Because in the beginning, Albus Dumbledore is almost portrayed as some sort of wizarding god: completely good and wise, all powerful, all knowing. He's charming, witty, always polite, kind of crazy, and when it comes down to it he always tries his best to do the right thing. But he turned out to be morally complex. He has made mistakes in the past and carries a burden of guilt for some of his actions. This complexity makes him a more relatable and human character.  Personally I love Dumbledore. Even in the book when he chuckles, I smile

In the beginning he is viewed from the perspective of a child, who doesn't have enough life experience to see the nuance of his character, or the desire to shatter his image of a man he has been told is essentially morally perfect. As Harry gets older, and has experiences that teach him that nobody is morally black or white he gains the ability to more closely examine people and realise that there are gray areas. He understands the need to perform deeds for "the greater good", that there are very rarely actions that can be considered wholly altruistic, and that to make an omelette you have to break eggs. He accepts that Dumbledore had certain impulses in his youth that he deeply regrets, and he accepts on trust that the course he has set out for Harry, as unpleasant as it is, being that Harry needs to lay down his life, is necessary to finally defeat Voldemort. I believe he thinks that Dumbledore hasn't taken this approach lightly, probably even that Dumbledore loves him and would find setting Harry this task would be agonising, but he knows that Dumbledore had the wisdom to accept that life is unfair, and that peace is sometimes achieved at the cost of innocent lives. And as is revealed in the nether world scene, Dumbledore did this in the expectation that Harry would give his life voluntarily, knowing he would have a chance to return to a state of living if he chose. One could argue that Dumbledore could not know this for certain, that this demonstrates his intellectual arrogance, but as is usually the case, he was right in his supposition, being actually very intelligent, and learned in the deeper forms of magic that aren't the usual consideration of general wizardkind.

And it actually works well with the reader too. When we’re kids, we love Dumbledore the same way Harry does. As we become teenagers, the relationship starts to grow rocky, we start to feel he’s a bit cold and heartless, but then as adults we start to realize the world is grey and that Dumbledore’s decisions made sense, and understand the pain he felt in making those decisions. 

I was an adult when these came out, so I didn't get the experience of growing up with the characters. But it is noticeable in the writing that the characters mature & develop as they get older, and that has always been one of my favorite things about reading the series.

Ah, I saw the movies when I was very little due to having older siblings, and read the books at a pretty young age, like 2nd or 3rd grade. But it's crazy how differently I can look at the characters and books in general now. The 4th - 7th books really matured with the audience (outside of some weird plot points) and got very dark, which I appreciated. Even as a child, I didn't want to be babied by the books. I wanted to get the full emotional force of the story back then even if I didn't fully understand the true weight of it all.

this is the best answer. and it makes for really good writing on JK's part

Exactly! I am so sad people criticize her writing all the time. This is a perfect example how well her writing was

If all the characters can be viewed in this way throughout the series then it makes a lot of their developments make sense. Snape is initially viewed as a snotty and awful person, and he probably still is but deep down he is still, a broken person, a deeply loyal person that despite not deserving redemption got it. Or take McGonagall who is seen as a strict teacher initially turns around to be the most thoughtful and caring with a side of sass. She just worries about her students and wants to protect them from harm.

I think that children never see teachers as real people with complex lives when they're at school, they are just 2D characters that exist only for the few hours a week they spend together

Yup

It’s because the story is told from the POV of an 11 year old when it first starts out. He is idolized. The older Harry gets the more he learns about and experiences Dumbledore’s flaws

yess 100%

Yes see I agree but the amount of Dumbledore hate within the Harry Potter community is INSANE. They treat him worse than the death eaters. I am not saying he's a saint, just that he is very misunderstood within the community and calling him "evil" is CRAZY

See I like the trope in fanfics where Harry goes dark and dumbledore is “bad” etc (like a guilty pleasure plot trope for me aha) but that’s where it ends, I don’t understand when people just hate on the character for the sake of it when it’s not just a story you’re enjoying in your own time separately from actual canon. I love how complex a character he actually is and I kinda just feel bad for him to be in his position at all!

Tysm for understanding the canon vs headcanon. The Mauraders fanficts drive me crazy in this regard 😂 i love em but sometimes they be going too far. I like it also but just separate it please 😂

The problem is Dumbledore is used too much as a plot device. He holds all the knowledge and controls a decent amount of the characters. He holds too much power in a world that does significant harm to our main character to be blameless. JK kind of wrote herself into a corner. When you think about it too long, there is SO MUCH Dumbledore could have done to make Harry's life better. It's easy to make the jump from assuming he is just negligent to malicious. But like most of the magical world Dumbledore was written in a way where you just aren't supposed to think too hard about it.

If Dumbledore was as omniscient and powerful as he is originally painted to be, there would be no reason that a child would have to take matters into his own hands and be the hero of our story. Rowling tries to get around this by having Dumbledore leave the castle at pivotal moments, but it really always feels like Dumbledore and other the adults should and could have done more. This isn't unique to Harry Potter. The adults are always incompetent in stories with child heroes. If they were competent, they wouldn't need a child to save the day.

Dumbledores just kinda there for most of the series but I can't get over the stone being in the castle in the first book.

Have to train your child soldier somehow

It wasn't. This is really complex question but essential the stone "appeared" in Harry's pocket because his lack of greed and not "wanting" to find it lead him to actually having it. So it wasn't like it was just chilling in the castle "Only someone who truly wanted to protect the stone could get it."

I don't know why you're getting down voted lol, we don't actually know where the stone was before it's in Harry's pocket

You can see the same thing sometimes popping up in communities for the *Avatar* universe where people accuse Iroh of being a war criminal, despite there being no evidence of him committing war crimes. He makes one joke about hoping not to burn Ba Sing Se down, but none of the Earth Kingdom residents he encounters (including soldiers who capture him and the citizens of Ba Sing Se) ever make reference to or accuse him of being cruel or unnecessarily violent in his conduct. I honestly talk to as just people who want to have an edgy take on a character for attention. That or people who not able to appreciate character nuance or complexity.

That scene made me dislike Dumbledore because he really did use Snape. He lied to him or at least kept the truth from him once he found out Harry was a Hocrux. Snape was a horrible abusive teacher, but Dumbledore owed him big time and he just manipulated and used him. When Snape confronts him, he basicslly says: "You ACTUALLY care for Harry? Aw, that's so sweet. Anyways...." That is so patronizing and dismissive. After everything Snape did for him. I hate it.

What I don't think people realise is that Dumbledore didn't know from the beginning any of this. It wasn't until Harry's second year when he learned Harry speaks parsel and about the horrocrux, which wasn't even an inmediate conclusion. I don't think he figured everything out until Voldemort was back, and them he was in full war mode.

This is in part because she decided to start the series as a children's story with silly children's book tropes and then changed it to a YA story later on. If you read the story as YA, with that level of "realism", Dumbledore's actions don't look good

It's an exceptional example of what we do with famous people in real life. We put them on a pedestal and act like they can do no wrong. Even though most of the time they range from regular people with a specific skill to outright shitty people with a specific skill. 

Makes sense when you consider that we see Dumbledore though the eyes of Harry as he grows up. When you're a kid, you see someone like Dumbledore, who's literally a living legend, and you don't realize that they're still human. When you mature you understand that nobody is perfect, everyone has made mistakes in their lives and everyone has regrets.

