The Life and Lies of Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore Read online

  Make no mistake: Dumbledore was Machiavellian. He did what he believed needed to be done in order to defeat Voldemort. He fought for the greater good. In the course of this battle, he behaved ruthlessly. He was incredibly cruel to Snape, and when necessary, he did plan Harry’s death. Rita Skeeter calls the relationship between Harry and Dumbledore “unhealthy, even sinister.” (DH27)

  But Dumbledore’s Machiavellian tendencies did have a limit, and that limit was Harry. The sensible and utilitarian thing to do would have been to allow Harry to sacrifice himself, to die if need be, in order for Voldemort to be defeated. And although Dumbledore knew that must happen eventually, he struggled against it in every way he could. He procrastinated, he delayed things, he set up schemes to give Harry a better chance of survival. And luckily for all involved, Harry did indeed survive.

  Evaluating the morality of Dumbledore’s actions, now that they’re clear, will have to be undertaken by every reader individually. I look forward to debating it, but I will leave you with a verdict from three parties that are very invested in Albus Dumbledore.

  First and foremost, J.K. Rowling. In 2008, Jo did an interview with Adeel Amini, where she had this to say about her newly controversial headmaster: “He’s an innately good man.”

  Second, Harry Potter. Of those still alive, he has perhaps suffered the most due to Dumbledore. And in many ways, his relationship with the headmaster mirrored the fandom’s perception of Dumbledore: we spent our formative years believing him to be a paragon of virtue, but after Deathly Hallows, we were filled with anger and a sense of betrayal. For Harry, the turning point was the chapter “King’s Cross,” where Harry acknowledged the awful things Dumbledore did, yet forgave him.

  Harry’s verdict on Dumbledore comes to us in the Epilogue (DH753). He has named his son Albus. Not Sirius, who’s relegated to a middle name. Not Remus, who makes no appearance in Harry’s brood. Albus. There can be no higher token of Harry’s esteem.

  Finally, I offer my own verdict, because I now know where I stand on Dumbledore’s morality.

  The practical (more Ravenclaw) side of me is appalled by Dumbledore’s dangerous sentimentality. Dumbledore let people die, he gambled the entire future of the wizarding world on keeping one boy alive and happy just a little bit longer. Thinking about it logically, this is horrible and I should hate Dumbledore all the more for it.

  But I can’t bring myself to hate Dumbledore now, because this just proves his love for Harry. The fact that Dumbledore loved Harry so much, that he was willing to risk everything because he cared about Harry, is something worth admiring in my opinion. It shows that Dumbledore is human after all and exemplifies the virtues of love that he always extolled.

  Much like Harry, all I wanted in Deathly Hallows was proof that Dumbledore actually cared about something other than his greater good—that there was some shred left of the benevolent wizard we thought we knew in the first six books. So after many confusing years trying to puzzle it out, crafting this book has been like my own King’s Cross, as I hope reading it may be for even a few of you. Once I lay Dumbledore’s cards on the table, stripped of salacious gossip and unfounded assumptions, I could acknowledge his faults and forgive them—returning to love Dumbledore almost as much as when I first wept for him in Half-Blood Prince.

  “In other words, I acted exactly as Voldemort expects we fools who love to act.”

  —Albus Dumbledore (OP838)

  Appendix A:

  The Timeline

  Figuring out dates in Harry Potter can seem a touch futile, since Rowling has often confessed she’s no great shakes at math. However, certain timelines are significant enough for her to have paid attention; among those is Voldemort’s. The timeline of who’s Headmaster of Hogwarts factors into this significantly, so it appears Rowling was detailed enough for us to craft a timeline.

  Most importantly, we should figure out when Dumbledore became Headmaster. Through several clues, we can pinpoint the start of his tenure at December 1956. McGonagall says that she will have been teaching Transfiguration for “Thirty-nine years this December,” (OP321) in 1995. So she started teaching in December 1956. This doubtlessly coincided with Dumbledore, the previous Transfiguration teacher, leaving the post, presumably by becoming Headmaster.

