#Dumbledore Analysis

[hollowed-theory-hall]

Dumbledore is a Manipulative Piece of Shit: Part 1/?

Since I read the books for the first time at the age of 12, I knew I didn't trust Dumbledore. Back then, I couldn't put my finger on why. But now, a bit over a decade later, I can.

Not only can I explain why I thought something's fishy, but I can prove it is.

This is going to be a long series... but let's start at the beginning:

Halloween 1981

I'm going to go about this in chronological order of events according to book quotes I could track down.

Before the Prophecy

Circa October 24, 1979 - Lily gets pregnant with Harry. According to reverse calculating due date.

Sometime between March 1980 and October 1980 Peter Pettigrew starts spying for the Order.

"(Dumbledore) was sure that somebody close to the Potters had been keeping You-Know-Who informed of their movements...Indeed, he had suspected for some time that someone on our side had turned traitor and was passing a lot of information to You-Know-Who."

(Prisoner of Azkaban, page 205)

We know that there was a spy in the Order that fed Voldemort information before James and Lily went into hiding. Sirius mentions Peter being a spy for a long time again later in Prisoner of Azkaban:

“Sirius, Sirius, what could I have done? The Dark Lord . . . you have no idea . . . he has weapons you can’t imagine. . . . I was scared, Sirius, I was never brave like you and Remus and James. I never meant it to happen. . . . He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named forced me —” “DON’T LIE!” bellowed Black. “YOU’D BEEN PASSING INFORMATION TO HIM FOR A YEAR BEFORE LILY AND JAMES DIED! YOU WERE HIS SPY!”

(Prisoner of Azkaban, page 374)

So we know Pettigrew spied for Voldemort for about a year, if not more, before October 1981. The reason I'm saying he might have spied for longer is that the Order noticed there was a spy during that year, there might've been months he spied but the Order was none the wiser.

The months leading up to the attack on the Potter

So, we know when Peter started feeding Voldemort information, but we need to know when exactly the prophecy was given and when James and Lily went into hiding under the Fideliulous Charm. Most fans I see, seem to think they were hiding for only a week, then Peter betrayed them and then they died that same night. I think it went a little different. I think they were hiding for much longer.

So, let's determine this from the Evidence we are given.

The picture of the Order of the Phoenix Moody shows Harry in book 5 is the final picture of the Order togather before the Potters went into hiding. Most fans date this photo to the summer of 1980. I think it has to be earlier than that for two simple reasons:

Lily isn't pregnant and Harry wasn't born

Alice isn't pregnant and Neville wasn't born

“...That’s Frank and Alice Longbottom —” Harry’s stomach, already uncomfortable, clenched as he looked at Alice Longbottom; he knew her round, friendly face very well, even though he had never met her, because she was the image of her son, Neville....

...His mother and father were beaming up at him, sitting on either side of a small, watery-eyed man Harry recognized at once as Wormtail: He was the one who had betrayed their whereabouts to Voldemort and so helped bring about their deaths.

(Order of the Pheonix, page 174)

Remember, Harry and Neville were born at the end of July 1980, and pictures taken during that summer would show the pregnancy or taken after their births. So I think that picture was taken in 1979, although I'm uncertain exactly when. because, as I'll prove later in this post, the Potters went into hiding before Harry was born.

Next up to help us put a date to when they went into hiding is the Fidelious Charm itself, or more correctly, how it works.

The Fidelious Charm hides a piece of information within a person. It hides the phrasing of a secret, not a location.

an immensely complex spell ... involving the magical concealment of a secret inside a living soul. The information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret-Keeper, and is henceforth impossible to find -- unless, of course, the Secret-Keeper chooses to divulge it.

(Prisoner of Azkaban, 205)

It can be used to hide a location like we see the Order of the Phoenix do:

Dumbledore's Secret-Keeper for the Order, you know -- nobody can find Headquarters unless he tells them personally where it is

(Order if the Pheonix, 115)

With the phrase that Dumbledore hides being:

The headquarters of the Order of the Phoenix may be found at number twelve, Grimmauld Place, London.

(Order of the Phoenix, page 58)

They use a specific phrasing to hide the Order's headquarters. The moment the Order stops existing, the house will stop being a secret. I'd argue the moment Grimmauld Place stopped being the Headquarters it stopped being a secret because this phrase applied no longer.

This is what we see with the Potter residence. Once James and Lily die, the Charm breaks and muggles make their way to the house:

“No, sir — house was almost destroyed, but I got him out all right before the Muggles started swarmin’ around. He fell asleep as we was flyin’ over Bristol."

(Philosopher's Stone, page 13)

The fact muggles and Hagrid could arrive at the house and see it means the Charm broke.

We also see it in Deathly Hollows when Harry and Hemione visit the Potter's cottage:

He could see it; the Fidelius Charm must have died with James and Lily. 

(Deathly Hallows, page 286)

"So what?" You may ask, "we know this already,"

True, but the reason it's important is because it hints at the phrasing used when the charm was cast. It means the phrasing of the secret Peter kept being along the lines of:

"James and Lily Potter are hiding in the Potter Cottage in Godric's Hollow"

Now, this makes sense to be the secret, right, but notice, Harry isn't mentioned. If Harry was part of the secret, the charm would not have broken with James and Lily's deaths, since the secret would still protect Harry. Now, why not protect Harry as well? The whole point of the Fidelious Charm was to protect Harry, was it not?

This means the Potters went into hiding and the charm was cast before Harry was born.

More that suggests they were hiding for quite a while is Lily's letter to Sirius:

Dear Padfoot, Thank you, thank you, for Harry’s birthday present! It was his favorite by far. One year old and already zooming along on a toy broomstick

(Deathly Hollows, page 158)

Meaning Harry's first birthday (July, 1981) happened when they were already under the protection of the charm. As this letter was sent a short time after it (early August 1981).

James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here, he tries not to show it but I can tell

(Deathly Hollows, page 158)

Also from Lily's letter to Sirius. James' restlessness definitely suggests they were hiding under the charm for a good few months before Harry's first birthday.

This dates the Prophecy and Trawlany's job interview around the first half of 1980 (January to May). This means the Potters were in hiding between a year and 4 months to a year and 9 months before their deaths.

All of this leaves us with two main oddities. Questions that just got me scratching my head:

If Peter was a spy since March 1980 at the earliest and October 1980 at the latest (but probably earlier), and the Potters went into hiding with him as the secret keeper in Earley in July 1980 at the latest, why not tell Voldemort immediately? And if he did, why did Voldemort wait a full year+ to go and kill the Potters?

It means that when Severus Snape came begging for Dumbledore to save Lily about a week before their deaths, Dumbledore already had the Potters in hiding. It means Dumbledore made Snape take an oath for him to do something he already did. So we see Dumbledore's first manipulations coming into play by fucking Severus over and taking him as a spy without actually giving anything in turn.

The first question is one I have somewhat of an answer for in my Voldemort character analysis, but this isn't this post. This is about Dumbledore's crimes.

The Night Everything Happened

Now we arrive at the night that changed the Wizarding World and the life of one Harry Potter. October 31st, 1981.

I time Voldemort’s arrival at Godric's Hollow at the late evening (around 8 PM). This is due to children being allowed outside still:

The night wet and windy, two children dressed as pumpkins waddling across the square, and the shop window covered in paper spiders, all the tawdry Muggle trapping of a world in which they did not believe

(Deathly Hollows, page 295)

And Harry (a year and four months old infent) still being awake, but clearly preparing for bed:

the tall black haired man in his glasses, making puffs of colored smoke erupt from his wand for the amusement of the small black-haired boy in his blue pajamas

(Deathly Hollows, page 295)

So, Voldemort arrives at Godric's Hollow around 8:00 PM, let's say, 15 to 20 minutes later, James and Lily are dead, Voldemort’s body is destroyed and he runs off to Albania. Baby Harry is crying and the Fidelious is broken.

Now, things get interesting. Well, more interesting.

We know the first on the scene is Peter Pettigrew, arriving around 8:30 PM, and retrieving Voldemort’s wand. We don't actually know when or if this happened beyond a quote from JKR, but as muggles and aurors searched the house, it's unlikely Voldemort’s wand was there and undiscovered.

Then Pettigrew ran away to the muggle street where he would meet Sirius.

The second on the scene is Reberus Hagrid.

Hagrid arrives sometime later when muggled started looking into what happened now that the Fidelious Charm is broken:

“No, sir — house was almost destroyed, but I got him out all right before the Muggles started swarmin’ around. He fell asleep as we was flyin’ over Bristol."

(Philosopher's Stone, page 13)

Around the same time Pettigrew arrived at Godric's Hollow, Sirius probably saw Peter wasn't home and realized the Fidelious was broken. So he heads to Godric's Hollow.

The night they died, I’d arranged to check on Peter, make sure he was still safe, but when I arrived at his hiding place, he’d gone. Yet there was no sign of a struggle. It didn’t feel right. I was scared. I set out for your parents’ house straight away. And when I saw their house, destroyed, and their bodies . . . I realized what Peter must’ve done . . . what I’d done. . . .

(Prisoner of Azkaban, page 365)

Sirius reaches the Potters and meets Hagrid there, outside the house, Harry already in Hagrid's arms:

“I met him!” growled Hagrid. “I musta bin the last ter see him before he killed all them people! It was me what rescued Harry from Lily an’ James’s house after they was killed! Jus’ got him outta the ruins, poor little thing, with a great slash across his forehead, an’ his parents dead . . . an’ Sirius Black turns up, on that flyin’ motorbike he used ter ride. Never occurred ter me what he was doin’ there. I didn’ know he’d bin Lily an’ James’s Secret-Keeper. Thought he’d jus’ heard the news o’ You-Know-Who’s attack an’ come ter see what he could do. White an’ shakin’, he was. An’ yeh know what I did? I COMFORTED THE MURDERIN’ TRAITOR!” Hagrid roared.

