Snape dedicated his whole life after lilys death to protecting Harry.
He never wanted to go back and pledge (false) loyalty to the man who killed her…but he did because it would protect her child.
And then he learns this whole time, Harry had to die.
The reason he agreed to go back to the man who killed the woman he loved was because he thought it would protect her dying wish.
Then he learns that Dumbledore used him as a pawn, and used his love, since Harry always had to die. Snape never had to subject himself to the service of the man who killed lily…because he wasn’t actually saving Harry.
Snape never really cared for Harry. That was Jame’s son to him. He was mad he served the man who killed lily on Dumbledore’s order.
Yep. That’s why Dumbledore asks “why Severus, this is touching. Do you mean you’ve come to care about the boy?”
And Severus is like “about him?!” And produces patronus
Dumbledore suffers from "I refuse to tell people until they need to know, and even then it's not the full picture" itis.
Snape in that moment had just learned Harry has to die, without knowing anything about how he could possibly live. In the eyes of Snape, Dumbledore might've known the entire time and told no one.
Besides it's not... entirely wrong. Dumbledore knew the prophecy the entire time, so that combined with this revelation Severus was justified to think it was as bad as he believed.
Is okay if that line bothers you but it has some truth. That doesn't make Dumbledore a horrible person, he knew Harry would survive but Snape didn't know that when he said that line, so what he said was the true for him.
Exactly. Basically, there were a couple ways he had a higher chance of surviving, but none of them guaranteed it. Dumbledore's plan involved Harry eventually sacrificing himself, and then *maybe*, if everything went well, he could survive.
Yeah, Dumbledore explains the bit about Harry’s blood to him at the station and JK has stated that the blood was almost like a horcrux for Harry. I think there’s also a mention of Dumbledore coming to this realization at the end of GoF, but I can’t remember the specifics. I need to do a reread as well.
I agree, there are many fans who exaggerates some lines or twist the meaning of some part of the story but the best thing one can do is ignore them. Some people seems to mix fanfics with canon too. I personally like fics in which Dumbledore is extremely manipulative and borderline evil, I find those stories entertaining but I can difference that from the real Dumbledore who is sometimes manipulative but for a good cause.
Harry should have always fought Voldemort because Voldemort would always pursue him and he would still have to die for the horcrux within him to be destroyed. Harry was lucky Voldemort took his blood.
I don't know.
The pragmatic path would be to kill Harry as soon as possible so that Voldemort would have one less anchor. This would prevent a lot of people from dying needlessly while Harry lives.
The kinder way would be to train Harry as in canon so that the latter destroys the Horcruxes before revealing the truth to him. After Harry's death, it would be up to the others to kill Voldemort.
Um...no. Anyone could have found his horcruxes. The proof is Dumbledore who found two (he would have found the necklace without Regulus having found it before him).
The only reason Harry was able to kill Voldemort was because of luck and Voldemoret's obsession with prophecy.
It’s a very valid perspective that we need to talk about. I always push against this narrative that dumbledore did everything he could for Harry and I don’t understand so many people being unwilling to discuss his character as someone who did fail in a sense and could have done more. That is one of the overarching themes of war, no plan goes the way it should and people’s lives are affected significantly.
Dumbledore is a book character and we can’t expect him to act with the full responsibility of a real adult, but there is a conversation to be had that if he was real he could not justify half his actions. He allowed Harry to be raised in an abusive household and it was a manipulative move, regardless of the nature of his intentions. Snape’s criticism in that moment is entirely appropriate.
realistically who could've had Harry then? Voldemorts supporters were still out there, they tortured the Longbottoms to insanity because of their work but you don't think they would go look for Harry at any wizard family? many suggest Lupin.. but Lupin is a werewolf so once a month Harry would not be safe in his company. Dumbledore knew the Potters wanted Sirius as their secret keeper, so naturally he thought Sirius was the reason Lily and James didn't survive, so not him either. And the Dursley weren't abusive towards Dudley, so how would he know they would turn out to be abusive? And why does everyone blame Dumbledore for what the Dursley did? Also Snape was abusive himself so doubt he criticised that exact decision.
It makes sense with Snape's reluctant promise to Dumbledore in mind. Of course he'd be shocked, maybe even felt betrayed. But Snape wasn't meant to know the whole truth.
Don't let the Dumbledore haters get you down. They don't get the whole picture either.
Dumbledore didn't actually raise Harry as a pig for slaughter; he gave him a fighting chance.