  This fits in with the time-table around Voldemort’s visit to Hogwarts to ask for the D.A.D.A. position. In the flashback, Voldemort says, “I heard that you had become headmaster,” (HBP441), indicating this was a recent appointment. We are told that this is “ten years” after Tom Riddle murdered Hepzibah Smith (HBP440). Tom Riddle graduated Hogwarts in summer of 1945, so if we assume he worked at Borgin and Burkes for a year or so, that would place this visit in the winter of 1956-1957, just after Dumbledore became Headmaster.

  As an aside: that means that Voldemort spent about fourteen years consolidating his power after making his fifth Horcrux (the diadem) and hiding it at Hogwarts, before fully unleashing his reign of terror. When he falls in October 1981, Dumbledore says, “We’ve had precious little to celebrate for eleven years.” So Voldemort was wreaking havoc from 1970 onwards.

  Back to the headmasters. We know that Armando Dippet was Dumbledore’s immediate predecessor. Since he was at Hogwarts during Riddle’s tenure, he was Headmaster from at least the mid-1930s onwards. However, we also know that he put Professor Kettleburn on probation sixty-two times (TBB39). Let us assume that Dippet put Kettleburn on probation twice a year on average (which is still quite impressive!). That would give Dippet a tenure as Headmaster of 31 years, meaning he would have become Headmaster in 1925. Of course, it could have been quite a bit earlier, since Dippet is portrayed as very old, but we can be reasonably sure he started no later than the mid-1920s.

  We can go back further, and ask who was Armando Dippet’s predecessor? All signs point to it being Phineas Nigellus Black. Phineas Nigellus’s dates from the Black Family Tree fit perfectly. His date of death is given as 1925—which is exactly the year we’ve deduced Dippet became Headmaster! That seems like no coincidence. Moreover, if Phineas was born in 1847, he would likely be the Headmaster preceding Dippet; otherwise, he would have been a very young Headmaster.53

  We can now create a thorough list of the Heads in the twentieth century:

  Late 19th/early 20th century—1925: Phineas Nigellus Black

  1925—1956: Armando Dippet

  1956—1997: Albus Dumbledore

  1996: Dolores Umbridge (Disputed)

  1997—1998: Severus Snape

  1998—present: Minerva McGonagall

  The other question that often comes up is when Dumbledore was born. Different apocryphal sources give different answers, while the published books are silent on the matter, which indicates Rowling never thought it was relevant enough to think through. So we’ll leave that one well enough alone.

  Appendix B:

  Dumbledore’s Most Puzzling Lie

  I keep having issues with Dumbledore’s conversation with Harry at the end of Sorcerer’s Stone. Dumbledore promises, “I shall answer your questions unless I have a very good reason not to, in which case I beg you'll forgive me. I shall not, of course, lie.” (SS298)

  He then proceeds to not only omit quite a few relevant details, but does tell an outright lie: “[Y]our father did something Snape could never forgive. [. . .] He saved his life. [. . .] Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt. . . . I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year because he felt that would make him and your father even. Then he could go back to hating your father's memory in peace. . . .” (SS300)

  While Snape’s true motivation obviously was not Dumbledore’s secret to tell, this whopper seems like a singularly bad idea. It abated Harry’s curiosity for two years, but the truth eventually surfaced and it was not pleasant for anybody.

  This was also rather inconsistent with Dumbledore’s modus operandi, which was to tell half-truths or simply withhold information. Especially considering Dumbledore just set a precedent for wi
thholding information, regarding Voldemort’s motivation for attacking Harry, he could have just said, “No comment. Next question.”

  The only theory I have come across is Theowyn’s, in their essay that shares a title with this book (it really is a good title!). Theowyn claims that Dumbledore told this lie to encourage the animosity between Snape and Harry, as their antagonism gave Dumbledore more control over both of them. I don’t buy that, because Theowyn’s reading of Dumbledore is incredibly sinister; in fact, it’s probably the harshest analysis of Dumbledore that I’ve read.

  However, I’m at a loss to offer an alternative theory. I leave this to you, dear reader, and beg you to let me know of anything you come up with.