(Prisoner of Azkaban, page 206)

Sirius then goes after Pettigrew, after failing to take Harry from Hagrid and figuring he'd rather chase the rat down before he disappears. We all know how that ends, as Hagrid takes Harry according to Dumbledore's orders.

‘Give Harry ter me, Hagrid, I’m his godfather, I’ll look after him —’ Ha! But I’d had me orders from Dumbledore, an’ I told Black no, Dumbledore said Harry was ter go ter his aunt an’ uncle’s. Black argued, but in the end he gave in. Told me ter take his motorbike ter get Harry there. ‘I won’t need it anymore,’ he says. “I shoulda known there was somethin’ fishy goin’ on then. He loved that motorbike, what was he givin’ it ter me for? Why wouldn’ he need it anymore? Fact was, it was too easy ter trace.

(Prisoner of Azkaban, page 206)

This quote has quite a few interesting things about Dumbledore, Hagrid and Sirius.

First, Hagrid says Dumbledore gave him orders to take Harry to the Dursleys. This order was given before Sirius went after Peter, before he was arrested and sent to Azkaban.

This is illegal. At this point in time Sirius was Harry's legal godfather and guardian, and yet Dumbledore gave Hagrid this order. And yes, you could argue it was because he knew Sirius was the Secret Keeper and was wary of him, but:

“Hagrid,” said Dumbledore, sounding relieved. “At last. And where did you get that motorcycle?” “Borrowed it, Professor Dumbledore, sir,” said the giant, climbing carefully off the motorcycle as he spoke. “Young Sirius Black lent it to me. I’ve got him, sir.” “No problems, were there?”

(Philosopher's Stone, page 13)

Dumbledore hears Hagrid met Sirius when retrieving Harry and shows no concern. Like he doesn't consider Sirius a threat to Hagrid and Harry. But then, why take Harry away? Why support Sirius' arrest? (More on that in a later post)

Not only is all this highly illegal but how did Dumbledore know when the Potters died?

JK explained he had some magical alarms in place, but that means at the earliest he would've known the moment Voldemort entered the premises. But he knew before. He knew James and Lily would die that day before they died.

How do I know that?

Simple, Hagrid can't apparate and didn't arrive via broom or floo.

Hogwarts, where Hagrid is during October as Grounds keeper, is in the Scottish Highlands (Higher up as they travel for about 9-10 hours by train from Kings Cross to reach Hogwarts as they leave at eleven and arrive for dinner). Godric's Hollow is in West Country, England. This distance is a 9-10 hour drive (672.03 km, 417.58 miles).

It means that for Hagrid to arrive by 9 PM at Godric's Hollow, Dumbledore told him to go fetch Harry, the order was given to Hagrid between 11-12 noon on October 31st.

This already paints Dumbledore in a bad light, it means he planned this. I'd argue he even planned for Voldemort to hear of the Prophecy (but that's a different post). But it means Dumbledore planned for the Potters to be killed that night.

Second, Hagrid is right about Sirius giving his bike being odd (But that's a different post about the Fidelious Charm). But, in short, something was up and Sirius knew, at least somewhat, that he was doomed.

The Boy Who Lived

Finally, we arrive at the first chapter of Philosopher's Stone. We follow Vernon Dursely throughout his day on November 1st. We know that because we see the Wizarding World celebrating the death of Voldemort:

He’d (Mr. Dursley) forgotten all about the people in cloaks until he passed a group of them next to the baker’s. He eyed them angrily as he passed. He didn’t know why, but they made him uneasy. This bunch were whispering excitedly, too, and he couldn’t see a single collecting tin. It was on his way back past them, clutching a large doughnut in a bag, that he caught a few words of what they were saying. “The Potters, that’s right, that’s what I heard —” “ — yes, their son, Harry —” Mr. Dursley stopped dead. Fear flooded him. He looked back at the whisperers as if he wanted to say something to them, but thought better of it.

(Philosopher's Stone, page 6)

So, McGonagall is watching over the Dursleys throughout November 1st. It means Harry arrived at the Dursleys around midnight between November 1st and November 2nd.

Hagrid and Harry left Godric's Hollow on Sirius' flying motorbike around 10 PM at the latest on October 31st. So what was Hagrid doing with Harry in these 26 hours?

The only information we have is that Harry: "fell asleep over Bristol,"

Thing is, if we go back to the map of the UK.

Bristol is not really on the way from Godric's Hollow to Surry.

But it is closer to the flight path between Godric's Hollow and Hogwarts.

(The locations are estimated for fictional locations but are based on what I know. Regardless, West Country to Surry won't pass over Bristol, while West Country to the Scottish Highlands is likely to, so the point stands)

In conclusion, Dumbledore manipulated Harry's life, his parents' deaths, Snape, Sirius, and Hagrid, and fucked them all over for the sake of his grand plan of defeating Voldemort.

What else went into his plan and who else he fucked over, will be covered in the next installments.

[maxdibert]

Dumbledore and Slughorn are weird. They know that through Slytherin they are recruiting to Voldemort, but they have done nothing for 20 years.. Slughorn the hypocrite Mulciber can practice dark magic as long as he has rich parents.. Slughorn’s guilt is huge.. Slughorn 100 years, and Voldemort died at 71

My problem with Dumbledore is precisely this: he never intervened. He actively promoted the creation of a ghetto within his own school by marginalizing and stereotyping Slytherins—branding them as “problematic.” This labeling led these children to feel excluded, to believe that society was against them, and to develop an “us against the world” mentality, which is the perfect breeding ground for them to be swayed down a dark path.

Dumbledore was fully aware of what was brewing, yet he did nothing—he didn’t give a damn. Then he had the nerve to act surprised and even had the audacity to deliver moral lectures to those who later became Death Eaters. Excuse me, but those Death Eaters were his own students! They were children he completely ignored, prejudging them from the very beginning based on their family backgrounds, surnames, or the house to which they belonged. He knew that by favoring others at their expense, he was effectively allowing these children to form their own ghetto, and he did nothing to stop it—even though he was aware that their parents and external agents were recruiting them.

As headmaster and guardian, Dumbledore was responsible for the safety, guidance, and well-being of these children. He had a duty to prevent them from taking the wrong path—and he didn’t lift a single finger. Who does he think he is, to later parade as a moral authority and lecture them? I’m not suggesting that he could have prevented every one of them from joining the Death Eaters; my point is that his responsibility, both as director and as their caretaker while they were away from home, was precisely to try, and he did nothing.

And if that weren’t enough, decades later, after the events of the First War, during Harry’s time at Hogwarts he repeated the same neglect. Then you act surprised at the mess that Draco Malfoy ended up in—the very Draco who, from the age of 11, witnessed how you favored Gryffindor and Potter, completely disregarding Slytherin. Who the hell do you think you are, to lecture a 16-year-old who felt ignored and marginalized by you—the highest authority in the school, the one who was supposed to protect him—and then dole out moral lessons? Of course, he told you to fuck off.

I have serious issues with Dumbledore because I’ve known teachers like him, and they are the ones I despise the most in this world.

[fannedandflawless]

🍋 The Lemon Drop Theory: A Tactical Sweet Disguise

A curious inquiry sparked by how often 'lemon drops' seem to come up—frequent enough to make one wonder if there’s more to the sweet than meets the tongue.

It all starts with a fact that deserves more side-eye than it receives: Albus Dumbledore really loved offering lemon drops. As in, constantly. It’s his password, his go-to hospitality item, and apparently his personality in confection form.

But why? Why lemon drops? And why does he offer them in moments of psychological warfare disguised as gentle conversation?

As someone who believes no sugar cube is ever truly innocent in a magical world, I present:

🍋 Theory 1: Veritaserum-Lite (Emotional Disarmament Candy)

Lemon drops are sharp, acidic, and jarringly sweet. They jolt the tongue like they’ve got opinions. What better way to disarm someone than by giving them a flavour that says, "you weren’t ready, darling, and that’s exactly the point"? Emotional defence? Consider it cracked. Sugar-coated, of course.

🍋 Theory 2: Soft Power, Pleasantly Presented

"Would you care for a lemon drop?" Translation: "I’m about to drop a life-altering revelation into your lap, but I’ll cushion it with citrus."

It’s not hospitality. It’s stagecraft. Dumbledore doesn’t offer sweets—he performs them. It’s a moment, a prop, a cue in the script. You think you’re chatting with a quirky old man who likes sherbets, but really, you’ve just stepped into a monologue.

It’s all smoke, sparkle, and a bit of sugar. And it works.

🍋 Theory 3: A Dash of Potion, Perhaps?

I'm not saying he definitely microdoses lemon drops with Calming Draughts or Legilimency triggers, but… I'm also not saying he doesn’t.

Given his unnerving perceptiveness, one might wonder whether Dumbledore dabbled in Legilimency. What if the lemon drop is the signal? The opening of the door, so to speak? You accept the sweet, your mind softens, and then—bam—he’s reading the surface of your thoughts with a smile and a twinkle.

🍋 Theory 4: The Eccentric Armour

In a world of hexes, curses, and political assassination, Dumbledore’s weapon of choice is… citrus sugar? No. It’s imagery.

He wears eccentricity like armour. Lemon drops are part of the costume: the doddery genius with a sweet tooth who just happens to outmanoeuvre everyone politically.

It’s easier to underestimate a man who smells of sugar than one who smells of sulphur.

⸻

And yes, canon offers us breadcrumbs—lemon-scented, at least the ones I can remember without needing a Pensieve

Philosopher’s Stone (Chapter 1): McGonagall is appalled by the plan to leave Harry with the Dursleys. Dumbledore deflects the tension with a Muggle sweet. She refuses.