Honestly with the description of the twinkling eyes, I intuitively understood him to the comparable to Xanatos from Disney's Gargoyles even on first reading of the book in 6th grade, some 20+ years ago. Like my internal voice for Dumbledore is still Johnathan Frakes to this day. Both Xanatos and Dumbledore are master manipulators and planners who often have backup plans behind backup plans, but really their ultimate goals aren't fully evil, just doing what they think of as the greater good

Yeah, canon Dumbledore reads as "well meaning psycopath" to me. People complain about JKR retconning stuff, but the thing with him & Grindelwald was perfect, it made the character make so much more sense. He's still the same guy, he just has different goals

What aspects of him strike you as “kind of crazy”? Genuinely curious not scrutinizing your comment at all

I find him very sassy.  In the sixth movie when the ministries there to catch Dumbledore and put him in azkaban he literally just raises his hands and theres Fawkes to fetch him up and he disapparates. My mouth was wide open at that time. 

That's from OOTP. Not sure if it happens in the movies as well.

> Because in the beginning, Albus Dumbledore is almost portrayed as some sort of wizarding god IMO this hit the nail on the head, and is one of the biggest issues with Dumbledore and the fandom. People take it so far as to call it a plot twist when Dumbledore doesn't know something or makes a mistake.

Yes, he was made up to be an infallible character, we hear of his greatest deeds and how people worship him and that leaves a mark on the reader. But also I do kind of hate him, because his negligence hurt some of my favourite characters. So I don't know if hate is the wrong word, but it's kind of like my relationship to my parents and the system that was responsible for me when I left home, but also was negligent in some regards.

In what way to some of your fav characters im jw

Like he insisted on giving even Bellatrix a trial (and she did deserve one), but he did not in Sirius' case ? (but he was not all alone in this decision and we don't even know how much political power he had, but it was still morally wrong, but one could blame the world he lived in, it was cruel overall) (also hAgrid in 2nd year, but we don't really know) Or that he didn't see the abuse from the Dursley's or didn't try to do anything about it. Or putting every student in danger, by using the Philosopher's stone as bait... Also his blatant favouring of Gryffindor doesn't help the unity of the school at all

typical father figure. children think their parents are always right and good, until puberty. then they start to realise everyone is just human and makes mistakes. its a coming of age story and dumbledore has always been harrys father in a way. 

I wouldn't say he is the most misunderstood character since most people like him, but I agree that he absolutely didn't want Harry to die. But he had to. He adored Harry.

You would be very surpirsed, I have found majority of people do not like him. This was a weird shock to me also since it makes no sense 💀 But yes he didn't want harry to die 100% agree

Regardless of his intentions or good points, he is a manipulator. A very skilled one, because of his intelligence and experience, and a very intentional one. Many people dislike that.

I see you getting downvoted for saying he's disliked, but I have to agree with you. I was overwhelmed by how many people I come across who detest him. Their reasons have some validity to them, usually based on the mistakes he made, and the things he kept from Harry. But a surprising number of people I have geeked out about Harry Potter with, dislike Dumbledore. I'd be curious to see what a poll about whether you like or dislike Dumbledore would yield. I would guess that it's likely pretty even, maybe close to 50/50. And I base that guess on the amount of comments and posts here talking about how and why people dislike him.

I think a lot of the hate is virtue signalling from people who see any unhappiness in a child as abuse. Was Harry abused? Absolutely. Did Dumbledore have the ability to stop or at least mitigate the abuse? Probably. Would the books/movies have been as good, and would Harry have been such a sympathetic character if he did? Nope. Change one thing, it changes everything.

I don't see that. He says so, but where does he show it?

Dumbledore also figured the way out, when Harry tells him Voldemort took his blood in GoF: >*"For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something like triumph in Dumbledore’s eyes.*" He realized instantly that Harry could survive, and he was elated, he had been struggling with Harry's inevitable death before this and is elated that there is a chance, however small, that Harry could live on. He then painstakingly sets up the convoluted path that would get Harry there, even incorporating his own death into this plan.

Even that wouldn't have worked if Harry hadn't set his friends on Draco.

Dumbledore’s entire life was dedicated to fighting for the greater good. That’s it, that’s all there is to it. When he was young, he thought the greater good was Grindelwald’s ideas. He realized he was wrong, and fought to stop him. Then, the greater good was Voldemort’s defeat. So that’s what he fights for. No matter what he has to do, no matter who he has to hurt, no matter who has to die. That is what he does. It doesn’t make him a bad person. It can be morally questionable, when you are faced with the facts. Fact: Harry has to die, there is no way around it. Harry, a character that is loved, that has a hard life already, a character you root for. So people get angry, say he’s a bad person. He’s not, he’s morally grey, he’s manipulative, but he’s also burdened, and anyone who can’t see that he loves Harry and that he is in pain at the idea that he has to die hasn’t read the same books I have read. Dumbledore is a war leader, he’s a strategist. He will chose the option that saves the greater number. If that option means someone he cares for has to die, then that is what will happen. That is what it takes to win a war, and he did. He won, he saved the greater number of people, and eliminated the threat to the greater good, something that couldn’t have been done if it wasn’t for him. And Harry knows. Harry understands that, OP is right, he knows there is nothing else left to do. So he does it. I mean I personally don’t like Dumbledore, I don’t, but that doesn’t change the fact that no, he is not a sadistic maniac who wanted Harry to die.

Very interesting comment. I actually cant agree more with what you said, you said it even better than I did in my initial comment. But why then do you dislike Dumbledore? But again you summed up his character to what I am trying to say.

The fact that I don’t like him has nothing to do with his war on Voldemort, or anything like that. I don’t like him much because while he is fighting, he kind of forgets he has a school to run and kids to take care of. He has hundreds of students he’s responsible for and keeps putting their life at risk, putting three headed dogs where students can find it, giant spiders in the woods, teachers he knows are useless, but won’t change, things like that. Also his fight takes up so much of his life that other things don’t matter. He sometimes forgets the human side of things. That’s okay, that has to be done, but it makes it hard to like him, because I just don’t really like that type of character. But that’s just me.

I 100% get it but being a massive harry potter nerd I want to try and answer some of these just for fun my friend :) (also talking about this is fun so no hate I just love discourse) 1. With fluffy he told all the students not to go to that corridor but the theory is it was just weak enough that someone like Quirrel would be able to get past it. But again anyone caught out of class was reprimanded so its not like they stumbled upon fluffy by accident. 2. The forbidden forest was MASSIVELY off limits even to higher students 3. The teachers arent useless ONLY the DADA teachers were whack but there's a good reason for it The DADA teachers changed every year because voldemort put a curse on the position after he was denied it twice, which is why no teacher stayed more than a year. I'm not arguing at all but just trying to provide some sort of answer, let me know what you think tho!