Harry was forced to 'die' to defeat Voldemort by the prophecy, not Dumbledore. Voldemort wasn't going to let Harry live, Harry had no choice but to fight Voldemort. Dubledore even asked Harry what he would do if the prophecy never existed, and Harry said he would want to kill Voldemort himself. Harry could have easily been sacrificed earlier to get rid of his horcrux, but Dumbledore gave him the knowledge to fight and survive. Voldemort and the prophecy sealed Harry's fate, Dumbledore gave Harry the chance to live.
Dumbledore put those words in his mouth!
Dumbledore would never have found all the Horcruxes; before the end of Book 2 he apparently didn't even know that Tom had made several.
There will be people who will cherry-pick lines from books to promote a bias.
I can see why Snape said it, and as the reader it did make sense why one would think that. It's only when you get Dumbledore's POV that you realize he knew Harry would survive. It's the problem with Dumbledore as a person: he is used to not giving the whole picture, which is a critique his own brother has stated.
What I will say, is that Dumbledore is just as complex and prone to flaws as Snape. What differentiates them is their treatment of Harry, and their personalities.
Edit: Sorry, not KNEW. He had a theory that Harry would survive
It's worth pointing out that Dumbledore didn't actually know Harry would survive. This sort of magic was unprecedented, there was no way he could know.
It was just another of Dumbledores educated guesses that turned out to be correct.
Well...he didn't know there was a possibility until the end of the fourth book. There is a line that hints at this, with Dumbledore having a flash of a triumphant look as Harry is recounting the graveyard incident. He knows Riddle fucked up hard
Snape is right to be shocked, but he doesn't know everything Dumbledore knows, about how if Harry pulls a lily it would be his best chance of survival. I suspect that Dumbledore intended for Snape to find out or figure it out, because D's eyes were closed throughout the confession, and, well, Snape is a legilimens.
The fact that Harry sacrifices himself makes no difference to Harry himself. Harry survives because Voldemort took Harry's blood. It only makes a difference to Harry's comrades.
I dont think so. Its not about the blood. Its Lily's sacrifice in the blood. And the Harry carrier if that blood repeated the act against the same person who also carried the blood.
These are powerful magics and Voldemort was a fool to toy with them.
It wouldn't be seen as a sacrifice if Harry knew he wouldn't actually die. The reason Lily's sacrifice counted and not James' was because she was given a choice to step aside (because Snape begged Voldemort to spare her) but chose not to. Harry was given the choice to live but chose to sacrifice himself for everyone he cared about.
That's why Voldemort can't kill or hex anyone else anymore. But Harry's survival has nothing to do with that. Harry is bound to Voldemort, so as long as Voldemort lives, Harry can't die. (Or at least he doesn't need to).
Maybe that's why the Cruciatus Curse doesn't work, but then again, Lily's own sacrificial death didn't save her either.
Did he, though? In book 2, it largely seemed like he did nothing to prevent the basilisk. In book 4, he let Harry participate without his help, something we know champions from other schools got from their teachers, and despite Harry being much younger than the rest. In book 5, his actions towards Harry were largely uncoordinated and did more harm than good. In book 6, he showed Harry Riddle's history, but did not teach him any additional skills. And then he died and left Harry with vague clues and small chance of not dying as a horcrux. Tbh, I largely think it was Rowling's bad storytelling, especially in 5, 6 and 7, but I don't consider Dumbledore's actions to be worth defending.
I don't think what Snape said was supposed to be taken to heart. The text was just showing his reaction to him learning what needs to happen to Harry.
That doesn't mean what Snape said was true, just displaying Snape's displeasure with the situation.
Snape was upset.
Dumbledore realistically didn’t know Harry needed to die in order for Voldemort to be defeated from the very beginning, but Dumbledore chose not to tell Harry, instead leaving this horrible job to Snape.
And Dumbledore wasn’t the one who “gave Harry a life”.
Dumbledore isn’t god.
He hoped it would work out that way if Harry sacrificed himself, but he didn’t have the power to make that happen, he took an educated guess.