Various mentions: Lemon drops are his office password during Harry’s early years, reinforcing the motif of access granted through sugar.

⸻

Perhaps lemon drops are more than sweets. Perhaps they’re rituals. A theatrical flourish before revelations, confessions, and persuasion. A bit of citrus to say: "You’re safe. I’m odd. Let’s talk."

Or maybe—just maybe—they’re traps pretending to come in wrappers they never actually had.

Would you like one?

[leaelakey]

Wasn't Grindeldore just a mere short-lived summer fling? It reminds me of people who fall head over heels in love after a week, get ruined, and then fall into depression because that guy was a complete asshole.

Why do people like this ship? Grindelwald seems like a total bitch, and Albus deserves so much better. After Ariana's death, I highly doubt Albus would ever fall in love with Gellert again. It changed his soul in the worst way, and I don't think he would ever allow himself to fall for him again. He would always replay Ariana's death, Aberforth's anger, and his own grief, and he would put up so many walls every time he even thought of Gellert.

And also, it's not like it was a long-lasting love that would make him crumble and put aside his convictions. They knew each other for two months—hardly enough time to genuinely love or truly know a person.

It's not even about what Albus deserves; it's about who he is. Pairing him with a person he connects with the downfall of his family, his biggest grief in life, as well as his biggest disillusionment and mistakes, goes against his entire character. It's like pairing Hermione with Voldemort. I'm not against enemies-to-lovers, opposites attract, or villains x heroes, but there should be something that allows the two to connect and let go of their walls—something that connects them internally. Albus doesn’t have that with Grindelwald. Gellert ruined his life. The fling he allowed himself to have with him ruined his family, and family means everything to Albus. He'd never get over it. He never got over it. His entire soul goes against that relationship. It goes against who he is. It goes against his morals, his convictions, his personality, his soul, his worldview, his needs, and his self. And that's not romantic. That's tragic.

[sparsilees]

tom riddle is a yapper. he loves his monologues and dramatics.

draco malfoy is a yapper. he, too, loves the sound of his voice and dramatics.

ron weasley has no qualms about being loud and seen. he grew up in a large household, fighting to be heard over his siblings.

harry potter grew up in a cupboard, friendless except for the spiders, and learned to subdue and suppress and submit at the dursleys. he isn’t loud, he isn’t boisterous, he isn’t talkative, he doesn’t like socialising, he keeps his opinions in his head and his feelings buried inside, he has very few close friends, he doesn’t reveal his worries and struggles easily, he dislikes showing his pain and weakness, and he sure doesn’t give up his secrets and personal details freely, sometimes not even to ron and hermione.

this is what canon harry’s like—very quiet and an introvert, someone who speaks when spoken to or has cause to broadcast his voice, and someone who’d rather blend into the walls than draw unnecessary attention to himself.

[wisteria-lodge]

So when I look at Harry Potter, my goal is to separate what I think the books are intending to say, from what they actually say, from what the movies say… and what the common fan interpretation is. So today I’m interested in Dumbledore, and specifically in the common headcanon of  Manipulative/Morally Gray Dumbledore. Is that (intentionally or unintentionally) supported by the text?

PART I:  Omniscient Dumbledore

“I think he knows more or less everything that goes on here”

In Book 1, yes Dumbledore honestly does seem to know everything. He 100% arranged for Harry to find the Mirror of Erised, publicly left Hogwarts in order to nudge Quirrell into going after the Stone, and knew what Quirrell was doing the whole time. It is absolutely not a stretch, and kind of heavily implied, that the reason the Stone’s protections feel like a little-end-of-the-year exam designed to put Harry through his paces… is because they are. As the series goes on this interpretation only gets more plausible, when we see the kind of protections people can put up when they don’t want anyone getting through. 

Book 1 Dumbledore knows everything… but what he’s actually going to do about it is anyone’s guess. One of the first things we learn is that some of Dumbledore’s calls can be… questionable. McGonagall questions his choice to leave Harry with the Dursleys, Hermione questions his choice to give Harry the Cloak and let him go after the Stone, Percy and Ron both matter-of-factly call him “mad.” The “nitwit, blubber, oddment, tweak” speech is a joke where Dumbledore says he’s going to say a few words, then literally does say a few (weird) words. I know there are theories that those particular words are supposed to be insulting the four houses, or referencing the Hogwarts house stereotypes, or that they’re some kind of warning. But within the text, this is pure Lewis Carroll British Nonsense Verse stuff (and people came up with answers to the impossible Alice in Wonderland “why is a raven like a writing desk” riddle too.) 

This characterization also explains a lot of Dumbledore’s decisions about how to run a school, locked in during Book 1. Presumably Binns, Peeves, Filch, Snape are all there because Dumbledore finds them funny, atmospheric, and/or character building. He's just kind of a weird guy.  He absolutely knew that Lockhart was a fraud in Book 2 (with that whole “Impaled upon your own sword, Gilderoy?” thing after Lockhart oblivates himself. ) So maybe he is also there to be funny/atmospheric/character building, or to teach Harry a lesson about fame, or because Dumbledore is using the cursed position to bump off people he doesn’t like. Who knows.

(I actually don’t think JKR had locked in “the DADA position is literally cursed by Voldemort” until Book 6. )

Dumbledore absolutely knows that Harry is listening in when Lucius Malfoy comes to take Hagrid to Azkaban, and it’s fun to speculate that maybe he let himself get fired in Book 2 as part of a larger plan to boot Lucius off the Board of Governors. So far, that’s the sort of thing he’d do.  But in Books 3 and 4, we are confronted with a number of important things that Dumbledore just missed. He doesn’t know any of the Marauders were animagi, he doesn’t know what really happened with the Potter’s Secret Keeper, doesn’t know Moody is Crouch, and doesn’t know the Marauders Map even exists. But in Books 5 and 6, his omniscience does seem to come back online. (In a flashback, Voldemort even comments that he is "omniscient as ever” when Dumbledore lists the specific Death Eaters he has in Hogsmeade as backup.) Dumbledore knows exactly what Draco and Voldemort are planning, and his word is taken as objective truth by the entire Order of the Phoenix - who apparently only tolerate Snape because Dumbledore vouches for him:

“Snape,” repeated McGonagall faintly, falling into the chair. “We all wondered . . . but he trusted . . . always . . . Snape . . . I can’t believe it. . . .”  “Snape was a highly accomplished Occlumens,” said Lupin, his voice uncharacteristically harsh. “We always knew that.”  “But Dumbledore swore he was on our side!” whispered Tonks. “I always thought Dumbledore must know something about Snape that we didn’t. . . .”  “He always hinted that he had an ironclad reason for trusting Snape,” muttered Professor McGonagall (...) “Wouldn’t hear a word against him!”

McGonagall questions Dumbledore about the Dursleys, but not about Snape. I see this as part of the larger trend of basically Dumbledore’s deification. In the beginning of the series, he’s treated as a clever, weird dude. By the end, he’s treated like a god. 

PART II: Chessmaster Dumbledore

“I prefer not to keep all my secrets in one basket.”

When Dumbledore solves problems, he likes to go very hands-off. He didn’t directly teach Harry about the Mirror of Erised - he gave him the Cloak, knew he would wander, and moved the Mirror so it would be in his path. He sends Snape to deal with Quirrell and Draco, rather than do it himself. He (or his portrait) tells Snape to confund Mundungus Fletcher and get him to suggest the Seven Potters strategy. He puts Mrs. Figg in place to watch Harry, then ups the protection in Book 5 - all without informing Harry. The situation with Slughorn is kind of a Dumbledore-manipulation master class - even the way he deliberately disappears into the bathroom so Harry will have enough solo time to charm Slughorn. Of course he only wants Slughorn under his roof in the first place to pick his brain about Voldemort… but again, instead of doing that himself, he gets Harry to do it for him. 

Dumbledore has a moment during Harry’s hearing in Book 5 (which he fakes evidence for) where he informs Fudge that Harry is not under the Ministry’s jurisdiction while at Hogwarts. Which has insane implications. It’s never explicitly stated, but as the story goes on, it at least makes sense that Dumbledore is deliberately obscuring how powerful he is, and how much influence he really has, by getting other people to do things for him. But the problem with that is because he is so powerful, it become really easy for a reader to look back after they get more information and say… well if Dumbledore was controlling the situation… why couldn’t he have done XYZ. Here are two easy examples from Harry’s time spent with the Dursleys:

1. Mrs. Figg is watching over Harry from day one, but she can’t tell him she’s a squib and also she has to keep him miserable on purpose:

“Dumbledore’s orders. I was to keep an eye on you but not say anything, you were too young. I’m sorry I gave you such a miserable time, but the Dursleys would never have let you come if they’d thought you enjoyed it. It wasn’t easy, you know…”

It’s pretty intense to think of Dumbledore saying “oh yes, invite this little child over and keep him unhappy on purpose.” But okay. It’s important to keep Harry ignorant of the magical world and vice versa. fine. But once he goes to Hogwarts… that doesn’t apply anymore?  I’m sure when Harry thinks he’s going to be imprisoned permanently in his bedroom during Book 2, it would’ve been comforting to know that Dumbledore was sending around someone to check on him. And when he literally runs away from home in Book 3… having the address of a trusted adult that he could easily get to would have been great for everybody. 

2. When Vernon is about to actually kick Harry out during Book 5, Dumbledore sends a howler which intimidates Petunia into insisting that Harry has to stay. Vernon folds and does exactly what she says. If Dumbledore could intimidate Petunia into doing this, then why couldn’t he intimidate her into, say - giving Harry the second bedroom instead of a cupboard. Or fixing Harry’s glasses. In Book 1, the Dursleys don’t bother Harry during the entire month of August because Hagrid gives Dudley a pig’s tail. In the summer between third and fourth year, the Dursleys back off because Harry is in correspondence with Sirius (a person they fear.) But the Dursleys are afraid of all wizards. Like at this point it doesn’t seem that hard to intimidate them into acting decently to Harry. 