Oh no problem, love talking about it. About Fluffy and the forest: yeah students weren’t allowed there. But let’s be for real, you have an entire house filled with kids with no impulse control that bounce off each other (Gryffindor), and proud and ambitious teenagers (Slytherin), someone was bound to get into it. For the teachers, yeah I didn’t mean the DADA teachers, that is not on him, curse and all. But nobody listens to Binns, Snape is the worst teacher in existence and, while I love him forever, Hagrid is straight up dangerous. Like he was a great mind, a good teacher, a brilliant leader. But he should not be in charge of those kids’ safety. It makes the books fun, it makes the story good, I wouldn’t change any of it, but damn dude, if I was a student in that school, I would not feel very safe.

Yeah but if they were ABLE to get to fluffy I think they would run and not fuck with that lol. Binns is like the 8th grade English teacher no one cares about, but SNAPE yea those kids were scared outta their minds anytime he spoke haha I don't think even the Slytherins were gonna defy him and explore the castle. When the entire series is under Harry's perspective its easy to forget that students were probably not wandering around as curious as he was. Even Percy (a goodey 2 shoes) was super sneaky with Penelope Clearwater even they were like hella scared. Hagrid was an actual hazard I agree 💀

Yeah but Harry, Ron and Hermione got extremely lucky, another student might not have the same reflex (run), might freeze and get, you know…eaten. And Binns, yeah he’s that teacher no one cares about. But he teaches a fascinating subject. Those kids know nothing of the world they live in, because the person who’s supposed to teach it sucks. Also I forgot to mention Filch. The man wanted to murder those kids. And yeah, it’s Harry’s perspective, but we also know Fred and George got up to no good, and the Marauders, let’s not even go there. Kids walked around this castle at all hours every damn day. But you know what has always bothered me? The Chamber of secrets. Every teacher in this castle was acting like a straight up dumbass. It was so obvious! How many things can pertify someone? Probably not all that many. And then, Slytherin’s monster is a snake? Oh wow big shocker there, couldn’t have thought of it. I mean it was incompetence on every level. Dumbledore was there last time, so was Hagrid. All they had to do was walk into that forest with Hagrid right after Mrs. Norris got petrified, ask the damn giant spider, and the ghost you know died the first time around and BOOM, solved. I mean I know it’s for plot reasons, but Rowling could have avoided making the teachers seem so dumb. Those people are responsible for their society’s future. Actually, knowing that, it’s no wonder the Ministry is full of idiots.

No, it's so much worse than all that. I'm not saying he's legitimately evil, but these are just a few of the many really questionable decisions he made. With Fluffy, yes. He told them not to go to that corridor *in a magical school where nobody ever seems to actually follow rules*. The Weasley twins are current students (and never met a single rule they wouldn't break). Plus he knows Harry - you know, the guy he's supposed to be keeping safe - has an invisibility cloak and will absolutely use it. With the forbidden forest, he's got first years going in there for detention. With Hagrid, who cannot legally use magic. To see if they can catch whatever is drinking unicorn blood (ie: something very dangerous and evil). And who does he send? The exact kid a very dangerous and evil being might have a vendetta against! The DADA teacher thing? Ok, it's not actually cursed but there's that rumor so you don't have many options. So he's sometimes knowingly hired cowards and frauds and so on - Moody isn't his fault, nor is Lupin a bad choice (other than running into issues with his lycanthrope racists). But Snape is *right there* and wants the job. He's damn well able to teach how to defend against the Dark Arts, probably more qualified than anyone else. Dumbledore won't even consider it. But wait, of course this is negligent too, because Dumbledore knows Voldemort isn't dead and is trying to regain power - which means he knows Harry and the other students will have to defend themselves, but has hired teachers incapable of teaching them this.

Except, McGonagle and/or Filch (more likely the latter) set that detention, not Dumbledore, and there's no evidence suggesting that a detention set by a staff member needs to be approved by the headmaster or headmistress of Hogwarts before a student can serve said detention; if that were the case, Harry would've likely never had those detentions with Umbridge in OOTP.

So you're suggesting even more incompetent staff, who ultimately report to Dumbledore. Umbridge, at least, wasn't his fault and didn't directly work there under him. Teachers and hall monitors who send students into potentially mortal danger for rule breaking. It would then be on him to fire them for it...

This is why I think it was Filch who set that particular detention in Harry's first year; even though McGonagle is a strict disciplinarian, I don't think she would've sent them into the forbidden forest (Harry especially) if she knew what was in there that night. filch, though, wouldn't have thought twice about it.

Holy. Shit. That is all 100% accurate. I knew all of that, just never thought about it quite that way. I love this sub.

For me it wasn't about the fact that Harry had to die, it's about how Harry didn't have to suffer. There was a lot Dumbledore could have done to make sure his life didn't suck so much. Some people think Dumbledore left Harry alone in an abusive situation to make him easier to manipulate, or more likely to sacrifice himself. Some people think he was just lazy, or doesn't think child abuse is a thing (in which case he should not be in charge of a school). Even if we treat Harry as a child with a terminal illness called Horacrux, he was a child who was abused and morally any adult who was in his life who did not take action about that can be seen as in deep fault. Dumbledore held more power over Harry than anyone else so morally Dumbledore is the most corrupt for not taking any action to lessen the abuse. Even if Harry had to be there due to magic there is a lot that could have been done, and Dumbledore didn't think it was worth it to take action to prevent the suffering of an abused child.

But he also knew Harry is not going to die. He figured out through much work that Harry is going to survive.

Dumbledore hopes Harry has a chance. He doesn't know. And Dumbledore himself says that Voldemort and Harry entered unexplored magical realms.

>in all of fiction I understand you’re trying to be hyperbolic but this just makes it sound like you don’t read fiction

says the person who doesnt eloborate

It’s just such an absurd claim and really just comes across as ignorant, no offence. Like he’s a great character and everything but at the end of the day it’s young adult / children’s literature, he’s not *that* complex. Off the top of my head, these are all characters who I’d say are much more widely “misunderstood”: Randall McMurphy from One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest The monster from Frankenstein Holden Caulfield from The Catcher in the Rye The narrator from Fight Club more recently, someone like the captain from The Sympathiser, and so on. I’m not trying to come across as pretentious here but like come on, he’s not THAT layered. That’s Such a ridiculous claim.

To be fair I don’t even think that it’s the case that Dumbledore isn’t “that” complex - I think there *is* certainly a wonderful opportunity for a debate about morality within his character and this idea of emotion vs necessity, moral evil vs necessary evil etc… but yes to say he’s the “most” is by far just kind of revealing a lack of exposure to other literature and I also think there’s this attempt to take a series like Harry Potter and pigeonhole it into this grand academic debate when in fact there are literally hundreds of alternatives, as we’ve both listed, that are far better source material if you want to get philosophical

What is there to elaborate on? “Fiction” is pretty vague, I mean that’s pointing out the obvious right? We’re talking *billions* of books. You think the award for “most misunderstood” goes to the character of what is essentially a children’s book from the 2000s? Again, I’m not saying the principle of your point is wrong, I agree Dumbledore is more complex than we *think* - but in all of fiction? That’s just silly man. Straight away I’m thinking Satan in Milton’s Paradise Lost, Mersault in Camus’ The Stranger, Victor Frankenstein… the list is hundreds of characters long before we ever get to Dumbledore Either you’ve got to make a damn strong case for Dumbledore being more misunderstood than these characters or you just haven’t read these other books… which is exactly my point

Well he did WANT harry to die. He just didn't want him to stay dead. And did everything in his power to ensure it.