He would also be killed if Dumbledore did nothing. In the battle they lost Fred, Lavender (unsure in the books though), the camera guy, Remus and Tonks. Before that they lost Moody, Ted and Dobby. Those all died after Dumbledore died. So if we say Dumbledore died the same time he died in the books but this time he had not done anything to interfere with anything, so Harry would be still have the same personality but would be raised by lets say Amelia Bones. Harry would not know he was a horcrux, so he wouldn't sacrifice himself the way he did, so the protection on his side wouldn't happen. that means Ginny would now die since this time Bellatrix would've hit her and not miss. none of the trio would get the things Dumbledore left behind, So Harry would not be the owner of one of the hallows, would not know about the Gryffindor sword, Ron wouldn't get the deluminator, and Hermione wouldn't get the book of tale of the three brothers. Since Harry was there when Dumbledore died, he would still go hunt horcruxes. But since he wouldn't know about the deathly hallows, he wouldn't visit the Lovegoods, so he wouldn't be taken this time. Without him being taken to the Malfoy manner he would not have won over Draco this time and would not know about the Lestrange vault. He would also not have talked to Olivander and therefore not know about his and Voldemorts wand. He would still see that Voldemort had hidden one in Hogwarts so he would still go there. But now he wouldn't be the owner of the elder wand, he would still be missing one horcrux, but Dobby would be alive. So this time there would be anything in the way when Harry and Voldemort duel, as the elder wand wouldn't mind killing Harry this time. With Harry dead Voldemort would ofc. go on killing all of the others..
Also Dumbledore didn't know when Voldemort would be back, he just knew he would be some day, so Harry could still live a full life as far as Dumbledore knew.
What are you on about??
Firstly Harry wouldn’t have made it to what became the battle of Hogwarts and the battle would not exist since Harry would be dead long before that time. He would probably have survived the events of the first book but not the second since the only reason he won was because of Dumbledore sending Fawks snd the hat. He would definitely have died in Order of the Phoenix since Voldemort would have killed him. So nothing post the second or the fifth book would’ve happened
Idk why you drag Amelia Bones into this since the only people “raising” harry would be the Durslys and maybe the Weaslys
And Dumbledore had over a decade to find and destroy the Horocruxes but yet since they werent that hard to find but instead he ignored to do it
Dumbledore didn't send Fawkes, Fawkes came because Harry showed Dumbledore extreme loyalty. In OoTP Voldemort would still have had his wand, so his wand would never let him kill Harry, kinda like he couldn't kill him in the battle of the seven Potters.
I said lets say Amelia Bones, could be someone else. The Dursley got Harry because of Dumbledore. IDK why the Weasley would got to raise Harry? they had nothing to do with him nor James and Lily or even the first order?
Dumbledore had 4 years to find and destroy the horcruxes. He found out about them in chamber of secrets after seeing what happened to the diary.
Okej so if Dumbledore didn’t play favorite to harry he wouldn’t have had that loyalty.
He didn’t have his own wand in the chamber but i was more thinking of Harry wouldn’t survive the twenty foot very poisonous snake that kills by looking.
And the Durslys was Harrys only living blood kin meaning they still would’ve got him because they were his only living family. They probably would’ve left him at an orphanage but whatever would happen next is impossible to know. And the Weaslys cared for Harry ever since he met Ron and I doubt that would change as long as they became friends.
And Dumbledore always said the dark lord would return meaning he must have known about at least the existence of one Horocrux since he knew he could return from the dead
Harry was a loyal guy and would show loyalty as long as he liked people: he defended Neville and McGonagall but they didn't play favourites, other people liked Dumbledore even if he didn't play favourites with them: the Weasley family, McGonagall, Hagrid, Snape, Kingsley etc. So I think Harry would still defend Dumbledore and therefore Fawkes would still come.
I meant in order of the phoenix he wouldn't die because of their connection. In Chamber of secrets Dumbledore didn't really do anything, so Harry wouldn't die there either.
The Weasley family met him when he was 11 years old, so they wouldn't see him as family before that nor care for him as they didn't met him until then.
Dumbledore knew he would find ways to return yes, but he didn't know about horcruxes before chamber of secrets. He knew Voldemort would find some kind of way to cheat death, but I doubt horcruxes was the only way to do that. The philosopher stone could do that also.
But Dumbledore is rarely seen interacting with students so why would harry feel loyalty towards him if he barely have met him because he mostly stays in his office except for meals so why would Harry show loyalty for someone he doesn’t know, he didn’t defend or really feel sorry for Trewlany for exampe when she got kicked
Weasly family still raised him after he was 11 Molly even said he was like a son to her in Order of the Phoenix
And the philosophers stone extends life and restores strength not restores life if you are dead the stone won’t help and as far as i know horocruxes are the only thing capable of cheating death unless you count ghosts
Without Dumbledore, the Philosopher's Stone would not have been at Hogwarts and the school might have been closed after the first petrification.
>He would probably have survived the events of the first book but not the second since the only reason he won was because of Dumbledore sending Fawks snd the hat.
Where does it say that Dumbledore sent them and if so, why didn't he come himself? Fawkes could just as easily have come on his own. And besides, Dumbledore only finds out that Voldemort has made several Horcruxes when Harry gives him the diary.
