Old Dumbledore or New Dumbledore?

MadDoctorMaddie · Jul 7, 2009

Xeddrief said: ↑

a) It may protect him from death eaters, but not the Dursleys themselves.
b) In fourth year Voldemort resurected himself with Harry's blood, negating the blood protection. Therefore wards around Privet Drive which are based on blood no longer work as Voldemort can now enter, but Harry is still sent there.
c) Why not have Dumbledore raise Harry himself? Dumbledore is 'the only one Voldemort ever feared'- so surely this would be where Harry was safest? And then Harry, as the chosen one, would be given a headstart to access to the proper training to kill a man with 50 years more magical experience than himself. At the end of DH he still can't do much more than a simple 'stupefy' or 'expelliarmus', instead having to resort to cheating (Elder Wand).

Saftey Fail.
Click to expand...

a&b) The blood thing applied to physically being able to touch Harry, not the house. As long as Harry had someplace he could, if grudgingly, call home, he was safe inside that building until he turned 17. (I can't remember how this exactly worked, it's in the end of Order of the Phoenix...) Dumbledore did at least ask for the Dursley's to care for Harry as if he were their son, but the Dursley's chose not to. Harry still turned out pretty okay.
c) For the same reason he didn't tell him about the prophecy or place him in to another wizard family: He wanted Harry to have as normal of a childhood as possible, without knowing what had happened to him the night Voldemort killed his parents.
And to be honest, I don't think that Dumbledore wanted to raise a child by himself, he doesn't exactly seem like a family man to me.

Ŧiмє Яǽрεѓ · Jul 7, 2009

Divine_Lunatic said: ↑

a&b) The blood thing applied to physically being able to touch Harry, not the house. As long as Harry had someplace he could, if grudgingly, call home, he was safe inside that building until he turned 17. (I can't remember how this exactly worked, it's in the end of Order of the Phoenix...) Dumbledore did at least ask for the Dursley's to care for Harry as if he were their son, but the Dursley's chose not to. Harry still turned out pretty okay.
c) For the same reason he didn't tell him about the prophecy or place him in to another wizard family: He wanted Harry to have as normal of a childhood as possible, without knowing what had happened to him the night Voldemort killed his parents.
And to be honest, I don't think that Dumbledore wanted to raise a child by himself, he doesn't exactly seem like a family man to me.
Click to expand...

I think thats a very feeble set of excuses. Dumbledore is EVIL!

...

But we're getting off topic. Ancient EVIL Dumbledore or Neo EVIL Dumbledore?

Arch · Jul 7, 2009

Xeddrief said: ↑

I think thats a very feeble set of excuses. Dumbledore is EVIL!

...

But we're getting off topic. Ancient EVIL Dumbledore or Neo EVIL Dumbledore?
Click to expand...

If Dumbledore was evil, his soul would've been broken. Like Tom Riddle's. Besides, JK Rowling's the author. She obviously made Dumbledore the good guy. He did some bad things but unless she states that he is "EVIL" the canon to the story is the fact that Dumbledore is good, although a bit selfish(and he has an ego but he's just awesome like that).

Log in or Sign up

Old Dumbledore or New Dumbledore?

MadDoctorMaddie I'm a doctor, not a custom title!

Premium

Ŧiмє Яǽрεѓ King's Apprentice

Arch Mana Knight

Moderator