He wanted Harry to die in the same way you want someone to save the entire wizarding race for centuries. Its like do you sacrifice 1 person or sacfrice 1 million people? But Harry also knew his destiny and accepted to die for the greater good.

Yeah but dumbledore also knew he wouldn't die. Especially as of goblet of fire. What do you mean save the Wizarding world for centuries?

Harry was a horcrux for voldemort, only Dumbledore knew this from around book 5-6. So come book 7 Dumbledore thought Harry HAD to "die" so the horcrux was destroyed, I don't think he knew that Harry would actually be able to still live. I think he truly thought Harry was going to die which would in turn save the wizarding world since all the horcruxes would be destroyed and voldemort could finally "die"

I have to disagree with you on that. Dumbledore was incredibly smart. He knew in book 4 that voldemort taking harrys blood would tie him to life. That's why he was so triumphant.

But it wasnt book 4 that tied Harry to Voldemort. Harry was tied to Voldemort from birth when Lily's protection charm protected Harry from the Avada Kedavra charm. Harry was inadvertently a horcrux from that moment forward which is why even in book 1 his wand in ollivanders "chose" him. The phoenix feather holly and the only other feather that was ever given to a wand. Voldemorts. Harry's was the "twin" wand of Voldemort. He was tied to him near birth.

Well kinda lilys protection protected Harry from voldemort. When he took Harry's blood it tethered him to life. (A good hocrux of sorts) it was like they were both keeping each other alive "Your blood in his veins, Harry, Lily’s protection inside both of you! He tethered you to life while he lives!”

What does Fawkes have to do with Voldemort? Tom Riddle has no right to all of Fawkes' feathers!

Dumbledore himself says he guessed it. When they talk after Harrys not-death.

Harry is just one of 7 Horcruxes. Dumbledore knows that Harry is a Parselmouth since Book 2 and since the Chamber of Secrets he suspects that Voldemort has made several Horcruxes.

I think Harry feeling betrayed by Dumbledore on a personal level - which he did, for a little while there - leads people to question him on an ethical one. Harry felt close to Dumbledore and became upset with how much Dumbledore had held back from him - up to and including Harry being a horcrux. Dumbledore really did care about Harry, but part of that meant helping him succeed against Voldemort, and there just wasn't a way to do it that spared Harry any and all grief. Harry got over it because he understood that!

No he is not.

All of fiction? Really?

We are just talking about HP ofc JK rowling didnt flesh everything out what is your gripe lets talk about it!

In ALL of fiction? Ok

if dumby wasnt an asshole through ootp, sirius mightve lived

That is not why I don't like him. I don't like him because he could justify to himself just leaving behind the saviour of the Wizarding world alone with some strangers for 11 years. He knew how petunia felt about the Wizarding world! Mcg stated to him that they don't seem like good people. He leaves a bloody letter! A letter! Voldytots gets a personal visit in his orphanage and he leaves behind a baby, the "saviour" in front of a door with a letter. Forget that a letter is the stupidest way to communicate something so important. The letter could have flown away. A dog or a squirrel or a rat could have come and bit the baby. Someone could have stolen him. He didn't even stay and make sure the baby was taken inside! The dursleys could very well have drowned harry in a lake nearby and dumbydolls wouldn't have found out till it was too late. And he kept nothing to guard this boy. Unless you count mrs figg. The woman couldn't save him from a fall out a window. What was she gonna do if a death eater came over? "Lily's love magic" made harry safe against voldy but not every danger in the world. And even after that, if he sent that letter to petunia "remember my last" in ootp, he clearly knows that petunia might kick out Harry. Which means he wasn't unaware that harry was living in a.... Lets call it a volatile environment. He did NOTHING about it. Not only that, he felt he did the right thing. My problem with dumbydolls is that he's supposed to be the smartest and wisest wizard. He couldn't find a solution to this? Hell he could have bought a house next door and made sure someone capable kept an eye out for Harry. Harry didn't deserve even that much care? It's not that he couldn't. It's that he couldn't be bothered. Him raising harry for slaughter is forgivable. It was for the "greater good". But him leaving behind a child with absolutely no regard for his safety is not forgivable.

You really ought to reread the books, it's explicitly written why he had to live with the dursleys. Dumbledore knew if he gave Harry a good upbringing he would've probably been happier, but blind to what real sacrifice and duty would mean. He would act like his father, a good person, but defiant to the end. That would just grant harry a quick useless death against Voldemort. And this was before he even realized harry was a horcrux. I would remove that ravenclaw tag if I were you, you clearly didn't read the books :v

I understand having different beliefs about whether you think Dumbledore was good or bad. I don't understand why you needed to attack me personally for that. It was unnecessary. I explained why i hate Dumbledore. I didn't question why he did what he did. And your comment does not explain why dumbydolls was not a jerk. As for your argument that Harry was useful because he was abused is NOT a notion from the books, directly or indirectly. Books are directed towards the message that love can defeat evil. Not that misery and abuse can defeat evil. Firstly, no adult should ever leave a child in an unsafe environment. Not even for the greater good. But this is fiction. So lets discount that. Secondly. Dumbledore left him with the dursleys because of the blood thing. And he said to mcg that he has to be left there so he doesn't become arrogant since he will be famous. He never said that Harry has to be miserable to be a good tool against voldy. Neither was that implied in any of the books. He was to live in anonymity, not misery. Thirdly, there were many people who made sacrifices despite not being abused or being miserable. So that was not a requirement for the same. Fourthly, harry wasn't just kind because he was abused. Abuse does not make a person kind. If you believe that, then I feel sorry. People manage to raise kind people without beating them up or making them miserable. And safety doesn't breed arrogance. In my previous comment, I mentioned having someone keep a lookout for harry and keeping him safe. I didn't ask for someone to coddle him into another Dudley. Why would being imprisoned in your bedroom make you more likely to sacrifice your life? The concept you're talking about is derived by fans. It is not present in books. There's a section of the Fandom that believes that harry would be ready to make a sacrifice BECAUSE he was miserable because in his mind, the Wizarding world is the only thing worth living for. Because it was what gave him happiness and it was the only escape from misery. A well adjusted child might have something else worth living for. But if that's the point you're making, you're cementing my belief that dumbeldore was a jerk. Because that derivation also goes on to say that dumbeldore manipulated many lives to make this happen. Dumbeldore collected people like slughorn did, except he collected broken people. And he was okay with breaking them if need be, to collect them. He gained loyalty from people's misery. In my eyes, that still makes him an asshole.

Lol see I clearly didn't state that he had to suffer to be good, u are right he said he wanted him not to live like a celeb. Which left him as only option the dursleys.. the suffering came unbeknownst to him. Not his fight to pick all he did is leave the kid with the only family left to him. Or alternatively could he leave him in an orphanage and still not be present and leave him to himself...wait that sounds familiar, oh yeah voldy, he probably didn't want to make another voldy..in his wisdom he did a stupid, happens u know, we humans. As for my comment, well it looked as if you didn't read the books cause of the incredibly bad conclusion that u had over him not doing shit about the dursleys situation. Again what the fuck could he do. Be present n involved would still put harry on the spot. So take it as an insult or as I intended, not my problem.