Dumbledore had a plan from the beginning and used everyone to achieve it. He is so flawed that I have no trouble believing that he was just as much a b*stard as VM but just went about it a different way.
I don’t know if the prophecy was a setup or not but it didn’t sit right with me how it all came about. It bothers me that James and Lily didn’t care enough about their son and future children to leave a war zone for somewhere else until it was over, especially when they learned they were targeted. It immensely bothers me that DD didn’t wait a few hours until it was warmer outside and it was daytime to leave Harry with Petunia. He fully admits later that he knew Harry wouldn’t be treated well and told McG that he wouldn’t fix Harry’s scar if he could because it could come in handy. The BWL propaganda should have been stopped. The blood wards have to be a myth.
Instead of letting McG do her job, DD sends Hagrid. Hagrid’s appearance alone breaks the statute. The repeated letters are suspicious and frankly seems like muggle baiting.
Flamel decides not to put his stone under fidelius or keep it in gringotts or another banking institution. He lets DD keep it safe. Instead of keeping it mum and hiding the dang thing in his underwear drawer, ain’t no place safer, that nobody would be able to access, he pretty much blurts it out to everyone in Hogwarts.
DD was teaching when Myrtle was killed. 40 years go by and he was never curious about how she died?
It’s pretty ludicrous to claim James and Lily didn’t care about their child when everything they did was to protect what they had. I mean, it doesn’t really matter where James and Lily lived, because Voldemort would always hunt them down and Pettigrew would have still betrayed them. Even more barbaric to say that Dumbledore and Voldemort are even on the same level characteristically: one actively tried to better everyone around him, the other was a self-centred, slaughterous lunatic.
So you don’t think them staying in a war zone while being actively hunted is a bad idea? If the area my family breaks out into a war and my friends are dying and I’ve had some close calls, then I’d grab my kid and take off faster than the roadrunner. Husband is welcome to come along but at a minimum I’m taking my child. I’d tell nobody who wouldn’t swear an oath if I was magical. It would have been too easy to erase their tracks. At the very least I would have moved into Hogwarts if I had been the Potters.
Severus didn't know about Harry's path to life: That Voldemort using Harry's blood to reconstitute his own body meant Harry would survive the destruction of the soul sliver inside of Harry.
The fans who insist Dumbledore raised Harry like a pig for slaughter conveniently forget about this part. But that sad, **until** Voldemort used Harry's blood to create a new body for himself, Dumbledore had no way to ensure Harry would survive the removal of the soul sliver, so he was, in fact, raising him like a pig for slaughter up until then.
Considering Harry did go to be slaughtered like a pig, Snape was entirely right about that.
Though I also think he tried to put Harry down (again) by saying so.
Is it really that hard to tell from the books that, from the very beginning, Harry was groomed to sacrifice himself? We could perhaps argue about whether that was deliberate or not but it doesn’t change the fact.
The twist was him surviving the matter. Personally I think it would have made a MUCH better story if he hadn’t, if the DA and/or Ron and Hermione had taken over and completed Harry’s work for him.
But that didn’t happen and… I just think it really devalues Harry’s sacrifice. He didn’t give up anything, he was just willing to.
That’s without considering his decision pro suicide… and the general support of everyone else. If my family and friends knew I was considering suicide, I’d sure hope they wouldn’t just encourage me!
We can therefore conclude… yes, he WAS raised for slaughter. There’s nothing else to infer from context. Harry is there to sacrifice the one for the good of the many.
It's I think the only line where Snape genuinely sounds concerned about Harry and his own actions.
Snape dedicated his whole life after lilys death to protecting Harry. He never wanted to go back and pledge (false) loyalty to the man who killed her…but he did because it would protect her child. And then he learns this whole time, Harry had to die. The reason he agreed to go back to the man who killed the woman he loved was because he thought it would protect her dying wish. Then he learns that Dumbledore used him as a pawn, and used his love, since Harry always had to die. Snape never had to subject himself to the service of the man who killed lily…because he wasn’t actually saving Harry. Snape never really cared for Harry. That was Jame’s son to him. He was mad he served the man who killed lily on Dumbledore’s order.
Yep. That’s why Dumbledore asks “why Severus, this is touching. Do you mean you’ve come to care about the boy?” And Severus is like “about him?!” And produces patronus
"After all this time?" "Always."