PART III: Dumbledore and the Dursleys 

“Not a pampered little prince”

JKR wanted two contradictory things. She wanted Dumbledore to be a fundamentally good guy: a wise, if eccentric mentor figure. But she also wanted Harry to have a comedically horrible childhood being locked in a cupboard, denied food, given broken glasses and ill fitting/embarrassing clothes, and generally made into a little Cinderella. Then, it’s a bigger contrast when he goes to Hogwarts and expulsion can be used as an easy threat. (Although the only person we ever see expelled is Hagrid, and that was for murder.)

So, there are a couple of tricks she uses to make it okay that Dumbledore left Harry at the Dursleys.’ The first is that once Harry leaves…  nothing that happens there is given emotional weight. When he’s in the Wizarding World, he barely talks about Dursleys, barely thinks about them. They almost never come up in the narration (unless Harry’s worried about being expelled, or they’re sending him comedically awful presents.) They are completely cut from movies 4, 6, and 7 part 2 - and you do not notice. 

The second trick… is that Dumbledore himself clearly doesn’t think that the Dursleys are that bad. During the King’s Cross vision-quest, he describes 11-year-old Harry as “alive and healthy (...) as normal a boy as I could have hoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my plan was working well.”  

Now, this could have been really interesting. Like in a psychological way, I get it. Dumbledore had a rocky home life. Dad in prison, mom spending all her time taking care of his volatile and dangerous sister. Aberforth seems to have reacted to the situation by running completely wild, it’s implied that he never even had formal schooling… and Albus doubled down on being the Golden Child, making the family look good from the outside, and finding every means possible to escape. I would have believed it if Molly or Kingsley had a beat of being horrified by the way the Dursleys are treating Harry… but Dumbledore treats it as like, whatever. Business as usual. 

But that isn’t the framing that the books use. Dumbledore is correct that the Dursleys aren’t that bad, and I think it’s because JKR fundamentally does not take the Dursleys seriously as threats. I also think she has a fairly deeply held belief that suffering creates goodness, so possibly Harry suffering at the hands of the Dursleys… was necessary? To make him good? Dumbledore himself has an arc of ‘long period of suffering = increased goodness.’ So does Severus Snape, Dudley‘s experience with the Dementor kickstarts his character growth, etc. It’s a trope she likes.

It’s only in The Cursed Child that the Dursleys are given any kind of weight when it comes to Harry’s psyche. This is one of the things that makes me say Jack Thorne wrote that play, because it’s just not consistent with how JKR likes to write the Dursleys. It’s consistent with the way fanfiction likes to write the Dursleys. And look, The Cursed Child is fascinatingly bad, I have so many problems with it, but it does seem to be doing like … a dark reinterpretation of Harry Potter? And it’s interested in saying something about cycles of abuse. I can absolutely see how the way the play handles things is flattering to JKR. It retroactively frames the Dursleys’ abuse in a more negative way, and maybe that’s something she wanted after criticism that the Harry Potter books treat physical abuse kind of lightly. (i.e.  Harry at the hands of the Dursleys, and house-elves at the hands of everybody. Even Molly Weasley “wallops” Fred with a broomstick.) 

PART IV: Dumbledore and Harry

“The whole Potter–Dumbledore relationship. It’s been called unhealthy, even sinister”

So whenever Harry feels betrayed by Dumbledore in the books - and he absolutely does, it’s some of JKR’s best writing  - it’s not because he left him with the Dursleys. It’s because Dumbledore kept secrets from him, or lied to him, or didn’t confide in him on a personal level. 

“Look what he asked from me, Hermione! Risk your life, Harry! And again! And again! And don’t expect me to explain everything, just trust me blindly, trust that I know what I’m doing, trust me even though I don’t trust you! Never the whole truth! Never!” (...) I don’t know who he loved, Hermione, but it was never me. This isn’t love, the mess he’s left me in. He shared a damn sight more of what he was really thinking with Gellert Grindelwald than he ever shared with me.”

Eventually though, Harry falls in line with the rest of the Order, and treats Dumbledore as an all-knowing God. And this decision comes so close to being critiqued…  but the series never quite commits. Rufus Scrimgeour comments that, “Well, it is clear to me that [Dumbledore] has done a very good job on you” - implying that Harry is a product of a deliberate manipulation,  and that the way Harry feels about Dumbledore is a direct result of how he's been controlling the situation (and Harry.)  But Harry responds to “[You are] Dumbledore’s man through and through, aren’t you, Potter?” with “Yeah, I am. Glad we straightened that out,” and it’s treated as a badass, mic drop line. 

Ron goes on to say that Harry maybe shouldn’t be trusting Dumbledore and maybe his plan isn’t that great… but then he abandons his friends, regrets what he did, and is only able to come back because Dumbledore knew he would react this way? So that whole thing only makes Dumbledore seem more powerful? Aberforth  tells Harry (correctly) that Dumbledore is expecting too much of him and he’s not interested in making sure that he survives:

“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 (...) Why didn’t he say… ‘Take care of yourself, here’s how to survive’? (...) You’re seventeen, boy!”

But, Aberforth is treated as this Hamish Abernathy type who has given up, and needs Harry to ignite his spark again. There’s a pretty dark line in the script of Deathly Hallows Part 2:

Which at least shows this was a possible  interpretation the creative team had in their heads… but then of course it isn’t actually in the movie. 

So in the end, insane trust in Dumbledore is only ever treated as proper and good. Then in Cursed Child they start using “Dumbledore” as an oath instead of “Merlin” and it’s weird and I don’t like it.

PART V: Dumbledore and his Strays

“I have known, for some time now, that you are the better man.”

So Dumbledore has this weird relationship pattern. He has a handful of people he pulled out of the fire at some point and (as a result) these people are insanely loyal to him.  They do his dirty work, and he completely controls them. This is an interesting pattern, because I think it helps explain why so many fans read Dumbledore’s relationship with Snape (and with Harry) as sinister. 

Let’s start with the first of Dumbledore’s “strays.” Dumbledore saves Hagrid's livelihood and probably life after he is accused of opening the Chamber of Secrets - and then he uses Hagrid to disappear Harry after the Potters' death, gets him to transport the Philosopher’s Stone, and he’s the one who he trusts to be Harry’s first point of contact with the Wizarding World.  Also, Hagrid's situation doesn’t change? Even after he is cleared of opening the Chamber of Secrets, he keeps using that pink flowered umbrella with his broken wand inside, a secret that he and Dumbledore seem to share. He could get a legal wand, he could continue his education. But he doesn’t seem to, and I don’t know why. 

So, Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality is a well known fix-it fic that basically asks “What if Harry Potter was a machiavellian little super genius who solves the plot in a year?” I enjoyed it when it was coming out, but the only thing I would call a cheat is the way McGonagall brings Harry to Diagon Alley instead of Hagrid. Because a Harry Potter who has spent a couple of days with McGonagall is going to be much better informed, better equipped and therefore more powerful than a Harry spending the same amount of time with Hagrid. McGonagall is both a lot more knowledgeable and a lot less loyal to Dumbledore. She is loyal, obviously, but she also questions his choices in a way that Hagrid never does. And as a result, Dumbledore does not trust her with the same kind of delicate jobs he trusts to Hagrid.

Mrs. Figg is another one of Dumbledore’s strays. She’s a squib, so we can imagine that she doesn’t really have a lot of other options, and he sets her up to keep tabs on (and be unpleasant to) little Harry. He also has her lie to the entire Wizangamot, which has got to present some risk. Within this framework, Snape is another very clear stray. Dumbledore kept him out of Azkaban, and is the only reason that the Order trusts him. He gets sent on on dangerous double-agent missions… but before that he’s sort of kept on hand, even though he’s clearly miserable at Hogwarts. Firenze is definitely a stray - he can't go back to the centaurs, and who other than Dumbledore is going to hire him? And I do wonder about Trelawney. We don’t know much about her relationship with Dumbledore, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if she was a stray as well.

I think there was an attempt to turn Lupin into a stray that didn’t… quite work. He is clearly grateful to Dumbledore for letting him attend Hogwarts and then for hiring him, but Lupin doesn’t really hit that necessary level of trustworthy that the others do. Most of what Dumbledore doesn’t know in Book 3 are things that Lupin could have told him, and didn’t. If had to think of a Watsonsian reason why Remus is given all these solo missions away from the other Order members (that never end up mattering…) it’s because I don’t think Dumbledore trusts him that much. Lupin doubts him too much. 

“Dumbledore believed that?” said Lupin incredulously. “Dumbledore believed Snape was sorry James was dead? Snape hated James. . . .”

 We also see Dumbledore start the process of making Draco into a stray by promising to protect him and his parents. And with all of that… it’s kind of easy to see how Harry fits the profile. He has a very bleak existence (which Dumbledore knows about.) He is pulled out of it by Dumbledore’s proxies. It’s not surprising that Harry develops a Hagrid-level loyalty, especially after Dumbledore saves him from Barty, from his Ministry hearing, and then from Voldemort. Harry walks to his death because Dumbledore told him too. 