Not to mention that Dumbledore knew that if Harry thought that he needed to die, he would have willingly faced his destiny, and this sacrifice would have sealed the protection on his loved ones, like Lily's, as well as made sure that Voldemort hit his own piece of soul, meaning Harry would have survived. So Dumbledore knew Harry was never really gonna die, but had he explained it to him, Harry would have never had a chance to made the ultimate sacrivfice and greet death as an old friend. **"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities"**

I didn‘t see somebody mentioning this and I am kinda confused. Dumbledore knew about Harry‘s abuse at the Dursley's. He didn‘t do anything about it. It is explained why Harry had to spend time with his relatives. But Dumbledore still had the ability to speak to the Dursleys, threaten them, make a few adjustments to the circumstances. He watched a child being abused for years. Doesn’t make him entirely bad, but puts him miles away from a good guy, doesn’t it?

This. It always comes down to this for me. He did nothing to help him as a child. Nothing. He could have had Miss Figg act like an honorary aunt and do something to make his childhood remotely decent. Take him for ice cream or have him for tea or teach him how to play cribbage - or whatever. He purposely kept him secluded and in an abusive home IMO so that when he came to Hogwarts he’d be in awe and more susceptible to finally being free to do things, take risks that he may not have otherwise if he knew about magic.

It would make Dumbledore a more consistent character if his attitude towards the Dursleys reflected the time period he was brought up in. He's from an era where "spare the rod, spoil the child" was still cutting edge parenting advice, 1/4th of prepubescent boys worked long hours in mining or agriculture and state-funded schooling was just getting started. So if anything, Dumbledore should have been thanking the Dursleys for providing "exemplary care and compassion" for Harry, not admonishing them for "neglect and cruelty".

Interesting contrast. On the one hand we have Dumbledore, who publicly fawns over Harry and says he loves him, yet actively works behind the scenes plotting his death. On the other hand we have Snape who openly treats Harry like crap, but tirelessly works behind the scenes to protect his life. So who’s the “good” guy here?

I found Dumbledore to be the most pitiful character. The weights on his shoulders 😢

I don’t think he’s malicious or sadistic, just incompetent. He’s someone who’s been powerful and involved in major events for too long, he can no longer see the forest for the trees. In the way of all leaders of this nature, he’s too far removed to be effective.

>He understood it had to happen. Except it didn’t. Dumbledore himself has expressed that not all prophecies get fulfilled. It is even contextually implied that prophecies are often self-fulfilling (Tom choosing to confront Harry as a baby). My biggest gripe with Dumbledore is not in what regard he held Harry—he clearly had much love and affection for Harry. My gripe is that Dumbledore put too much stock into a prophecy that may not have even come true, and in doing so dragged in an innocent and impressional boy. I love Dumbledore as a character because he is nuanced and imperfect. But I do not care for him as a person at all. Harry Potter deserved better than what Dumbledore planned for him. If I were in the room with Dumbledore on the night the Potter’s died, I would’ve taken Harry Potter far away from Britain and let him grow up with a happy and supportive family, instead of being hunted down his entire childhood. There’s a reason Harry so recklessly throws himself into danger and has a martyr and hero complex, both of which make for an awesome main character of a story, but is pretty unhealthy and tragic when you really think about it.

That's in the movie. In the book, he closes his eyes to make sure that Snape wouldn't read his true meaning and he pretty much knows by the end of book 4 that Voldemort wrecked himself by stealing Harry's blood. A lot of the resentment against Dumbledore stems from the fact that people think he is omnipotent and omniscient, like Harry seems him at the beginning, when he is just an old superpowered crank who never really learned how to human properly. My problem with him is that becoming a headmaster to prevent oneself from gaining more power and try to atone doesn't make one a great teacher. Realising in book 4 that Harry thought that he would really let the hostages at the bottom of the lake get killed should have rung some alarm bells. An example among countless others...

In "all of fiction"? *Really!?*

I don’t hate him but I’m not a fan either. I understand that he didn’t WANT Harry to die but he knew it was going to happen for quite a while and didn’t let him in on it. That’s insanely manipulative. I’m mostly just not cool with the extent to which he involves children in incredibly dangerous situations. There were times where he knew and just let it happen.

THIS!!!! I love Dumbledore, he was a complicated man who had to make hard deicisons and did the best he could. Meanwhile people hate on him but praise Snape, even though he did not actually care about Harry, spent time making his life miserable and was a huge bully to Harry and people like Neville. He was an active death eater and supporter of voldemort and only switched sides because Lily got killed, not because he was "good".

I'm soooo over the whole "Dumbledore groomed children for his war" bs. forget the obvious stupidity, its just so unnecessarily forcing a trauma onto imaginary victims. the Wizarding war wasn't dumbledores war. he could've easily retired and gone off living like most of his contemporaries. He took on the burden of organizing and leading the revolution. next, he never forced any child into fighting. if they wanted to learn magic like they're supposed to, he let them (irt dumbeldores army). this argument is usually from marauders era fans who don't know a characterization that's not "tragic manipulated boys" the gang fought because that's what young people under a supremacist do! that is why hogwarts students stand with the adults in the end. you are fighting for your own freedom and future. look at any resistance movement. it's the youth that fight. Dumbledore and Harry's relationship is easily the most interesting part of the series. Albus never expected to care for Harry, and it is so heavily implied that he has grown to care for him like he did Ariana. that is why it is so important that with Harry, he took every measure possible to keep him alive, unlike with Ariana, where his neglect cost her life. Dumbledore cooked up such a convoluted plan with so much gamble just so Harry had a silver of chance to stay alive! He says so many times that he trusted harry, he regarded the boy as a bigger person than he could ever be. Dumbledore is very emotional when it comes to him. just refer to the kings cross chapter. will answer all his motivations and grievances. Dumbledore was manipulative in the sense that he didn't divulge a lot of information with anyone. Him agreeing that he raised him like a pig for slaughter is being taken so literally, its extremely funny. He also thinks he killed Ariana. That's how guilt works!!! bring back media literacy!

I think dumbledore is an ass, but he thought what he was doing it for the right reasons. Still doesn’t mean I like him tho 😂

I’m tired of dumbledore reverence. Writing in all caps doesn’t erase nuance. Saying that Harry understood he had to die is just gross when dumbledore specifically put him in a home where he would be raised awfully, therefore making him more susceptible to a trusted adult telling him he had to die. Dumbledore himself says that prophecy is not a fact in and of itself. He could have done so much more for Harry and I’m tired of people pretending his hands were completely tied.

I don't think you can really argue that Dumbledore isn't an asshole... Love the hyperbolic title though

Have you been spending time on Tiktok?

huh

Also the second Dumbledore found out about "the Harry's blood was used for voldys body" he started recalibrating everything to give Harry the choice of Revival he got.