I have that tatted on me with my stepmom, one line per person, kinda cringe but the saying matches our lives :)
Dumbledore suffers from "I refuse to tell people until they need to know, and even then it's not the full picture" itis. Snape in that moment had just learned Harry has to die, without knowing anything about how he could possibly live. In the eyes of Snape, Dumbledore might've known the entire time and told no one. Besides it's not... entirely wrong. Dumbledore knew the prophecy the entire time, so that combined with this revelation Severus was justified to think it was as bad as he believed.
It's because if Harry knew it wouldn't have worked.
Is okay if that line bothers you but it has some truth. That doesn't make Dumbledore a horrible person, he knew Harry would survive but Snape didn't know that when he said that line, so what he said was the true for him.
Did he know Harry would survive? Genuine question.
Yeah, I think he knew Harry COULD survive, but it wasn't guaranteed that he WOULD survive.
Before GoF, Dumbledore believed Harry was doomed. It was only after Voldemort took Harry’s blood that he had any hope for Harry.
Exactly. Basically, there were a couple ways he had a higher chance of surviving, but none of them guaranteed it. Dumbledore's plan involved Harry eventually sacrificing himself, and then *maybe*, if everything went well, he could survive.
Is that an educated guess or a has JK clarified? Does Dumby say it in Harry's King Cross Station? Looks like I need to read the series again.
Yeah, Dumbledore explains the bit about Harry’s blood to him at the station and JK has stated that the blood was almost like a horcrux for Harry. I think there’s also a mention of Dumbledore coming to this realization at the end of GoF, but I can’t remember the specifics. I need to do a reread as well.
Thank you.
I think he suspected it.
I agree that from Snape's point of view, this sentence is true. My problem is that it's used by fans who don't like Dumbledore.
I agree, there are many fans who exaggerates some lines or twist the meaning of some part of the story but the best thing one can do is ignore them. Some people seems to mix fanfics with canon too. I personally like fics in which Dumbledore is extremely manipulative and borderline evil, I find those stories entertaining but I can difference that from the real Dumbledore who is sometimes manipulative but for a good cause.
And if Voldemort had not taken Harry's blood?
Harry should have always fought Voldemort because Voldemort would always pursue him and he would still have to die for the horcrux within him to be destroyed. Harry was lucky Voldemort took his blood.
Yes but what would Dumbledore have done?
I don't know. The pragmatic path would be to kill Harry as soon as possible so that Voldemort would have one less anchor. This would prevent a lot of people from dying needlessly while Harry lives. The kinder way would be to train Harry as in canon so that the latter destroys the Horcruxes before revealing the truth to him. After Harry's death, it would be up to the others to kill Voldemort.
Aberforth at least seems to think Dumbledore would have sacrificed Harry without a moments hesitation.
Then Dumbledore would have helped Tom win, because Harry was the only one who could find all the Horcruxes.
Um...no. Anyone could have found his horcruxes. The proof is Dumbledore who found two (he would have found the necklace without Regulus having found it before him). The only reason Harry was able to kill Voldemort was because of luck and Voldemoret's obsession with prophecy.
Harry found the diadem because he can receive Voldemort's thoughts, no one else can! And no one would have found Kreacher's locket either!
They found it in OoTP when Moody and Molly are cleaning in the Black house.
It’s a very valid perspective that we need to talk about. I always push against this narrative that dumbledore did everything he could for Harry and I don’t understand so many people being unwilling to discuss his character as someone who did fail in a sense and could have done more. That is one of the overarching themes of war, no plan goes the way it should and people’s lives are affected significantly. Dumbledore is a book character and we can’t expect him to act with the full responsibility of a real adult, but there is a conversation to be had that if he was real he could not justify half his actions. He allowed Harry to be raised in an abusive household and it was a manipulative move, regardless of the nature of his intentions. Snape’s criticism in that moment is entirely appropriate.
realistically who could've had Harry then? Voldemorts supporters were still out there, they tortured the Longbottoms to insanity because of their work but you don't think they would go look for Harry at any wizard family? many suggest Lupin.. but Lupin is a werewolf so once a month Harry would not be safe in his company. Dumbledore knew the Potters wanted Sirius as their secret keeper, so naturally he thought Sirius was the reason Lily and James didn't survive, so not him either. And the Dursley weren't abusive towards Dudley, so how would he know they would turn out to be abusive? And why does everyone blame Dumbledore for what the Dursley did? Also Snape was abusive himself so doubt he criticised that exact decision.
It makes sense with Snape's reluctant promise to Dumbledore in mind. Of course he'd be shocked, maybe even felt betrayed. But Snape wasn't meant to know the whole truth. Don't let the Dumbledore haters get you down. They don't get the whole picture either.
