the greater good than in you?" 13

Harry refused to entertain that thought, but too soon Aberforth was proven right. After viewing Snape's memories in "The Prince's Tale" Harry finally realized that he had been used.

Dumbledore's betrayal was almost nothing. Of course there had been a bigger plan; Harry had simply been too foolish to see it, he realized that now. He had never questioned his own assumption that Dumbledore wanted him alive. Now he saw that his life span had always been determined by how long it took to eliminate all the Horcruxes. Dumbledore had passed the job of destroying them to him ] How neat, how elegant, not to waste any more lives, but to give the dangerous task to the boy who had already been marked for slaughter ]

And Dumbledore had known that Harry would not duck out ] because he had taken trouble to get to know him, hadn't he?14

This last is perhaps Harry's most poignant insight. Dumbledore had drawn him in, gained his confidence, praised him for laying his life on the line time and again, and cultivated his determination to finish Voldemort at any cost to himself ’ until Dumbledore knew that Harry wouldn't balk when faced with the sacrifice required of him. However, this begs the question of why Dumbledore didn't tell Harry of his fate.

Dumbledore made one miscalculation in formulating his plan; he came to care for Harry ’ so much so that his compassion for the boy threatened to derail his scheme.

Do you see the flaw in my brilliant plan now? ] I cared about you too much. 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.15

Order of the Phoenix was an epiphany of sorts for Dumbledore. After admitting to having strayed from his design, he recommitted himself to it, telling Harry of the prophecy. Throughout Harry's sixth year he continued to lead the boy to believe that he had to kill Voldemort and encouraged Harry in his desire to do so.16 Ultimately, he gave Harry the task of destroying the Horcruxes. Yet through all of this, he kept the fact that Harry was a Horcrux secret.

Dumbledore told Snape that it would be too great a burden for Harry to know that he must die,17 but this is the same sort of excuse Dumbledore used to justify not telling Harry of the prophecy even when it was clear that Voldemort was seeking it. He seemed to recognize the folly in that reasoning after the debacle at the Department of Mysteries. Likewise, Dumbledore should have realized that by the time Harry was learning to hunt Horcruxes and to kill Voldemort, he was old enough for the whole truth. Dumbledore owed him the truth.

Unfortunately, Aberforth was right about his brother. Keeping secrets came as naturally as breathing to Dumbledore, and once again this very nearly proved disastrous. It was only by the sheerest luck that Snape managed to pass on the crucial information to Harry ’ not something a wise general should rely upon when the fate of the war hangs in the balance. Perhaps though, Dumbledore clung to this secret because of his own sensibilities more than Harry's. He did, after all, love the boy and perhaps that is why in the end he couldn't bring himself to tell Harry the worst, but left that daunting task to the least likely of people.

Machiavelli and the Half-Blood Prince

As heartbreaking as Dumbledore's calculated plan for Harry's death was, his treatment of Snape was in some ways even worse. A case can be made that all of Dumbledore's actions towards Harry were at least nominally necessary for the defeat of Voldemort, but the same cannot be said of his ill use of Snape. Before Deathly Hallows, it would have been inconceivable that Severus Snape might wrest the moral high ground from Albus Dumbledore, and yet he did precisely this in "The Prince's Tale." That chapter of Deathly Hallows provided us with a rapid-fire insight into the relationship between these two men and it was shocking.

Our first glimpse was of Snape going to Dumbledore in desperation to confess that he had told Voldemort of the prophecy and that the evil wizard was going after Lily Potter's son. And yet when he begged Dumbledore to protect Lily, the old wizard rebuffed him, telling him to ask Voldemort to spare her. Snape persisted, conceding that James and Harry should be saved as well, but still Dumbledore appeared unmoved, asking, "And what will you give me in return, Severus?"

This was Dumbledore at his manipulative best, using Snape's desperate fear for Lily to bend the young man to his service. It goes without saying that Dumbledore would have protected the Potters regardless of Snape's plea. They were members of his own Order of the Phoenix. What good man in Dumbledore's position would have needed asking, let alone recompense? But to have one of Voldemort's brightest and most capable Death Eaters come begging him for help presented an exquisite opportunity that Dumbledore was not about to pass up and which he wasted no time in exploiting.