Just to be clear, I don’t think this pattern is deliberate. I think this is a side effect of JKR wanting to write Dumbledore as a nice guy, and specifically as a protector of the little guy. But Dumbledore doing that while also being so powerful creates a weird power dynamic, gives him a weird edit. It’s part of the reason people are happy to go one step farther and say that the Dursleys were mean to Harry… because Dumbledore actively wanted it that way.  I don’t think that’s true. I think Dumbledore loves his strays and if anything, the text supports the idea that he is collecting good people, because protecting them and observing them serves some psychological function for him. Dumbledore does not believe himself to be an intrinsically good person, or trustworthy when it comes to power. So, of course someone like that would be fascinated by how powerless people operate in the world, and by people like Hagrid and Lupin and Harry, who seem so intrinsically good. 

PART VI - Dumbledore and Grindelwald

“I was in love with you.” 

I honestly see “17-year-old Dumbledore was enamored with Grindelwald” as a smokescreen distracting from the actual moral grayness of the guy. He wrote some edgy letters when he was a teenager, at least partly because he thought his neighbor was hot. He thought he could move Ariana, but couldn’t - which led to the chaotic three-way duel that killed her. 

One thing I think J. K. Rowling does understand pretty well, and introduces into her books on purpose, is the concept of re-traumatization. Sirius in Book 5 is very obviously being re-traumatized by being in his childhood home and hearing the portrait of his mother screaming. It’s why he acts out, regresses, and does a number of unadvisable things. I think it’s also deliberate that Petunia’s unpleasant childhood is basically being re-created: her normal son next to her sister’s magical son. It's making her worse, or at the very least preventing her from getting better. We learn that Petunia has this sublimated interest in the magical world, and can even pull out vocab like “Azkaban” and “Dementor” when she needs to.   She wrote Dumbledore asking to go to Hogwarts, and I could see that in a universe where Petunia didn’t have to literally raise Harry, she wouldn’t be as psychotically into normalness, cleanliness, and order as she is when we meet her in the books. After all, JKR doesn’t like to write evil mothers. She will be bend over backwards so her mothers are never really framed as bad.

And I honestly think it’s possible that J. K. Rowling was playing with the concept of re-traumatiziation when she was fleshing out Dumbledore in Book 7. We learn all this backstory, that… honestly isn’t super necessary? All I’m saying is that the three-way duel at the top of the Astronomy Tower lines up really well with the three-way duel that killed Ariana. Harry is Ariana, helpless in the middle. Draco is Aberforth, well intentioned and protective of his family - but kind of useless, and kind of a liability. Severus is Grindelwald, dark and brilliant, and one of the closest relationships Dumbledore has. If this was intentional, it was probably only for reasons of narrative symmetry… but I think it's cool in a Gus Fring of Breaking Bad sort of way, that Dumbledore (either consciously or unconsciously) has been trying to re-create this one horrible moment in his life where he felt entirely out of control. But the second time it plays out… he can give it what he sees as the correct outcome. Grindelwald kills him and everyone else lives. That is how you solve the puzzle.

If you read between the lines, Dumbledore/Grindelwald is a fascinating love story. I like the detail that after Ariana’s death, Dumbledore returns to Hogwarts because it’s a place to hide and because he doesn’t feel like he can be trusted with power. I like that he sits there, refusing promotions, refusing requests to be the new Minister of Magic, refusing to go deal with the growing Grindelwald threat until he absolutely can’t hide anymore, at which point he defeats him (somehow.) I like reading his elaborate plan to break Elder Wand’s power as both a screw-you to Grindelwald, the wand’s previous master, but also as a weirdly romantic gesture. In Albus Dumbledore’s mind, there is only Grindelwald. Voldemort can’t even begin to compare. I like the detail that Grindelwald won’t give up Dumbledore, even under torture. And, Dumbledore doesn’t put him in Azkaban. He put him in this other separate prison, which always makes it seem like he’s there under Dumbledore authority specifically.  Maybe Dumbledore thinks that if he had died that day instead of Ariana…he wouldn’t have had to spend the rest of his life fighting and imprisoning the man he loves.

And then of course, Crimes of Grindelwald decided to take away Dumbledore's greatest weakness and say that no, actually he was a really good guy who never did anything wrong ever.  He went all that time without fighting Grindelwald because they made a magical friendship no-fight bracelet. Dumbledore is randomly grabbing Lupin’s iconography (his fashion sense, his lesson plans, his job) in order to feel more soft and gentle than the person the books have created. Now Dumbledore knows about the Room Requirement, even though in the books it’s a plot point that he's too much of a goody-two-shoes to have ever found it himself. He loved Grindelwald (past tense.) And Secrets of Dumbledore is mostly about him being an omniscient mastermind so that a magical deer can tell him that he was a super good and worthy guy, and any doubt that he’s ever felt about himself is just objectively wrong and incorrect. Also now Aberforth has a neglected son, so he’s reframed as a bit of a hypocrite for getting on his brother’s case for not protecting Harry. 

So to summarize, I think Dumbledore began the series as this very eccentric, unpredictable mentor, whose abilities took a hit in Books 3 and 4 in order to make the plot happen. He teetered on the edge of a ‘dark’ framing for like a second… but at the the end of the series he's written as basically infallible and godlike. I’ve heard people say that JKR’s  increased fame was the reason she added the Rita Skeeter plot line, and I don’t think that’s true. But I do think her fame may have affected the way she wrote Dumbledore. Because Dumbledore is JKR’s comment on power, and by Book 5 she had so much power. In her head, I don’t think that Dumbledore is handing off jobs in a manipulative way. She sees him as empowering other less powerful people. That is his job as someone in power (because remember - people who desire power shouldn't wield it.)

Dumbledore’s power makes him emotionally disconnected from the people in his life, it makes him disliked and distrusted by the Ministry, but it doesn’t make him wrong. That’s important. Dumbledore is never wrong. Dumbledore is always good. That’s why we get the Blood Pact that means he was never weak or procrastinating. That’s why we get the qilin saying he was a good person. It’s why we get the tragic backstory (because giving Snape a tragic backstory worked wonders when it came to rehabilitating him.) And that is why Harry names his son Albus Severus in the epilogue, to make us readers absolutely crystal clear that these two are good men. 

(art credit to @fafodill for the amazing banner.)

[txyloria]

(Me trying to explain that Tom Riddle's journey at Hogwarts is literally the twisted version of Harry's journey)

We all know that both of them are orphans, had a rough childhood and both found solace in Hogwarts. However, their time at Hogwarts parallel eachother, but one of them is literally the twisted version of the other's journey.

When Harry goes to Hogwarts for the first time, he has immediately got the attention of Dumbledore in an affectionate, mentor-like way. Meanwhile, when Dumbledore visits tom in the orphanage, he doesn't trust him and always observes him from afar.

Because of that, Harry cares for Dumbledore while Tom loathes him.

Another noticeable parallel is that Harry always has friends and people who care for him surrounding him, and he enjoys every part of it. On the other side, Tom never cared about his Knights of Walpurgis, nor did he ever have an actual friend (since the Knights probably saw him more of a leader than a friend).

Tom and Slughorn's dynamic is quite literally the dark version of Harry and Dumbledore's dynamic. Dumbledore "manipulates" Harry but it's for the boy's well-being, meanwhile Tom manipulates Slughorn by getting information out of him to use it for dark means.

Some other thing I noticed is that in OOTP, Harry gets called a liar because the government doesn't want to believe Lord Voldemort has returned, on the other hand, Tom is congratulated for (supposedly) finding the culprit who opened the Chamber of Secrets, even though he framed Hagrid and was actually the one who killed Myrtle.

After Hogwarts, Harry goes on to become an auror, while Tom becomes the most dangerous dark wizard in modern history.

[chocfrog-enjoyer]

Reminder that Hagrid was just 13 years old when Riddle framed him and got him expelled. A 13 years old boy with a good heart that was already facing major discrimination from the Wizarding World.

Like out of all the things Riddle could have done in that situation he chose to target an already discrimated younger student.

Hagrid whose mother left him when he was 3. Hagrid whose father died when he was 12. Hagrid who by all means was also an orphan.

If not for Albus’s kind heart and good nature, who put his effort into making Hagrid the groundskeeper and allowing him to stay at Hogwarts, Hagrid would have nowhere to go, nobody to look for, no future due to his expulsion and half-gigantism and no ability to manage a life on his own.

[rewritingcanon]

what do u think of the portrayal of harry and ginny in the cursed child (i feel like it's so out of character, especially for harry) also that he works at the ministry and that ginny gave up her quidditch career (same goes for harry)

alright ive had this in my inbox for so long because i wanted to do this ask justice so i really hope that anon is still around to read this. in saying that harry was ‘out of character’ in hpcc, i assume you’re talking about how he was a bad/flawed father, as MANY fans have argued the same. so i will address that first and then i will talk about ginny and hinny’s careers.

disclaimer: when i say “you” im not talking specifically about anon but about fandom.

harry potter vs fatherhood

harry’s whole life resolved around being the chosen one and the prophesied saviour of the wizarding world. it was either being The Hero or being the unwanted, abused and scorned freak living with the dursleys. when thats your home life, then you tend to cling on to anything that is an escape from that— and in harry’s experience that was hogwarts.

if you really think about it, hogwarts was very nasty to harry as well. he was always getting picked on or bullied or in some life threatening danger that he got blamed for half of the time— but because it was better than living with the dursleys, his mind idolised it as a safe haven.

harry also reflects this idolising behaviour onto parental figures, especially paternal figures. he doesnt actually know his parents, only has an ideal of them in his head that was constructed as a coping mechanism to the abuse and neglect he went through at home. he projects The Perfect Father onto every one of his paternal figures (i think the only exception to this is arthur but i mayyy be wrong)— sirius and dumbledore are the biggest ones that come to mind, even though sirius only knew him for two years, and dumbledore would manipulate and use harry for the betterment of the world, which is unlike a parent who would put their child’s needs first (harry did not recognise these issues at length at the time as he was used to the idea of self sacrifice and probs understood that it came with the territory of being The Hero). harry even projected his father onto himself in PoA and nearly died from it.