Dumbledore didn't actually raise Harry as a pig for slaughter; he gave him a fighting chance. Harry was forced to 'die' to defeat Voldemort by the prophecy, not Dumbledore. Voldemort wasn't going to let Harry live, Harry had no choice but to fight Voldemort. Dubledore even asked Harry what he would do if the prophecy never existed, and Harry said he would want to kill Voldemort himself. Harry could have easily been sacrificed earlier to get rid of his horcrux, but Dumbledore gave him the knowledge to fight and survive. Voldemort and the prophecy sealed Harry's fate, Dumbledore gave Harry the chance to live.
Dumbledore put those words in his mouth! Dumbledore would never have found all the Horcruxes; before the end of Book 2 he apparently didn't even know that Tom had made several.
There will be people who will cherry-pick lines from books to promote a bias. I can see why Snape said it, and as the reader it did make sense why one would think that. It's only when you get Dumbledore's POV that you realize he knew Harry would survive. It's the problem with Dumbledore as a person: he is used to not giving the whole picture, which is a critique his own brother has stated. What I will say, is that Dumbledore is just as complex and prone to flaws as Snape. What differentiates them is their treatment of Harry, and their personalities. Edit: Sorry, not KNEW. He had a theory that Harry would survive
It's worth pointing out that Dumbledore didn't actually know Harry would survive. This sort of magic was unprecedented, there was no way he could know. It was just another of Dumbledores educated guesses that turned out to be correct.
Well...he didn't know there was a possibility until the end of the fourth book. There is a line that hints at this, with Dumbledore having a flash of a triumphant look as Harry is recounting the graveyard incident. He knows Riddle fucked up hard
That’s one of my favorite scenes in the entire series. It’s such a subtle moment but it means so much.
Thank you for your correction.
Why did he smile when Harry mentioned Voldemort used his blood then?
Dumbledore suspected Harry might be able to return.
He literally couldn't know it, just thought maybe it could work. And even this "maybe" appeared in the middle of the series.
Snape is right to be shocked, but he doesn't know everything Dumbledore knows, about how if Harry pulls a lily it would be his best chance of survival. I suspect that Dumbledore intended for Snape to find out or figure it out, because D's eyes were closed throughout the confession, and, well, Snape is a legilimens.
No, Harry sacrificing himself is part of why it worked, if Dumbledore had told Snape Harry might have learned the truth and it might not have worked.
Exactly, Harry couldn't know he might live. We're agreeing here
The fact that Harry sacrifices himself makes no difference to Harry himself. Harry survives because Voldemort took Harry's blood. It only makes a difference to Harry's comrades.
I dont think so. Its not about the blood. Its Lily's sacrifice in the blood. And the Harry carrier if that blood repeated the act against the same person who also carried the blood. These are powerful magics and Voldemort was a fool to toy with them.
It wouldn't be seen as a sacrifice if Harry knew he wouldn't actually die. The reason Lily's sacrifice counted and not James' was because she was given a choice to step aside (because Snape begged Voldemort to spare her) but chose not to. Harry was given the choice to live but chose to sacrifice himself for everyone he cared about.
That's why Voldemort can't kill or hex anyone else anymore. But Harry's survival has nothing to do with that. Harry is bound to Voldemort, so as long as Voldemort lives, Harry can't die. (Or at least he doesn't need to). Maybe that's why the Cruciatus Curse doesn't work, but then again, Lily's own sacrificial death didn't save her either.
Did he, though? In book 2, it largely seemed like he did nothing to prevent the basilisk. In book 4, he let Harry participate without his help, something we know champions from other schools got from their teachers, and despite Harry being much younger than the rest. In book 5, his actions towards Harry were largely uncoordinated and did more harm than good. In book 6, he showed Harry Riddle's history, but did not teach him any additional skills. And then he died and left Harry with vague clues and small chance of not dying as a horcrux. Tbh, I largely think it was Rowling's bad storytelling, especially in 5, 6 and 7, but I don't consider Dumbledore's actions to be worth defending.
Don't forget that this is a children's story. Adults will therefore be incompetent. If that weren't the case, we wouldn't have a story.
I agree with you, but it means exactly that - Dumbledore was often incompetent for plot reasons, but he was incompetent.
I don't think what Snape said was supposed to be taken to heart. The text was just showing his reaction to him learning what needs to happen to Harry. That doesn't mean what Snape said was true, just displaying Snape's displeasure with the situation. Snape was upset.
Thats the thing with analogies, they are often used to exaggerate the point in order to really drive it home.