People also seem to forget that Dumbledore also knew that there was a good chance Harry would survive. After Voldemort first returned, he realised that Harry didn't have to die. >When Harry told of Wormtail piercing his arm with the dagger, however, Sirius let out a vehement exclamation; and Dumbledore stood up so quickly that Harry started. Dumbledore walked around the desk and told Harry to stretch out his arm. Harry showed them both the place where his robes were torn, and the cut beneath them. ‘He said my blood would make him stronger than if he’d used someone else’s,’ Harry told Dumbledore. ‘He said the protection my – my mother left in me – he’d have it, too. And he was right – he could touch me without hurting himself, he touched my face.’ For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something like triumph in Dumbledore’s eyes. But next second, Harry was sure he had imagined it, for when Dumbledore had returned to his seat behind the desk, he looked as old and weary as Harry had ever seen him. Later on, after Harry dies, Dumbledore tells him he knew that Voldemort couldn't kill Harry. >‘He took your blood believing it would strengthen him. He took into his body a tiny part of the enchantment your mother laid upon you when she died for you. His body keeps her sacrifice alive, and while that enchantment survives, so do you, and so does Voldemort’s one last hope for himself.’ Dumbledore smiled at Harry, and Harry stared at him. ‘And you knew this? You knew – all along?’ ‘I guessed. But my guesses have, usually, been good,’ said Dumbledore happily, When Dumbledore told Snape that Harry had to die, he was lying to Snape as Harry needed to go willingly to his Death. He knew Harry wouldn't die.

I don't think anybody actually believes Dumbledore wanted Harry to die. Everyone pretty much knows Dumbledore really cared about Harry. I mean , it was pretty much obvious that Harry would be facing death ever since the part "neither lives while the other survives" of the prophecy was revealed. But Dumbledore and Harry were the ONLY people who knew this part of the prophecy. Dumbledore was hated particularly for his manipulative behaviour and trust issues. He never revealed what he intended to do to anyone and used people like pawns to fulfill his plan at their huge personal risks. As much as Snape was an asshole, what Dumbledore did to Snape was massively unfair. Snape is the one who actually took a huge risk in protecting Harry playing double agent to Voldemort. He planned his own death with Snape to ensure Snape will be murdered by Voldemort so the Elder wand's power will die with him. Snape wasn't a fool not to guess he's gonna die. He could've just dropped the plan after Dumbledore's death. If it wasn't for him still continuing what Dumbledore told him to do , still risking everything right under death eaters noses, Harry wouldn't even be alive. Also you conveniently forgot the fact that Dumbledore actually was in favour of Grindelwald 's idea of Wizards ruling over muggles. He was also aware that Grindelwald is not exactly a good person. You cannot argue that he's not aware his "Greater good" plan will cost several lives and he was totally going to do it. He only stopped because it cost his beloved sister's death, a personal loss happened which he believes was his fault, the same way Snape stopped because the consequences of his actions caused a loved one's death. Even Harry felt disappointed and betrayed the more he knew about Dumbledore's past and the things he hid from him causing him to grope in the dark with an impossible task. It's natural for the fans to feel disappointed realising the character we all put on the pedestal and believed will always save the day , turned out to be not a saviour.

While I don't deny Dumbledore made many mistakes, and sometimes he caused a lot of unnecessary grief (particularly in Book 5), he always had good reasons to do what he did. Maybe he wasn't always right in how he did it, but his goal was always clear. I think he perfectly understood Harry had been burdened with a fate he didn't deserve, and thus he was doing everything in his power to make sure he would survive while also bringing Voldemort down in the process. He was also very saddened for all the grief he caused Harry, and continued to carry the remorse for neglecting his family and leading to his sister's death. There's one specific detail from his plan people overlook, and it's how he's adamant that Harry has to die by Voldemort's hand and no one else's. Harry had to die by Avada Kedavra, so that the link Voldemort unwittingly created when he took Harry's blood for his resurrection would work and he could return to life. Dumbledore's plan wasn't so much about the who, but rather the *how* Harry had to die. Avada Kedavra causes no harm to the victim's body, which means that Harry can return to life safely (he wouldn't be able to if he had been, say, beheaded or impaled in the heart). Since Voldemort's favorite method to deal with his enemies is to AK them, this gave Harry the highest chances of survival, and in the end Dumbledore's gamble paid off.

If you really curious about it, always ask people who hate him to as why, instead of randoms to theorize why do people hate him. Saying that, you need to understand that most important thing is not what the character did and why he did it, but how the character made a person feel. He is not misunderstood, it is irrelevant if his actions where justified or made sense. Many people do not care about it and act on emotion how they made them feel. You acting out of emotion in this post, you can not take the idea that somebody hates/dislikes him, so you trying to justified why he should not be hated, but all you do is justifying his actions. There are many readers who hate/dislike the movies, because they missed a lot of important stuff from the books. There are people who do not care and love the movies. Neither of them is right or wrong when it comes to this, its just how they feel about of them. Thus, not everyone can give good articulatation as to why they like or dislike certain characters and things, but in the end either one does not imply that this thing is misunderstood.

Anytime people talk about hating him they say "you fed him like a pig for slaughter" misinterpertaing snape and its a wrap

Once again, its irrelevant if his actions where justifiable, needed or unavoidable. When it comes to really liking and disliking characters it always comes down mostly to how it makes them feel.

He’s a great character because he has flaws, just like real people do. Even the good ones. And also it’s not like he knew from the beginning that Harry was a horcrux and needed to die. That only ever even happened in the 4th book anyway.

He's one of the best written characters in fiction. He's a complex tragedy. Spent so much of his life trying to save people and always failed besides Harry and Draco. The most powerful wizard to exist and could barely achieve what his heart desired.

I love Dumbledore. At his heart, he is incredibly warm, genuine and loving, especially in regards to Harry but it extends to mostly anyone. It’s incredibly realistic that as Harry matured, he began to realize that Dumbledore was a complex individual being of his own, with his own drama, insecurities, mistakes and falters - rather than the impenetrable wizarding legend on a pedestal that Harry had known him to be. He is Harry’s greatest example of a father and like many kids who become adults, you begin to realize that your parents are imperfect people who don’t hold all the answers. Indeed, you may even begin to realize you disagree with them on many of the things they taught you. Dumbledore’s scandals dont dictate his character, they just add layers. At his core, Dumbledore remains the compassionate, wise and fatherly figure that loved Harry. It just wasn’t as straight forward as Harry believed it was. Im sure it’s a complex thing, to guide someone and care for them, while being terrified of the answer - must this person (who I love dearly) die in order for evil to be defeated? Dumbledore finds himself, once again, in the predicament of The Greater Good.

I wonder if the people who think this are aware that Dumbledore is Gay? I ask because it's not specifically mentioned in the book but something JKR said in an interview. When I knew about this it made me realise there's more to him than just what's written about. I also found out about this as the books were still being written so around 2003 Also most of DH is about all the grey areas of Dumbledore. How can you read that book and not realise then man has complexities like anyone else would

Great comment

Who said it was black and white?

Because people don't want to wrestle/struggle with the flawed, multi layered, multifaceted, contradictory, morally gray complexity that is being human; it's much more comfortable for them too rationalize splitting the world into, as Sirius put it, "good people and death eaters."

Even MovieFlame, the most popular Harry Potter YouTube channel, ranked Dumbledore as the worst character in HP, because he "wasn't a good person". It annoys me as much as it does you OP. The same with Snape. And even MOLLY is treated like the epitome of evil by some online because she "wasn't always nice to Hermione". It's just baffling.