in saying this, its reasonable to argue that there’s a disconnect with harry and the idea of what a good father actually is. this is challenged in the books itself (with SWM, harry seeing that james was not the Perfect Man he built up in his head), but this is challenged the most in the cursed child.

throughout the play, harry acts as the personified ideal he grew up with. easygoing, confident, wise— when in reality he is the opposite of those attributes and albus can see right through it (ginny says this to harry in the play, i would find the line but alas, im on the train rn). hes not easygoing or confident— he’s fearful that he doesn’t know what hes doing or how to be a father, and hes scared not knowing makes him a bad father. hes acted out in fear multiple times— the biggest moment is when he bans albus from seeing scorpius to keep him ‘safe.’ he has constant nightmares about his trauma as a child when living with the dursleys and not having the stability or love he craved. his ‘wise’ advice is not applicable to his children because he is harry potter, The Hero, and they are just normal kids. this is why albus and harry get on each others nerves so badly— because they are constantly stomping on each others sore spots by accident. albus doesn’t appreciate the facade that harry tries to uphold, and harry doesn’t understand why— because he’s projecting that ideal onto all of his kids, and if it works for james and lily (presumably), why doesn’t it work for albus? harry would’ve done anything for a father figure like himself!! there must be something wrong with albus!! (🙄)

now The Blanket SceneTM is very controversial and pissed off a lot of longtime fans into denouncing the entire play as canon. ive talked about it at length and since theres more to discuss in this post, i will shorten it down as best i can for you:

as a way of bonding, harry tries to give his precious blanket to albus. he believes albus may be more like him and may be able to understand the sacredness of the present unlike his siblings.

unknowingly, harry is still projecting his ideals onto albus. the blanket is only so extremely precious to him because it represents his parents, who he still views in an idolised light. therefore the blanket is the ideal.

albus scorns this ideal so he scorns the gift. however, because hes a confused and possibly depressed fourteen year old, he doesn’t communicate the rejection of this in a healthy way and basically insults the blanket by calling it old and mouldy and comparing it to james and lily’s presents, which outwardly could make him seem like a brat.

by attacking the blanket, he attacks harry’s parents and the ideal. and harry is very sensitive about this

albus then accidentally triggers very central fears surrounding being an orphan and being a father when he says “i wish you werent my dad”

harrys first thought is that albus wants him dead. at this point, hes stopped listening to albus trying to explain himself as he’s already triggered, so he’s acting in complete defence when he responds “sometimes i wish you werent my son”

this was said with the intention to hurt albus, it was a mindless act with one goal. saying this is out of character for harry is ridiculous, because he’s done the exact same thing in the books multiple times to the people he loves.

another important note: these characters trigger each other accidentally. the intent to connect is there, but there are deep seated issues on harry’s side that was never confronted leading to these issues. and as albus is a young angsty teen who does get bullied and is a little self-centred (again, very normal for a 14yo), he can’t really communicate these issues to harry effectively (harry being dismissive of the bullying (that he believes is normal for hogwarts students) albus goes through doesn’t help the situation either), leaving harry stumbling in the dark and further emboldening that The Perfect Father he imagined as a child may not exist.

ok that wasnt very economical but anyways! those are the issues! what happens next is harry spiralling and confirming those fears, being forced to confront them and deal with them, and then the steps toward healing his relationship with albus.

im not defending how harry treated albus (dismissing his bullying, lashing out, the enmeshment abuse) but offering insight and trying to explain that he was certainly in-character. i think people simply had an emotional reaction to seeing their loved character being very realistically flawed, and decided they didnt like it without doing much analysis as to why harry was acting the way he was. trauma is very complex, and theres no expiry date for it if you simply refuse to confront it or heal.

a lot of harry’s journey with interrogating the Perfect Father concept was to confront and acknowledge his inner child. he has to recognise his childhood for the childhood it was without the flashy titles or impressed ideals. the confrontation with dumbledore is the pinnacle of it— harry idolised dumbledore as a central father figure, and he realised when confronting the portrait that his relationship with dumbledore was much more complex and nuanced than he originally thought. suddenly dumbledore ceases to be an ideal, and harry sees him for the man that he was: conflicted, more uncertain in his own choices than he let on, heartbroken and self-sabotaging.

when harry presents himself at the end of the play to albus, he presents himself as human— an escapist, unsure in his decisions, insecure, and scared of the dark, small spaces and pigeons. and albus appreciates the flawed, real version of harry. those expectations and ideals that albus struggled to uphold in the face of harry’s projecting simply disappear, and he finally feels like he can adequately be harry’s son just by being.

another less obvious moment that shows this, is how harry and delphi mirror each other. delphi is the more extreme version of this— she is completely deluded in her worship for a father she never knew, so desperate for the love and respect shes built up in her mind that she’s dedicated her life to it and feels empty without the ideal to go off of. its why harry defends her when albus asks him why they shouldn’t just kill her— because hes the only one who understands the pain of being an orphan, living in an abusive household, dreams of ‘what ifs’ and what it can do to a person.

whats important to take away is that harry and albus love each other immensely, which is why they are able to turn over a new leaf at the end. it speaks of incredible strength on albus’ half, and i really want to stress that albus LOVES harry, because i see so much content about him straight up butchering or slandering harry when that is sooo not them!! if albus saw the way some of yall were misinterpreting his relationship with his dad he’d be livid. whether or not you would do the same in forgiving harry is irrelevant— albus has always wanted to have a good relationship with harry and the same goes both ways. people hurt each other, sometimes egregiously so, but when one promises change and is serious about it, than chances are there will be change. this is especially so in the case of family.

ginny weasley vs age

what is paradoxical is how self-centred harry is, despite also being very willing to sacrifice himself for other people. albus possesses a self-centredness similar to him. harry is so caught up in his own world and comparing it to albus’ situation, and vice versa. ginny is normally the middle man who can see both harry and albus for what they are and the individual worlds they inhabit, and tries to communicate effectively between them. the play mostly revolves around harry and albus, so what i’ll have to say for her will not be as in-depth.

short answer: ginny matured with age. she is probably the most mature character alongside draco, although draco does let his emotions get in the way at times (funnily enough i think this is why ginny and draco get along so well in the cursed child and are able to recognise each other for who they are). she was very brash and courageous and wonderfully chaotic in the books, but she was also blunt and impatient, which is not something thats presented in the cursed child. instead, she is VERY patient and communicates extremely well, being able to navigate both harry and albus without prodding their weak spots like they do to each other.

she offers her own experiences to albus as her own experiences, not projecting them onto him as an unequivocal truth. this can be seen in how she opens up to him about how she was exploited by tom riddle, and she lets albus draw his own comparisons to himself and delphi without pushing his experiences into a box.

her relationship with harry is interesting, because she is the only one who sees him for him and the only one that harry’s not bothered by when she makes honest judgments on his actions. he’s only okay with her seeing him for the flawed man he is. she doesn’t make him feel defensive, nor does she make him feel demonised for not knowing how to parent albus, or for messing up with him (though she does call him out when he is in the wrong, something her younger self would be quick to do too). one of the most heart wrenching scenes is when ginny blows up at harry and really screams at him about albus being missing and him being self-centred about it, making it out to be about himself and his issues surrounding fatherhood. despite this, harry does not get defensive— which shows that he trusts even her negative judgments of him because she knows him so well (very very similar to the library scene with scorpius screaming at albus over his self-centeredness as well btw).

she still possesses key qualities from her younger self, she’s just ironed out the rougher ones as she’s grown— she’s still impossibly brave, fiercely loyal, extremely devoted to those she loves and also very logical. you can tell harry and albus are more emotional than she is, which is part of the reason why she is able to construct her points so effectively. she puts her logical thinking to good use in emotional situations. i think people are forgetting that people aren’t typically going to be the same as who they were as teenagers.

why has ginny been able to grow so much in comparison to harry? because she’s recognised what she went through as a teenager and made peace with it. you can see it in the way she freely offers her own experiences about it. she’s been able to build on top of what she went through in a healthy way, and was able to experience real, healthy change. and she is so much wiser and kinder for it.

hinny vs their careers

first i’ll talk about harry because i think i have more stuff to go off of with him.

we’ve already established that hes The Hero first and foremost. after he fulfilled the prophecy and saved the world i dont think its such a stretch to argue that he may have needed another similar purpose to latch onto, and that being an auror granted him that. quidditch was fun for him, but it couldn’t give him the same purchase that being an auror could. heroes dont play quidditch, they save the world. the same could be said for neville and ron, who were also aurors at first. was it the healthiest road to go down for harry? i dont think so, but considering his characterisation in the cursed child, i think it works. ron ended up quitting to be a father, neville ended up quitting to focus on his real passion (herbology), and harry continued to cling onto The Hero image he’s used to presenting. yes, the ministry was impossibly corrupt and worked against him in his youth, but to harry that could’ve served as more of a reason to change the institution from the inside. this, i imagine, was most definitely the case with hermione, who was always an idealist.

that being said, i don’t think continuing being an auror is such a great idea post-hpcc. he at least needs a break in order to continue his job in a healthy manner and not misconstrue his identity with it.

in terms of ginny, i don’t believe she’d still be playing quidditch in her 40s. if you think about real athletes, very few of them continue playing professionally in their 40s (i think the average age is 34 but i may be wrong), especially after birthing three kids. we dont know much about her retirement, but there are many reasons one can assume ginny retired for, kids and/or age being the most reasonable deduction. its not so much a question of characterisation but more about the reality of having to give up your passion earlier than most if its sports.

despite retiring, its clear ginny is still very passionate about quidditch as shes still working within the field, just not playing the sport professionally anymore.