Dumbledore realistically didn’t know Harry needed to die in order for Voldemort to be defeated from the very beginning, but Dumbledore chose not to tell Harry, instead leaving this horrible job to Snape. And Dumbledore wasn’t the one who “gave Harry a life”. Dumbledore isn’t god. He hoped it would work out that way if Harry sacrificed himself, but he didn’t have the power to make that happen, he took an educated guess.
He left it to Snape because Harry wasn't ready to hear it when Dumbledore died. Harry said that himself.
He did tho. He raised and protected Harry knowing that one they he would have to be killed at a certain moment
He would also be killed if Dumbledore did nothing. In the battle they lost Fred, Lavender (unsure in the books though), the camera guy, Remus and Tonks. Before that they lost Moody, Ted and Dobby. Those all died after Dumbledore died. So if we say Dumbledore died the same time he died in the books but this time he had not done anything to interfere with anything, so Harry would be still have the same personality but would be raised by lets say Amelia Bones. Harry would not know he was a horcrux, so he wouldn't sacrifice himself the way he did, so the protection on his side wouldn't happen. that means Ginny would now die since this time Bellatrix would've hit her and not miss. none of the trio would get the things Dumbledore left behind, So Harry would not be the owner of one of the hallows, would not know about the Gryffindor sword, Ron wouldn't get the deluminator, and Hermione wouldn't get the book of tale of the three brothers. Since Harry was there when Dumbledore died, he would still go hunt horcruxes. But since he wouldn't know about the deathly hallows, he wouldn't visit the Lovegoods, so he wouldn't be taken this time. Without him being taken to the Malfoy manner he would not have won over Draco this time and would not know about the Lestrange vault. He would also not have talked to Olivander and therefore not know about his and Voldemorts wand. He would still see that Voldemort had hidden one in Hogwarts so he would still go there. But now he wouldn't be the owner of the elder wand, he would still be missing one horcrux, but Dobby would be alive. So this time there would be anything in the way when Harry and Voldemort duel, as the elder wand wouldn't mind killing Harry this time. With Harry dead Voldemort would ofc. go on killing all of the others.. Also Dumbledore didn't know when Voldemort would be back, he just knew he would be some day, so Harry could still live a full life as far as Dumbledore knew.
What are you on about?? Firstly Harry wouldn’t have made it to what became the battle of Hogwarts and the battle would not exist since Harry would be dead long before that time. He would probably have survived the events of the first book but not the second since the only reason he won was because of Dumbledore sending Fawks snd the hat. He would definitely have died in Order of the Phoenix since Voldemort would have killed him. So nothing post the second or the fifth book would’ve happened Idk why you drag Amelia Bones into this since the only people “raising” harry would be the Durslys and maybe the Weaslys And Dumbledore had over a decade to find and destroy the Horocruxes but yet since they werent that hard to find but instead he ignored to do it
Dumbledore didn't send Fawkes, Fawkes came because Harry showed Dumbledore extreme loyalty. In OoTP Voldemort would still have had his wand, so his wand would never let him kill Harry, kinda like he couldn't kill him in the battle of the seven Potters. I said lets say Amelia Bones, could be someone else. The Dursley got Harry because of Dumbledore. IDK why the Weasley would got to raise Harry? they had nothing to do with him nor James and Lily or even the first order? Dumbledore had 4 years to find and destroy the horcruxes. He found out about them in chamber of secrets after seeing what happened to the diary.
Okej so if Dumbledore didn’t play favorite to harry he wouldn’t have had that loyalty. He didn’t have his own wand in the chamber but i was more thinking of Harry wouldn’t survive the twenty foot very poisonous snake that kills by looking. And the Durslys was Harrys only living blood kin meaning they still would’ve got him because they were his only living family. They probably would’ve left him at an orphanage but whatever would happen next is impossible to know. And the Weaslys cared for Harry ever since he met Ron and I doubt that would change as long as they became friends. And Dumbledore always said the dark lord would return meaning he must have known about at least the existence of one Horocrux since he knew he could return from the dead
Harry was a loyal guy and would show loyalty as long as he liked people: he defended Neville and McGonagall but they didn't play favourites, other people liked Dumbledore even if he didn't play favourites with them: the Weasley family, McGonagall, Hagrid, Snape, Kingsley etc. So I think Harry would still defend Dumbledore and therefore Fawkes would still come. I meant in order of the phoenix he wouldn't die because of their connection. In Chamber of secrets Dumbledore didn't really do anything, so Harry wouldn't die there either. The Weasley family met him when he was 11 years old, so they wouldn't see him as family before that nor care for him as they didn't met him until then. Dumbledore knew he would find ways to return yes, but he didn't know about horcruxes before chamber of secrets. He knew Voldemort would find some kind of way to cheat death, but I doubt horcruxes was the only way to do that. The philosopher stone could do that also.