The distraught Snape was taken aback by Dumbledore's question. "In”in return?" However, it only took a moment for him to make the choice that Dumbledore had cornered him into making and his simple, "Anything' sounded very much like chains being bound about a prisoner.18

Dumbledore manipulated Snape with equal proficiency on the night that the Potters died. Snape was grief stricken at the news of Lily's death, but Dumbledore offered him no comfort. Instead he used Snape's grief to maneuver him into agreeing to protect Harry. Standing over the young man who had yet to see his twenty-second birthday he twisted the knife with skillful calculation.

"Her son lives. He has her eyes, precisely her eyes. You remember the shape and color of Lily Evans's eyes, I am sure?"

"DON'T!" bellowed Snape. "Gone dead "

"Is this remorse, Severus?"

"I wish I wish I were dead."

"And what use would that be to anyone?" said Dumbledore coldly. "If you loved Lily Evans, if you truly loved her, then your way forward is clear."

"What”what do you mean?"

"You know how and why she died. Make sure it was not in vain. Help me protect Lily's son." 19

Some might argue that Dumbledore did all of this for Snape in order to save the young man from selling his soul to Voldemort, but Dumbledore's subsequent actions dashed the hope that this was his sole motivation. While he certainly trusted Snape implicitly, he could also be gratuitously cruel to the man.

Dumbledore clearly enjoyed Snape's impotent fury when Sirius escaped in Prisoner of Azkaban. He was quite delighted at Harry and Hermione having pulled off his clever plan for them to go back in time to save Sirius and Buckbeak. That's certainly understandable, but knowing how Snape felt about Lily's death, couldn't Dumbledore have shown a bit more sensitivity for the man's distress over her supposed betrayer's escape? Snape's pain at that moment had to be almost unbearable. And yet all Dumbledore could do was smirk about his "severe disappointment." 20

The Elder Wand presented another troublesome issue. Dumbledore admitted that he intended Snape to have the wand.21 Why then didn't he bother to tell Snape? At King's Cross, he told Harry that he knew Voldemort would go after the Elder Wand, "I have been sure that he would try, ever since your wand beat Voldemort's in the graveyard of Little Hangleton." 22 So in asking Snape to kill him, Dumbledore was effectively painting a target on Snape's back at which Voldemort was bound to eventually take aim. If this stratagem fit into one of Dumbledore's convoluted plans, he took that knowledge to his grave. However, regardless of what he hoped to accomplish, he should have at least warned Snape that his life was being put in even greater peril than usual. It's clear that he didn't, because Snape was caught completely off guard at the Shrieking Shack in Deathly Hallows; he wasn't expecting Voldemort to murder him. It would seem that this was yet another secret that Dumbledore failed to reveal ’ with tragic results.

It is unlikely that Dumbledore was being intentionally cruel in these situations. A more probable ’ and charitable ’ explanation is that these are further examples of how detached he truly was. For all his insight into human nature, he was often oblivious to the emotional needs of those around him. Perhaps the most poignant example of this comes in "The Prince's Tale."

When Snape finally learned the truth of Dumbledore's plan for Harry's death, he was horrified. "You have kept him alive so that he can die at the right moment?" 23

Dumbledore's response was chillingly nonchalant. "Don't be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?" 24

Not only did Dumbledore refuse to acknowledge the horror of what he had planned for Harry, he insinuated that Snape had no right to feel affronted. Surely the former Death Eater was too inured to Voldemort's horrors to feel any remorse over the loss of an innocent life.

Snape's reply, "Lately, only those whom I could not save' 25 was heartbreaking and it was at this moment that Snape finally understood that Dumbledore had betrayed him. It is perhaps ironic that the ever-suspicious Slytherin spy could not see the lies that had been in front of him for so many years, but for all that Snape led a life of professional deceit he was scrupulously honest and honorable in his dealings with Dumbledore and was stunned to discover that the old man had not returned the favor.

"You have used me. ] I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. Everything was supposed to be to keep Lily Potter's son safe. Now you tell me that you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter”" 26

Dumbledore could have easily placated Snape's outrage at this point. He might have said that he didn't want to grieve Snape by telling him the truth; that yes, Harry's impending fate was tragic, but unavoidable and that Lily would have understood the need for such a sacrifice. He could have said something to imply that he felt remorse for having deceived his loyal spy. Sadly, he didn't even try. Instead, he once again challenged Snape's right to feel hurt and outraged. "Have you come to care for the boy, after all?" 27

Snape's response, however, was uncontestable. When the silver doe burst from his wand, it declared plainly where his loyalty lay. What had been merely a means to an end for Dumbledore was a lifelong vow to Snape. Regardless of his feelings for Harry, he had pledged his life to the boy for Lily's sake and remained faithful to that vow.