  Appendix C:

  Dumbledore as Death

  Many years after Deathly Hallows was released, when it seemed the fandom was slowing down, a new theory began making the rounds, eventually reaching the pinnacle for fan theories: Jo Rowling’s Twitter. When a fan named Abbie Owen-Jones asked Jo what her favorite theory was in 2015, Jo replied, “Dumbledore as death. It's a beautiful theory and it fits.”

  Spearheading the discussion about this theory since then is Andrew Sims, who laid it out beautifully in an article on Hypable, and has since discussed it on MuggleCast #358 (which led to insightful comments on MuggleCast’s Patreon). I would be remiss not to include this theory in a book about Dumbledore, so here is a breakdown.

  The theory posits that The Tale of Three Brothers is a parallel to the events of the Harry Potter series. The trio that Harry once termed “the abandoned boys” (DH697) represent the three brothers of the tale; with Dumbledore serving as Death. Whether deliberate or not on Jo’s part, there is a beautiful symmetry here.

  The Three Brothers

  Voldemort represents the oldest brother, Antioch Peverell, who received the Elder Wand from Death. “So the oldest brother, who was a combative man, asked for a wand more powerful than any in existence: a wand that must always win duels for its owner, a wand worthy of a wizard who had conquered Death!” (DH407) Crucially, Voldemort actually uses that exact turn of phrase when he is resurrected: “You know my goal—to conquer death.” (GF653) Like the oldest brother, Voldemort is a combative man seeking the most powerful wand.

  “The first brother [. . .] sought out a fellow wizard with whom he had a quarrel. Naturally, with the Elder Wand as his weapon, he could not fail to win the duel that followed. Leaving his enemy dead upon the floor, the oldest brother proceeded to an inn, where he boasted loudly of the powerful wand he had snatched from Death himself, and of how it made him invincible.” (DH408)

  Voldemort, too, seeks out the wizard with whom he has a quarrel: Harry. He leaves Harry dead on the floor at first, then returns to Hogwarts, boasting loudly of how he triumphed over Harry Potter. But his arrogance proves his undoing, as (like Antioch) he is killed that very night.

  Severus Snape represents the middle brother, Cadmus Peverell, who received the Resurrection Stone from Death. The key similarity here is a shared longing for a long-lost love. When Cadmus uses the Stone, “the figure of the girl he had once hoped to marry, before her untimely death, appeared at once before him.” (DH409) Snape, too, is consumed with longing for a girl he loved before her untimely death: Lily Evans.

  Harry Potter represents the youngest brother, Ignotus Peverell, who received the Invisibility Cloak from Death. “The youngest brother was the humblest and also the wisest of the brothers” (DH408)—as Harry certainly is of the abandoned boys. And like Ignotus, Harry is the only one of the three to evade death—living a long, full life, with sons that he doubtless bequeathed the Cloak to one day.

  Death

  That’s well and good, but where does Dumbledore come in?

  Like Death, Dumbledore was instrumental in distributing the Hallows to the brothers. Voldemort literally took the Elder Wand out of Dumbledore’s dead hands. And like Death, Dumbledore gave the Invisibility Cloak to Harry in Sorcerer’s Stone. But the interesting one is Snape, who never received the Resurrection Stone. Dumbledore may not have given him the Stone, but he replicated its effects for Snape. When he charged Snape with protecting Harry, he provided Snape with a poor imitation of the woman he loved: her son, who may have her eyes and her “deepest nature,” (DH684) but looks mostly like Snape’s enemy.

  We are given another subtle clue by the fact that Voldemort fears death above all else.54 And ever since the first book, everyone keeps saying that “Dumbledore was the only wizard Voldemort had ever feared.” This is said by Hermione (SS260), Bill Weasley (OP92), twice by Harry (GF679/HBP72), and it even lends itself to the title of Order of the Phoenix chapter 36. The conflation of Dumbledore with Death renders these statements doubly true: Dumbledore is the only one Voldemort ever feared because he is Death, and Voldemort’s worst fear is death.