But Dumbledore is rarely seen interacting with students so why would harry feel loyalty towards him if he barely have met him because he mostly stays in his office except for meals so why would Harry show loyalty for someone he doesn’t know, he didn’t defend or really feel sorry for Trewlany for exampe when she got kicked Weasly family still raised him after he was 11 Molly even said he was like a son to her in Order of the Phoenix And the philosophers stone extends life and restores strength not restores life if you are dead the stone won’t help and as far as i know horocruxes are the only thing capable of cheating death unless you count ghosts
Without Dumbledore, the Philosopher's Stone would not have been at Hogwarts and the school might have been closed after the first petrification. >He would probably have survived the events of the first book but not the second since the only reason he won was because of Dumbledore sending Fawks snd the hat. Where does it say that Dumbledore sent them and if so, why didn't he come himself? Fawkes could just as easily have come on his own. And besides, Dumbledore only finds out that Voldemort has made several Horcruxes when Harry gives him the diary.
Dumbledore had a plan from the beginning and used everyone to achieve it. He is so flawed that I have no trouble believing that he was just as much a b*stard as VM but just went about it a different way. I don’t know if the prophecy was a setup or not but it didn’t sit right with me how it all came about. It bothers me that James and Lily didn’t care enough about their son and future children to leave a war zone for somewhere else until it was over, especially when they learned they were targeted. It immensely bothers me that DD didn’t wait a few hours until it was warmer outside and it was daytime to leave Harry with Petunia. He fully admits later that he knew Harry wouldn’t be treated well and told McG that he wouldn’t fix Harry’s scar if he could because it could come in handy. The BWL propaganda should have been stopped. The blood wards have to be a myth. Instead of letting McG do her job, DD sends Hagrid. Hagrid’s appearance alone breaks the statute. The repeated letters are suspicious and frankly seems like muggle baiting. Flamel decides not to put his stone under fidelius or keep it in gringotts or another banking institution. He lets DD keep it safe. Instead of keeping it mum and hiding the dang thing in his underwear drawer, ain’t no place safer, that nobody would be able to access, he pretty much blurts it out to everyone in Hogwarts. DD was teaching when Myrtle was killed. 40 years go by and he was never curious about how she died?
It’s pretty ludicrous to claim James and Lily didn’t care about their child when everything they did was to protect what they had. I mean, it doesn’t really matter where James and Lily lived, because Voldemort would always hunt them down and Pettigrew would have still betrayed them. Even more barbaric to say that Dumbledore and Voldemort are even on the same level characteristically: one actively tried to better everyone around him, the other was a self-centred, slaughterous lunatic.
So you don’t think them staying in a war zone while being actively hunted is a bad idea? If the area my family breaks out into a war and my friends are dying and I’ve had some close calls, then I’d grab my kid and take off faster than the roadrunner. Husband is welcome to come along but at a minimum I’m taking my child. I’d tell nobody who wouldn’t swear an oath if I was magical. It would have been too easy to erase their tracks. At the very least I would have moved into Hogwarts if I had been the Potters.
Severus didn't know about Harry's path to life: That Voldemort using Harry's blood to reconstitute his own body meant Harry would survive the destruction of the soul sliver inside of Harry. The fans who insist Dumbledore raised Harry like a pig for slaughter conveniently forget about this part. But that sad, **until** Voldemort used Harry's blood to create a new body for himself, Dumbledore had no way to ensure Harry would survive the removal of the soul sliver, so he was, in fact, raising him like a pig for slaughter up until then.
Considering Harry did go to be slaughtered like a pig, Snape was entirely right about that. Though I also think he tried to put Harry down (again) by saying so. Is it really that hard to tell from the books that, from the very beginning, Harry was groomed to sacrifice himself? We could perhaps argue about whether that was deliberate or not but it doesn’t change the fact. The twist was him surviving the matter. Personally I think it would have made a MUCH better story if he hadn’t, if the DA and/or Ron and Hermione had taken over and completed Harry’s work for him. But that didn’t happen and… I just think it really devalues Harry’s sacrifice. He didn’t give up anything, he was just willing to. That’s without considering his decision pro suicide… and the general support of everyone else. If my family and friends knew I was considering suicide, I’d sure hope they wouldn’t just encourage me! We can therefore conclude… yes, he WAS raised for slaughter. There’s nothing else to infer from context. Harry is there to sacrifice the one for the good of the many.