[lines-in-limbo]

I’ve just recently started reading Snape: The Definitive Analysis of Hogwarts’s Mysterious Potions Master by Lorrie Kim, and I’m really enjoying it so far! It’s offering some great insights into Snape’s character.

While looking into more character analyses, I came across Dumbledore: The Life and Lies of Hogwarts’ Renowned Headmaster by Irvin Khaytman. For those who’ve read it, is it worth checking out?

[bloodpxct]

I think the funniest think Albus Dumbledore ever did was wear a bright purple / plum suit while visiting the orphan Tom Riddle 😭

[hollowed-theory-hall]

Dumbledore is a Manipulative Piece of Shit: Part 4/?

(part 1, part 2, part 3)

He knew and allowed Harry's abuse

Well, this is a pleasant subject, isn't it? Harry's abuse at the Dursleys' hands. And the worst part about it is that no adult in his life really seems to care.

I'll talk about the Weasley parents in a different post. This one is dedicated to Dumbledore and how he always knew about Harry's abuse and allowed it to persist. For years. Not just once, Harry started Hogwarts. No, I think Dumbledore knew what was going on at Number 4 Privet Drive long before Harry stepped foot in Diagon Alley.

And more importantly, I can prove it.

So, I'll cover my evidence according to the order of the quotes that appear in the books since there is quite a bit to cover.

And yes, I know Dumbledore calls the Dursleys out in Half-Blood Prince:

“You did not do as I asked. You have never treated Harry as a son. He has known nothing but neglect and often cruelty at your hands. The best that can be said is that he has at least escaped the appalling damage you have inflicted upon the unfortunate boy sitting between you.”

(Half-Blood Prince, page 55)

But this scene is the definition of "too little, too late" considering how long this has been going on.

So, let's start:

“Nah. Dumbledore gave me the day off yesterday ter fix it. ‘course, he shoulda sacked me instead — anyway, got yeh this.…” It seemed to be a handsome, leather-covered book. Harry opened it curiously. It was full of wizard photographs. Smiling and waving at him from every page were his mother and father. “Sent owls off ter all yer parents’ old school friends, askin’ fer photos… knew yeh didn’ have any…d’yeh like it?”

(Philosopher's Stone, page 218)

Hagrid can't keep a secret to save his life, we know that, and he isnt the brightest, with all his good intentions. Yet, even he noticed something's wrong with Harry's home. He knows Harry doesn't have photos of his parents, he knows he never got any gifts.

"But that's not Dumbledore,"

True, but Hagrid tells Dumbledore everything. So if Hagrid knows, Dumbledore knows.

“I told you, I didn’t — but it’ll take too long to explain now — look, can you tell them at Hogwarts that the Dursleys have locked me up and won’t let me come back, and obviously I can’t magic myself out, because the Ministry’ll think that’s the second spell I’ve done in three days, so —” “Stop gibbering,” said Ron. “We’ve come to take you home with us.”

(Chamber of Secrets, page 31)

“It was cloudy, Mum!” said Fred. “You keep your mouth closed while you’re eating!” Mrs. Weasley snapped. “They were starving him, Mum!” said George. “And you!” said Mrs. Weasley, but it was with a slightly softened expression that she started cutting Harry bread and buttering it for him.

(Chamber of Secrets, page 39)

Both these quotes from Chamber of Secrets show Fred, George, Ron, and Mrs. Weasley clearly knew what was happening. That Harry was being locked up and starved.

Harry really, never kept his abuse a secret and is quite open about informing anyone who'd listen to him about it. He is just used to it being brushed off as something unfortunate that nothing can be done about. The Weasleys, McGonagall, Dumbledore, Remus, and the entire Order of the Phoenix treat it as such.

In OOP, Harry references needing to duck from Vernon's beatings as a joke to Ron and Hermione. He wasn't keeping it a secret.

On the same vane:

She had no idea that Harry was not following the diet at all. The moment he had got wind of the fact that he was expected to survive the summer on carrot sticks, Harry had sent Hedwig to his friends with pleas for help … Hagrid, the Hogwarts gamekeeper, had obliged with a sack full of his own homemade rock cakes. (Harry hadn’t touched these; he had had too much experience of Hagrid’s cooking.) Mrs. Weasley, however, had sent the family owl, Errol, with an enormous fruitcake and assorted meat pies.

“Why didn’t you tell me you’re a Squib?” Harry asked Mrs. Figg, panting with the effort to keep walking. “All those times I came round your house — why didn’t you say anything?” “Dumbledore’s orders. I was to keep an eye on you but not say anything, you were too young. I’m sorry I gave you such a miserable time, but the Dursleys would never have let you come if they’d thought you enjoyed it. It wasn’t easy, you know. . . . But oh my word,”

(Goblet of Fire, page 28)

Harry wrote everyone he knew he was being starved. He wrote Hagrid and the Weasleys, and they all sent him food. The adults sent him food without bothering to ask him the important question: "Why aren't you being fed?"

(Order of the Pheonix, page 22)

This is the most damning evidence against Dumbledore.

He knew. He knew how Harry was treated his entire childhood because he had someone spy on him for years.

Mrs. Figg knew how Harry was treated by the Dursleys. She calls it: "miserable". She knew.

And she was sent there on Dumbledore's orders, meaning she was a spy. because let's be real, a squib, who can't do magic and doesn't own a gun can't do anything to protect Harry. She can only be there to spy. To report everything to Dumbledore.

This proves, more than any other quote here, how okay Dumbledore is with Harry suffering at the hands of the Dursleys.

Next moment he jumped as the lock gave a loud click and his door swung open. Harry stood motionless, staring through the open door at the dark upstairs landing, straining his ears for further sounds, but none came. He hesitated for a moment and then moved swiftly and silently out of his room to the head of the stairs. His heart shot upward into his throat. There were people standing in the shadowy hall below, silhouetted against the streetlight glowing through the glass door; eight or nine of them, all, as far as he could see, looking up at him.

(Order of the Pheonix, page 46)

The entire Order was there, at Number 4, Privet Drive. They've been following Harry since he got there. Tonks has seen Harry's bedroom. I don't think they missed something is definitely wrong. (I think this is why they tell the Dursleys off at the end of the fifth book and Dumbledore again in the sixth because someone else finally knew and Dumbledore had no choice but to address it)

And to make sure the Order is aware something's wrong between him and the Dursleys (that being an understatement), Harry outright tells Lupin:

“Excellent,” said Lupin, looking up as Tonks and Harry entered. “We’ve got about a minute, I think. We should probably get out into the garden so we’re ready. Harry, I’ve left a letter telling your aunt and uncle not to worry —” “They won’t,” said Harry. “That you’re safe —” “That’ll just depress them.” “— and you’ll see them next summer.” “Do I have to?” Lupin smiled but made no answer.

(Order of the Pheonix, page 54)

Harry makes it very clear the Dursleys don't care for his safety and that he never wants to return to literally everyone he can.

Why then? Why would Dumbledore want Harry abused?

“She’s evil,” said Harry flatly. “Twisted.” “She’s horrible, yes, but . . . Harry, I think you ought to tell Dumbledore your scar hurt.” It was the second time in two days he had been advised to go to Dumbledore and his answer to Hermione was just the same as his answer to Ron. “I’m not bothering him with this. Like you just said, it’s not a big deal. It’s been hurting on and off all summer — it was just a bit worse tonight, that’s all —” “Harry, I’m sure Dumbledore would want to be bothered by this —” “Yeah,” said Harry, before he could stop himself, “that’s the only bit of me Dumbledore cares about, isn’t it, my scar?” “Don’t say that, it’s not true!”

(Order of the Pheonix, page 277)

Harry said it best here: "for his scar"

In the previous posts, I covered how desperate Dumbledore was at the end of the war for a win, so much so, he might've forged a prophecy. And I explained he needed Sirius Black out of the picture for the same reason he wanted Harry at the Dursleys and wanted him mistreated — confident boys with a good support network and emotional regulation don't make very good martyrs.

In part 2, I mentioned how Dumbledore knew since the night the Potters died that Harry is likely a Horcrux. He has been manipulating Harry's life since then to achieve his grand plan of killing Voldemort. Even if it comes at the price of Harry having anything resembling a childhood and a life.

[maxdibert]

What do you think Dumbledore's zodiac sign is? There's no precise canon DOB, but according to the HP wiki (based on information from DH book and the second Fantastic Beasts movie) it's late August 1881, so he's either a Leo or Virgo.

Astrologically, Leo brings leadership, charisma, and generosity, while Virgo contributes intellect, modesty, and attention to detail. Dumbledore embodies both archetypes: he has the courage, regal presence, and light humor typical of Leo, but also the analytical mind, humility, and perfectionism of Virgo. For example, he was a brilliant student who won every award at Hogwarts, clearly indicating a highly Virgoan intellectual profile.

It’s true that Dumbledore is flamboyant, charismatic, and enjoys being in the spotlight; he also has a moralistic way of viewing the world, which fits well with Leo. And I wouldn’t be surprised if Rowling intended to portray him as a Leo. But Dumbledore is more than someone who simply seeks the good, no matter how much the narrative wants to sell us that idea. He is a deeply complex character—at times dark, prejudiced, and prone to making preconceived judgments about people. Dumbledore is highly calculating and pragmatic. In that sense, he aligns more closely with Virgo.

Dumbledore doesn’t lead with passion, but through the design of systems. He presents himself as reserved, manipulative, and burdened by silent guilt. Virgo also has its shadow side: silent sacrifice, control, emotional coldness justified by logic. That sounds more like Dumbledore than the Leo archetype, which offers itself to the world with all its fire and pride. Virgo does have a service-oriented nature, but also a judgmental one: it separates, categorizes, and discriminates. Its ethics are high, but not always empathetic; it’s an ethic of duty, not of the heart. So Virgo it is, folks, sorry!