Dumbledore was moved to tears by this symbol of Snape's constancy, though it's difficult to say why. Perhaps he never truly believed that Snape loved Lily. Perhaps he thought of it as only an obsessive infatuation. After all, he himself had been betrayed by a young man whom he thought loved him and that betrayal cost an innocent life just as Snape's youthful betrayal of the Potters did. It's possible that Dumbledore thought that Snape's love for Lily was as transient as Grindelwald's love for him and this may explain his callous disregard for Snape over the years. It would also explain his tears at the realization that Snape's love was real and unwavering.

"After all this time?"

"Always." 28

The Chess Master

Of all the lies that Dumbledore told, perhaps the most pernicious came at the end of Philosopher's Stone. In the hospital wing when Harry began to question Dumbledore, the old wizard assured him, "I shall not, of course, lie." 29 Yet Dumbledore did precisely that. Only moments later he told Harry that the reason Snape protected him all year was because of a life debt owed to James Potter.

I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year because he felt that would make him and your father quits. Then he could go back to hating your father's memory in peace. 30

Dumbledore knew that Snape had been protecting Harry for Lily's sake and certainly not for James, so this was a bald-faced lie. Worse, it was a poisonous one and completely unnecessary. While Dumbledore couldn't tell Harry the truth about Snape and Lily, he could have easily come up with a general explanation for Snape's actions: "Professor Snape is a teacher at this school and would do all in his power to protect every child at Hogwarts regardless of his personal feelings." Or perhaps, "I suspected Quirrell and asked Professor Snape to keep an eye on him and to protect you."

Both of these reasons possess some shred of truth and more importantly, either would have given Harry a more honest understanding of Snape's motivations. Yes, he hated James and Harry, but when it mattered he was capable of putting those feelings aside and acting with integrity. That kernel of truth could have gone a long way towards softening Harry's opinion of Snape.

Instead, Dumbledore told Harry a lie guaranteed to make the boy think the worst of his Potions Master, believing that Snape only saved him for the sake of his own vindictive hatred when in fact Snape was acting out of love. What a cruel disservice to both Harry and Snape. It would also seem to be pointless. This only served to spur on the animosity between Snape and Harry and it gained Dumbledore nothing ’ nothing, that is, beyond control.

Dumbledore recognized that his greatest weakness was a thirst for power,31 but while he guarded against this weakness in many aspects of his life such as refusing to stand for Minister for Magic, he succumbed to it in his ultimate chess game with Voldemort. Perhaps that is the reason then for this seemingly senseless lie. Had Harry and Snape found any common ground, it might have diluted Dumbledore's influence over Harry and Dumbledore could not risk that, not when Harry was still so young and impressionable and might detour from the path Dumbledore had planned for him. He couldn't afford to chance losing control over his most important chess piece.

Dumbledore's longing for power was always benevolent. Even while plotting with Grindelwald to gain dominion over Muggles, he convinced himself that he was doing it for the Muggles' own good. We can see this same paternalistic behavior throughout the books. Dumbledore believed that he knew what was best for everyone, whether it be using Snape's guilt and grief to turn him to the Light side or lying to Harry to protect him from knowledge of his fate.

But he had no right to such condescension, no right to manipulate the lives of others, no matter how noble his purpose. Worst of all, Dumbledore used love as his tool. He knew, you see, that nothing binds the soul more surely than love and so he used Snape's love for Lily and Harry's abiding love for virtually everyone to persuade them to do his bidding.

Harry and Snape never stood a chance against the master gamesman. He manipulated them both effortlessly and so completely that even when his machinations were revealed they still obeyed. That's because he used their own natures to ensnare them. He deceived them in the particulars, but he led them where they were willing to go. He laid out an enticing road ’ the only one in sight ’ and beckoned them to follow him down it. They couldn't see the end. He kept that hidden until they had gone far enough that he knew they wouldn't turn back. Then he stepped aside and pointed the way to the cliff he expected them to jump off.

One might call this a ruthless faith in both Snape and Harry's better natures. It is horrifying and compelling at the same time. Because Dumbledore was right; there was no other path to take. Still, one can't help wondering if he couldn't have spared a little more honesty and respect for the two people of whom he asked the ultimate sacrifice.