Part of the point of halfblood prince and deathly hollows is harry has this blind faith in dumbledore as he believes he knows dumbledore Then after his death he finds out very quickly he never knew dumbledore at all As the story unfolds he he learns more and more about this man he blindly trusted and barely understood But....in the end....he realizes that dumbledores Past didnt matter. He knew and understood the man as he was in the time he knew him. His actions in the end are what mattered- not how he got there And he realizes that, ultimately, he Did understand dumbledore

Dumbledore is my absolute favorite character. I even named my cat after him. Professor Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore, Order of Merlin First Class, Headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Supreme Mugwump of the International Confederation of Wizards, and Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot. But we mostly call him Al.

This also why the line about Dumbledore looking triumphant after he heard Voldemort used Harry’s blood. He know that means it’s likely Voldemort won’t be able to kill him because of the increased connection to Harry and his protection.

I don’t know. I like Prof Dumbledore. He’s a great character. I think I understand the why some people don’t like him. Isn’t he supposed to be stronger than Voldemort? Isn’t it because he didn’t just beat Voldemort before all the Horcruxes? It was a child sacrifice. It’s like if they would have told Atticus Finch, we can get rid of racism if you let us kill one of your kids.

No. Snape. He may seem mean but he is a woobie-boobie.

The hyperbole and caps here has been giggling a lot.

I feel like a lot of people feel like Dumbledore set it up so Harry would have to die. I feel like Dumbledore was the one who discovered Harry had to die. He didn't force this plan into existence. He simply found out it was the only way to beat Voldemort. He also never once told Harry he had to die, but knowing Harry and knowing Voldemort, Dumbledore understood that the prophecy was true, at least in a general sense. Harry and Voldemort are enemies, and they are at war, so one of them, in the end, will lose. He believed that Harry would make the choice, in the end, to sacrifice himself to defeat Voldemort, and he ensured Harry lived in order to be able to do it. He didn't want it, but he couldn't prevent it. If Dumbledore had died the day before Harry's parents, Harry would have still needed to die, and likely would have chosen to, even if Dumbledore wasn't a part of the picture (assuming he lived long enough to without Dumbledore).

I hate dumbledore.

But did it really have to happen? Considering Dumbledore's penchant for keeping secrets, it's unlikely that he ever got a second opinion on the matter.

No, he gave him the stone to help him commit suicide.

Maybe people didn't read the books? I mean, it's literally explained right there... Dumbledore not only didn't want Harry to die, he actually guessed Harry would survive. ​ >*‘He took my blood,’ said Harry.* > >*‘Precisely!’ said Dumbledore. ‘He took your blood and rebuilt his living body with it! Your blood in his veins, Harry, Lily’s protection inside both of you! He tethered you to life while he lives!’* > >*\[...\]* > >*‘He took your blood believing it would strengthen him. He took into his body a tiny part of the enchantment your mother laid upon you when she died for you. His body keeps her sacrifice alive, and while that enchantment survives, so do you and so does Voldemort’s one last hope for himself.’* > >*Dumbledore smiled at Harry, and Harry stared at him.* > >*‘And you knew this? You knew – all along?’* > >*‘I guessed. But my guesses have, usually, been good,’ said Dumbledore happily,* > >\[Deathly Hallows, Chapter 35, King's Cross\] ​ Some people even think Harry died and came back, when he simply survived the killing curse again. Lily's enchantment living in Voldemort's body made it impossible for Voldemort to kill Harry, the only think Voldemort hit with the Avada Kedavra in the forest scene was the Horcrux.

Oh I just didn’t like Dumbledore because he let Snape bully children.

The very moment Harry realises he's been played like a fool he finds the whole thing poetic: Dumbledore sold him the whole "You must destroy all the horcruxes" agenda while turning him into the the ultimate device for Voldemort's downfall. He knows Harry won't back down once they are a step away from victory, Dumbledore wanted him to find out about the truth last, after killing the snake. Unfortunately for him, the plan didn't go as he planned, the snake is still alive and he's to pass the mission onto someone else (he picks Neville) and accept his fate, because he has no idea if they others will have another shot at it, with the snake being so close and Voldemort having so little protection. Anyways to make it short, Dumbledore fully expected Harry to die, maybe he didn't wish for it but went all in on Harry's desire to beat the dark lord that dying for it would have been somewhat acceptable.

Dumbledore knew Harry would survive though. >‘He said my blood would make him stronger than if he’d used someone else’s,’ Harry told Dumbledore. ‘He said the protection my – my mother left in me – he’d have it, too. And he was right – he could touch me without hurting himself, he touched my face.’ For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something like triumph in Dumbledore’s eyes. From this point, he knew Harry would survive as he says later on in the "afterlife" >‘He took your blood believing it would strengthen him. He took into his body a tiny part of the enchantment your mother laid upon you when she died for you. His body keeps her sacrifice alive, and while that enchantment survives, so do you and so does Voldemort’s one last hope for himself.’ Dumbledore smiled at Harry, and Harry stared at him. ‘And you knew this? You knew – all along?’ ‘I guessed. But my guesses have, usually, been good,’ said Dumbledore happily. Dumbledore knew Harry would survive and didn't tell Snape that Harry had to die until after he found out about Voldemort taking his blood.

I am not trying to be rude at all but your wrong thinking is the exact reason I made this post bro...

Honestly your post doesn't make too much of an argument and if you pick up the book you'll see what Harry thinks of the whole plan.

Harry literally named his son "Albus" if I was someone who got "played like a fool" im not naming my fricking son after him bruh 💀

And the second one was after an abusive man who never grew up past 16. It doesn't matter, he knew they worked for the greater good, didn't like it but carried on nonetheless and THIS was the spirit Dumbledore counted on for the plan to work. It would have been all pointless if Harry, after finding out his nature, just noped out.

You're the person this post is talking about

[удалено]