  Dumbledore was also the key orchestrator of the deaths of each of the abandoned boys. He devoted all the last years of his life to destroying Voldemort, and in the end, his plan succeeded. As we discussed in Chapter 6, Dumbledore painted a target on Snape’s back by asking Snape to kill him; Snape’s death at Voldemort’s hands can be attributed to Dumbledore. And Dumbledore’s final master plan revolved around Harry laying down his life, which Harry did because of what Dumbledore said in The Prince’s Tale.

  But note the difference: where Snape and especially Voldemort greeted death unwillingly, Harry made the choice to sacrifice his life. “The youngest brother finally took off the Cloak of Invisibility and gave it to his son. And then he greeted Death as an old friend.” (DH409) Right before Harry is hit by the Killing Curse, he “pulled off the Invisibility Cloak.” (DH703) And then Harry greets Dumbledore as an old friend in King’s Cross.

  The theory is incredibly elegant, and it fits the text very well. It’s incredibly exciting that new Potter scholarship like this is still being developed and will continue to be for many years to come. So in light of this, I thank you for reading a book all about Death. Let us go together gladly, and, equals, continue the discussion about Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore.

  Bibliography

  As I said in my introduction, this book is built upon the foundation of all the Harry Potter essays I read over the course of fifteen years of fandom. I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the writers who put their cleverness into the essays at The Lexicon, The Leaky Cauldron, and mighty MuggleNet. Throughout my teenage years, I read all the essays posted on those websites voraciously—naturally, I wish I’d kept better track of the stuff I read. But these are the best pieces I could recall about Albus Dumbledore, and I highly recommend reading all of them to anyone interested in further examining this fascinating character.

  Also, anyone looking for a comprehensive fictional biography of Albus Dumbledore would do well to visit his page on The Harry Potter Lexicon:. The page is useful for both fast facts and for insightful analysis (like the etymology of his name, for example).

  This book was always meant to generate further conversation, and I’m thrilled to say that it already has. Lorrie Kim wrote an insightful series of chapter-by-chapter responses to this book’s first edition on her blog!

  Post-Deathly Hallows Era

  Josie Kearns; “Philosopher’s Stone—Dumbledore’s Perspective”

  Josie Kearns is one of the foremost essayists of the post-Deathly Hallows era, and her entire website (hp-companion.com) is worth reading through for analysis of the seven books. I tend to agree with her on a lot of what Dumbledore was scheming. However, she tends to credit the characters with knowing, deducing, and orchestrating much more than I do. In her essay on Sorcerer’s Stone, she reaches the same end goal I do for Dumbledore but theorizes that Dumbledore knew Quirrell was possessed from the get-go and set traps accordingly.

  Josie Kearns; “What Did Dobby Know?”

  This essay does not pertain to Dumbledore per se, but it does explain what Lucius was up to during Chamber of Secrets, which helps us understand why that tripped Dumbledore up.

  Josie Ke
arns; “Needing More Time”

  Josie’s perspective on the climax of Prisoner of Azkaban is that Dumbledore pretty much knew everything going on the entire time.

  Josie Kearns; “A Very Bad Year for Albus Dumbledore (and it’s all Snape’s fault)”

  Probably my favorite HP essay, this lays out why Dumbledore is at a loss during Goblet of Fire. It illustrates how the breakdown in communication between Snape and Dumbledore was instrumental in allowing Crouch Jr. to get away with masquerading as Moody.

  Josie Kearns; “Harry Potter, Occlumens?”

  Josie lays out an intriguing theory that Dumbledore set up the Occlumency lessons to fail on purpose.

  Josie Kearns; “Prophecy”

  This essay discusses the Ministry’s knowledge of the prophecy, which puts their interactions with Harry and Dumbledore in a fascinating new light.

  mirrormere; “The Flaw in the Plan”

  This essay is very similar to what you just read in this book but uses a similar style of deep dive into the books to reach nearly the opposite conclusions I did: namely, that Dumbledore prioritized Snape in his plans as opposed to using Snape dangerously to give Harry an edge.