1. Solomon, "J.K. Rowling Interview."

2. Anelli & Spartz. "TLC/MN interview: Part One."

3. Adler, Shawn. "Rowling Meets With L.A. Students."

4. Rowling, Deathly Hallows, 562.

5. Ibid., Chamber of Secrets, 245.

6. Ibid., Deathly Hallows, 686.

7. Ibid., Order of the Phoenix, 736.

8. Ibid.

9. Ibid., Philosopher's Stone, 219.

10. Ibid., Half-Blood Prince, 510’12.

11. Ibid., Deathly Hallows, 561.

12. Ibid., 563.

13. Ibid., 568.

14. Ibid., 692’93.

15. Ibid., Order of the Phoenix, 739.

16. Ibid., Half-Blood Prince, 510’12.

17. Ibid., Deathly Hallows, 685.

18. Ibid., 678.

19. Ibid., 678’79.

20. Ibid., Prisoner of Azkaban, 307.

21. Ibid., Deathly Hallows, 721.

22. Ibid.

23. Ibid., 687.

24. Ibid.

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid.

27. Ibid.

28. Ibid.

29. Ibid., Philosopher's Stone, 216.

30. Ibid., 217.

31. Ibid., Deathly Hallows, 718.


Adler, Shawn. " Harry Potter' Author J.K. Rowling Meets With L.A. Students, Plots Her Next Move." , 15 October 2007. http:///news/articles/1571977/20071015/index.jhtml.

Anelli, Melissa and Emerson Spartz. "The Leaky Cauldron and MuggleNet interview Joanne Kathleen Rowling: Part One' The Leaky Cauldron, 16 July 2005. http:///articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-1.htm.

Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 1998.

”””. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. New York: Scholastic Press, Arthur A Levine Books, 2007.

”””. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000.

”””. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. New York: Scholastic Press, Arthur A Levine Books, 2005.

”””. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003.

”””. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997.

”””. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. London: Bloomsbury, 1999.

Solomon, Evan. "J.K. Rowling Interview' CBCNewsWorld: Hot Type, 13 July 2000.

Comments? Discuss this essay here on the Scribbulus forum.

Game of Thrones/A Song of Ice and Fire

Winter is Coming

When winter comes… You’ll hear no lions roar… No stags grazing the fields… No roses growing in the meadows… No snakes in the sand… The krakens will freeze where they swim… The flayed men will rot and wither… No trouts swimming in the river and no falcons flying in the air… Not even the dragon’s breath will warm you in your halls. You shall hear only the wolves howl… Everyone who betrayed the North will pay, The Wolves rise and will not sleep till there is blood spilled! The North remembers!!!

In a world of lies, truth is a crime.

In a world of truth, lies cannot exist.

IMPORTANT NOTICE- A mega troll user whose real name I won't mention because he doesn't deserve that kind of attention, has made an alt account called 'OmniputentUIJudgeOfCharacterOV' to both give me a bad name and to mock me, because the braindead idiot, pathetic moron has nothing better to do with his time. I now go by OmnipotentUIJudgeOfCharacterOV to avoid confusion. I'm the genuine article and the real deal. How can you tell this? Simple. The alt goes by Omniputent, notice the U in that word, and I go by Omnipotent, the O being the correct letter in the word. I repeat. O is the correct word. If the alt account does the opposite, don't buy into it. Good thing FanFiction doesn't allow users to share the same usernames with all the same letters. Another difference you will notice is the date of joining, Profile Picture and User ID. The forgery alt account copied my previous profile pic and the forgery alt account did not exist until October 15, 2021. I joined this site in September 10, 2014, which was 7 years ago. The date of joining and user ID is not something the alt account can mimick or modify, so I already won there. I changed my profile pic again to avoid further confusion. If the forgery troll account uses the same profile pic that I use now, that's the troll, not me.

So remember, if you get any messages or comments from the aforementioned alt account, it's not me. That's a forgery, a well made forgery. Don't buy its act and appearance. It can be very deceiving. The forgery alt even has my profile page copied for added insult and therefore being extremely petty as a result. You have been been warned. If you receive any comments or PMs from OmniputentUIJudgeOfCharacterOV, know right now that it's not me. The troll will do whatever it takes to ruin my image, going as far as to copy my profile pick up to this important notice. The forgery cannot beat the original.

Author: Follow Favorite

Twitter . Help . Sign Up . Cookies . Privacy . Terms of Service