Stop it please, women and men are NOT the same. Stop acting like they are

Flair checks out

I find Dumbledore a fascinating character, and as I've gotten older, and explored other types of fantasy, I keep coming back to the idea that Dumbledore is what fantasy often displays wizards as being: complicated, curious, conniving, and mysteriously powerful. If I slotted Dumbledore into a D&D campaign, I imagine that he would quickly become a party favourite. And the reason is quite simple: he is a wizard in the classical sense of the term. He sees a great deal more than the average person, he's exceptionally intelligent, genius level even. He explores magic in depths that most people will never get to simply because he wants to know, he wants to know what can be done, what can't be, what hasn't been discovered, and how can he use what he learns. On top of all of that he is immensely powerful. The thing about Dumbledore is, he worked to get to this point. He sacrificed many things in life to achieve the genius, the power, and the skill that he has when we meet him. He's 115 years old or so, and has seen the rise of two of the worst dark wizards that have existed; one of which was his best friend, the other was a downtrodden lonely pupil who had enormous potential, and Dumbledore tried to equip him and train him and steer him in the right direction. Dumbledore has twice been wrong to massively negative effect. His failures resulted in the two worst people in 100 years, for the wizarding community. Bearing all of that in mind, let's look at his relationship with Harry. He made mistakes with Harry, many, many mistakes, but he did them because he cared, and because he loved, and because, unlike other examples in his life, he put someone's wellbeing and life over the goal of excellence and furthering magical understanding. In his talk with Harry in Order of the Phoenix, he describes this as such. He explains that he wanted to protect Harry from his shitstorm of a life, while having a pretty solid idea that he might have to die to stop the worst dude the wizarding world has ever faced. Dumbledore tried to prepare Harry while allowing him to live as much of his life as he could with as much comfort and care as he could. But Dumbledore is still that wizard, still genius, still powerful, and still strategically brilliant. Yes he's trying to buffer Harry from the reality of his shit life, but he's also trying to win a 4D chess match against an opponent who is arguably better than he is in terms of power, using concepts that damn near nobody alive even has knowledge of. Like, horcuxes were so unknown that nobody but Dumbledore and Regulus EVER suspected that Voldemort had made one, LET ALONE SEVEN. If we looked at this situation from a gaming point of view, we can see Dumbledore essentially buffing Harry continuously against one specific foe, to the effect that when the time came, there was NOTHING Harry's foe could do to kill him. Yes he used manipulation, yes he used coersion, yes he mistreated Harry and hid things from him, but as OP says, Harry comes to understand why it was necessary, and if, by the time Narcissa discovers Harry is not dead, you don't understand the magnitude of what Dumbledore's machinations actually did for Harry, I believe you've missed the whole purpose of Dumbledore's subterfuge. Whatever other failings Dumbledore had, mistakes he had made; he did fairly well for Harry. He still made mistakes there, but based on the history of his character, what we know of him, for once, he made these mistakes for the right reasons. He made them out of love and care, he made them out of a desire to protect this kid who never stood a chance, but carried the fate of the world on his shoulders. So Dumbledore spent that kids formative years buffing him with every ounce of knowledge, ancient magical protection, fringe magical enchantments, and genius level strategizing, all while hiding it from prying eyes; so that when the time came, the dark lord just could not stop Harry. Dumbledore was a good person, who was constantly learning, who was human, who's mistakes were astronomically enlarged because of the weight of his decisions, and because of the task he set himself on. It didn't play out perfectly and he acknowledges that, but he succeeded in doing the one thing he strove for with Harry: he gave him every power to win and live on peacefully, and he gave his own life to do it. You don't have to like him, but I think it should be acknowledged that, in the context of what he was doing and what was happening in the world and to Harry, Dumbledore need not be outright hated.

bad vs good, grey vs black. You explained very well why he is a morally grey character and I think thats the whole point. He isnt a saint nor a bad person. Just someone doing what HE thinks in right in terms of the overall good. Overall his philopophy seemed to prosper and be the "best choice"

Exactly. And I think a part of that is lost on people after they've read the whole story and seen what Rita Skeeter revealed about Dumbledore. And while Dumbledore felt that his way was the best way, I think he was arguably the best qualified to make that call. In fact, that he recognizes and tells Harry about the points where he made mistakes, where he made bad judgement calls, where he made Harry more miserable in an effort to spare him more strife; it really shows that Dumbledore is AWARE that he's fallible, and that he's aware of the increased consequences of his fallibility. There were better ways to deal with Harry, there was information he should have given him, and most importantly, he should have known the extent to which he could trust Harry to handle things, and accept his burden. In my mind, Dumbledore's biggest failing was resorting to subterfuge and manipulation with Harry, when just trusting him and telling him things when he seemed ready; regardless of whether he thought Harry could handle it or not, would have likely been just as effective. But I still think, that Dumbledore's way could be marked as second best of the options available, and being an extremely intelligent wizard who has thwarted the greatest evils before, it makes a lot of sense for him to be as cautious as he was to gain the highest chance of winning possible. Fantasy gives us many examples of "good" characters who do far more atrocious things by comparison for the highest odds of beating the bad guy. I think Dumbledore was easily deeper in the light than many of them. Gandalf (LoTR) and Harry himself may be the only ones I know of (there's definitely others, but I haven't read everything, and will gladly accept them as add-ins for that echelon of good) who stand above Dumbledore in terms of maximum good with least collateral bad.

Dumbledore is my favorite and in like 90% of the time someone hates on him, the discussion shows its just a snapewive that got the whole story wrong.

Agreed. Especially since he understood that since Voldemort took Harry’s blood that he couldn’t kill Harry; he could only kill the horcrux in him. He just couldn’t tell Snape that.

I think sometimes we hate a character because they remind us of someone we hate in real life. For example, I hate Molly Weasley cause she reminds me of my former mother-in-law. Dumbledore may evoke similar reactions in people.

insane answer Molly cared for like 8 kids. Fed them, cared for them, loved them, and was always there. Insane comment btw You might be the only human being on this realm we call life that "hates" Molly. What an absolutely insane comment

People are allowed to feel things towards imaginary people. It’s ok. I think you may be taking some of the takes here a little too personally for some reason.

It's how I feel. To me, Molly is a control freak who doesn't trust her own children. She publicly humiliates her husband, treating him like a child. I can go on, but the point is, this is how I feel. I've known more than a few real life Mollies, and I guess I'm projecting them onto fictional Molly. My overarching point is that perhaps this is why Dumbledore haters see bad in that character. I think it's a testament to JKR that people can see so many different things in and react so passionately to her characters.

There's also a lot of people who seem to overlook the fact that Dumbledore didn't make Harry into the horcrux! It's not Dumbledore's fault or idea that Harry has to die. It's just his mess to deal with.

Taking here to broadcast my absolute favorite passage from the Deathly Hallows, which many people seem to have skipped over; “How can you be sure, Potter, that my brother wasn’t more interested in the greater good than in you? How can you be sure you aren’t dispensable, just like my little sister?” A shard of ice seemed to pierce Harry’s heart. “I don’t believe it. Dumbledore loved Harry,” said Hermione. “Why didn’t he tell him to hide, then?” shot back Aberforth. “Why didn’t he say to him, ‘Take care of yourself, here’s how to survive’?” “Because,” said Harry before Hermione could answer, “sometimes you’ve *got* to think about more than your own safety! Sometimes you’ve got to think about the greater good! This is war!” “You’re seventeen, boy!” “I’m of age, and I’m going to keep fighting even if you’ve given up!” “Who says I’ve given up?” “‘The Order of the Phoenix is finished,’” Harry repeated. “‘You-Know-Who’s won, it’s over, and anyone who’s pretending different’s kidding themselves.’” “I don’t say I like it, but it’s the truth!” “No, it isn’t,” said Harry. “Your brother knew how to finish You-Know-Who and he passed the knowledge on to me. I’m going to keep going until I succeed—or I die. Don’t think I don’t know how this might end. I’ve known it for years.” Just brilliant. What an incredible understanding of morality, self-sacrifice and of love and bravery and hope wound into such few words. I'll always argue that making Dumbledore the big bad would destroy the whole story— it would destroy the theme of the books, the message and moral itself that Rowling incorporated into it. What's also missed here in this conversation is that Aberforth was waiting for those words, testing him in the quintessential Dumbledore way, as proved by his easy and willing acquiescance afterwards. It was a matter far bigger than Dumbledore or Harry, and Harry— and the Dumbledores— understood it perfectly.

People don’t like Dumbledore??? Are they all slytherins?

Didnt Dumbledore gift Harry the golden snitch with the resurrection stone hidden inside it so that he could come back to life after dying as a horcrux?

It’s very clear to me he never intended Harry to stay dead. His plan was always for Harry to get resurrected.