[fannedandflawless]

From Student to Staff: The Adults Who Watched Him Break, Then Welcomed Him Back

Severus Snape didn’t just return to Hogwarts as a professor. He returned to a castle full of ghosts—not the ones who drifted through walls, but the ones who once looked through him. The ones who had titles, robes, and responsibilities. And Merlin, the way they smiled when he came back.

These weren’t strangers. These were his former teachers. The ones who watched him unravel—slowly, painfully, obviously. They saw the weight—emotional bruises no child his age should have been burdened with. They noticed the robes that hung too loose, the way his voice softened into nothing, the eyes that dulled year by year. And then, as if memory had been Obliviated, they greeted him with polite nods and teacups.

Let’s name them. Let’s drag the velvet curtain back. Let’s ask what they refused to.

🧙‍♂️ Albus Dumbledore — The Grand Strategist of Silence

He saw everything. The twinkle in his eye? That was calculation. Dumbledore knew Severus’ pain. Knew his background. Knew the Marauders were brutal, and knew exactly how Hogwarts worked for boys who didn’t shine the right way.

And what did he do? Nothing.

Not until the prophecy.

Not until Severus—broken and desperate—came crawling with regret.

Only then did Dumbledore offer protection. And even then, it wasn’t mercy. It was strategy. It was cost-benefit arithmetic.

He kept Severus close, yes—but not out of trust. Out of necessity. And in that same chessboard logic, he raised Harry the same way. A pawn to be protected, yes, but only until it was time to be sacrificed.

Severus recognised it all too well. The same cold detachment Dumbledore had shown him as a man—keeping him close, not out of care, but for utility—was now being applied to Harry. Despite the tangled mess of resentment and reluctant protection he felt toward the boy—born of Lily, shaped by James—Severus could see the pattern. He could see the purpose.

He saw through it: "You've kept him alive so that he can die at the proper moment. You've been raising him like a pig for slaughter!"

Two lives. One broken young, the other burdened late. Both groomed to serve, both shaped for sacrifice—and in the end, perhaps, both meant to die on cue.

And when the war ended, Dumbledore offered Severus a position—not because he sought to make amends, but because it served a purpose. Severus had returned to spy, initially under orders, a reluctant shadow caught between masters. And once the mask was worn long enough, Dumbledore simply let it stay.

As if a professorship could heal years of sanctioned cruelty. As if being called "Professor" would cleanse the memory of being a punchline in the corridor.

⸻

🧪 Horace Slughorn — The Collector of Potential

He loved talent. But only when it glittered.

Slughorn praised Severus’ brilliance in Potions—called him promising, sharp. But he never once shielded him.

He didn’t invite him to the Slug Club. Not until Severus’ name meant something. Not until his mind could decorate a shelf.

Slughorn’s affection was conditional. You had to be charming. Presentable. A legacy. And Severus? He was none of those things. Just a poor boy with a hungry mind and no surname to flaunt.

And perhaps that is why, years later, Severus held nothing but quiet disdain for him. Because if anyone should have noticed what was happening in the shadows of Slytherin House, it should have been its Head. Not McGonagall. Not Dumbledore. Slughorn.

He should have seen it first. And yet—he didn’t.

Slughorn used him on parchment, but never sat beside him in reality.

⸻

🐈‍⬛ Minerva McGonagall — Sharp-Eyed and Selectively Blind

Minerva loved her lions. James Potter was golden in her eyes—brave, brilliant, bold.

She watched him torment Severus in broad daylight. She called it mischief. At best, she scolded. At worst, she said nothing.

She taught Severus Transfiguration. She saw his talent. But she never once stepped in when he was dangling upside down in a public corridor.

And years later? She called him Severus. Perhaps it was meant as respect. Perhaps it was all she had left to give. But even that name, spoken in her steady voice, must have tasted hollow.

Because if I were Severus, I don’t know what I would feel beneath the careful nods and professional courtesy. Not really.

Respect? Yes. She was formidable, fair—in her own way. But also a bystander. A witness to pain who never raised her wand.

The bitterness would have settled in strange places. Not hatred. Not fury. Just that sharp ache that lingers when someone could have helped—and chose not to.

As if calling him by name could erase the silence that came before it.

⸻

📚 Filius Flitwick — Gentle, Brilliant, Absent

Flitwick was kind. Clever. Charms master of immense skill. The sort of professor whose praise felt like sunlight.

And yet—he kept to his corner. He didn’t speak up.

Severus wasn’t just a good student. He was exceptional. The sort of student whose talent should have lit up the classroom like a Lumos Maxima—quiet, focused, effortlessly precise. The kind of brilliance that doesn’t need to shout because it radiates.

He invented spells. Created incantations from scratch. If anyone in Charms class should’ve stood out like a blinking sign under a spotlight—radiating silent brilliance from the back of the room—it was him. You didn’t need him to speak to notice. You just had to be looking.

Surely Flitwick noticed. How could he not?

But maybe noticing brilliance wasn’t the same as seeing pain. Maybe house loyalty got in the way. Maybe the politics of Slytherin versus Gryffindor made it easier to stay silent.

Perhaps he thought it wasn’t his place. Perhaps no one ever taught the professors how to reach past a student's wandwork and into their wounds.

And so, in the silence between spells, a boy learned that even kindness could be hollow.

⸻

🌿 Pomona Sprout — The Kind Bystander

Warm, earthy, nurturing. That was Sprout’s image. A Hufflepuff’s dream.

But she, too, looked away.

Maybe she frowned at what she saw. Maybe she clucked disapproval over tea. But she never interrupted the hierarchy.

Not when Severus slouched through corridors like a shadow. Not when he withered a little more each autumn.

She believed in fairness—but not enough to fight for it.

⸻

🏥 Madam Pomfrey — The Healer Who Didn’t See

Out of all the professors, Madam Pomfrey may be the one I find myself most curious about. Not because she was cruel—she wasn’t. Not because she was blind—she couldn’t have been. But because if anyone should have noticed—it was her.

She could spot a fractured rib with a glance. She healed Quidditch injuries between spoonfuls of broth. Her hands were warm, her wards comforting.

And yet… she didn’t notice Severus returning each term thinner, paler, greyer?

No trace of curiosity when he flinched at loud spells? No quiet pause when he walked too carefully, too lightly—as if even the castle floors might punish him?

Did she not see the hex marks? The magical burns? Did she really miss the boy who never sought help unless he was near collapse?

Or perhaps... he hid it too well. Perhaps he wore silence like a second robe. Perhaps he'd already learned that pain, when visible, only made you more vulnerable. That vulnerability made you expendable.

But still—she was a healer. She would have known the signs. Malnutrition. Exhaustion. The long-term magical residue that clings to a child who’s been hexed too often.

Pomfrey, as matron, was in a position to notice it all—if he had come to her. But maybe he didn’t. Maybe he couldn’t. Maybe he knew better than to hope.

We know his home life wasn’t gentle. Tobias Snape, his father, was a drunk—furious, unkind, loud enough to silence the whole house. We weren’t shown every bruise or every scream, but we were shown the aftermath.

So when Severus came back each September—robes loose, eyes dimmed, voice flat—surely, surely she must have seen something. Anything. A flicker of concern. A whisper of doubt.

To be fair, we cannot fully blame her. Hundreds of students passed through her care. She healed what was asked, tended what was brought. Perhaps she was simply overwhelmed. Perhaps she assumed someone else would act.

But still… I can’t help but wonder.

She offered pepperup potions to those with sniffles. She wrapped bandages around bruised Gryffindors.

But Severus? The boy who never asked, who needed most?

She offered rest to others.

But not to him.

⸻

They all had eyes. They all had wands. They all had duty—but they wore it like a decorative cloak, not a vow.

And oh, how one wonders. How could they not see the bruises? The shoulders pulled too tight? The voice too low?

How could a castle brimming with portraits, portraits that whispered and staircases that listened, miss the slow crumbling of a child?

Perhaps they did see. Perhaps that’s what makes it worse.

Because silence isn’t always ignorance. Sometimes, it’s a choice. Sometimes, it’s self-preservation masquerading as neutrality. Sometimes, it’s indifference dressed as decorum.

And still—they looked away.

Severus Snape returned to Hogwarts as a man.

But once, he was the boy they failed.

And they seated him at their table as if none of it ever happened.

[kalkaros-is-the-boss]

“I don’t think Snape’s redemption arc was good”. That’s because it didn’t happen. No, I’m serious, Snape didn’t have a redemption arc in the books. His redemption happened literally before the first book. We only hear about it, but we don’t see it, because it’s not relevant. What is relevant, is the knowledge that he is on Harry’s side. The Prince’s Tale was not a redemption, it was a reveal. In the Prince’s Tale it’s revealed that Snape has redeemed himself, it’s revealed that he is on Harry’s side. We're not shown his redemption arc, we're shown why we - or more specifically, why Harry - should believe that he is on his side. Do you really think Snape cares if people think he’s good? He doesn’t care about being redeemed in Harry’s or anyone’s eyes, all he cares about is that Harry believes him. That’s why we’re shown Lily’s and his relationship, so we understand what motivates him in the most raw, and bare level. Even if Harry doesn’t believe that he’s good, he’ll understand that Snape would do anything for Lily, and therefore anything to protect Harry. We’re shown him and Dumbledore, so we’ll know that he is following Dumbledore’s orders and that Dumbledore trusts him. Again, Harry doesn’t have to think that Snape is good, he just needs to trust that he’s following Dumbledore’s orders.

It’s not a redemption, it’s a reveal.

[redr0sewrites]

i would talk about harry potter on here but no one agrees with my headcanons i fear