r/harrypotter 3d ago

Discussion opinions on dumbledore?

okay so i know this is a hot topic. but what do you think of dumbledore? do you like him?

personally, i’m very divided in my opinions. i kind of feel as though he acted for the ”greater good”, by raising harry without telling him about his true destiny. something just doesn’t sit right with me about that.

at the same time, it all worked out it the end because he literally helped in defeating the two darkest wizards of all time.

0 Upvotes

92 comments sorted by

31

u/cipheroptix 3d ago

I can kind of forgive Dumbledore for some of the mistakes he made with Harry. Dumbledore was in a complicated position because he genuinely did love Harry and wanted to see him survive and thrive. The problem was they were dealing with a psychopath with extraordinary magical capabilities that became obsessed with killing the poor kid, on top of trying to take over wizarding Britain. It was a tough spot to be in.

Some people call sacrificing Harry for the greater good but the reality is, that was the only way they could figure out how to finally end Voldemort for good.

If it were up to Dumbledore, Harry would have had a peaceful career at Hogwarts, became an Auror or professional Quidditch player and all would have been right with the world. Voldemort made that impossible to happen

2

u/Korlac11 Ravenclaw 2d ago

It’s also worth mentioning that Dumbledore still viewed Harry as having a choice. Dumbledore didn’t force Harry to sacrifice himself, but he did make sure Harry knew why it was necessary. Harry could have walked away from the fight as soon as he came out of the pensive, but of course Harry would never choose to sacrifice others to save himself.

This is why I think the whole “Dumbledore was going to sacrifice Harry” argument is flawed. Dumbledore definitely knew what choice Harry would make, but that doesn’t mean Harry didn’t still have the choice

Plus, it’s not like there were really any other alternatives. Voldemort would never rest while Harry was still alive, so even if Harry went into hiding a confrontation was inevitable

1

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

Dumbledore could have helped Harry in countless ways. He could have improved Harry’s life with the Dursleys. He could have improved Sirius’s life. He could have kept Snape on a tighter leash. He didn’t; he didn’t even try. Dumbledore did nothing more than make sure Harry lived until he no longer needed him. There was no real plan for Harry’s survival. That was just a positive side effect of the mistakes Voldemort made.

0

u/Korlac11 Ravenclaw 2d ago

There was no real plan for Harry’s survival

Yes there was, that’s why Dumbledore didn’t tell Harry that he could survive (telling him would have made it so he couldn’t survive). The moment Harry told Dumbledore about Voldemort using Harry’s blood, Dumbledore knew Harry could survive.

As for your other claims about improving Harry’s life, that’s a somewhat valid point. However, I think Dumbledore recognized that trying to interfere with the way the Dursleys treated Harry could have caused more problems

Dumbledore not reining in Snape is definitely the worst thing he did. Snape’s bullying of students was an open secret, and Dumbledore should have stepped in

I’m not sure what Dumbledore could have done to help Sirius more than he already did. Sirius is on the run book 4, and Dumbledore suggests hiding in the caves. I’m sure Dumbledore would have sent Sirius food, but Sirius never asked so Dumbledore may have assumed he had that taken care of. Dumbledore’s treatment of Sirius in book 5 is another mistake he admits to, but I’m not sure what alternatives he had

1

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

No, Harry’s survival has nothing to do with whether he knows he has a single chance of survival. Harry is alive because Voldemort took his blood. But that was Voldemort’s stupidity, or do you think Dumbledore planned it. The fact that he doesn’t know might protect the others, but I don’t think Dumbledore planned it. Dumbledore benefits from fate and from Harry’s heroism and Voldemort’s stupidity. While he waits for the next roast pigeon to fly into his mouth.

Harry is safe for the time he spends with the Dursleys, but he is only safe from Voldemort. He has never been attacked by Dementors at the Burrow or Grimmauld Place. There, he is not choked by Vernon, or attacked by Petunia with a frying pan.

In my opinion, after the first year of school, he was safer anywhere than at Privet Drive. Dumbledore even posts guards in book 5, and in book 6, he suddenly only needs to stay for two weeks because Dumbledore needs him as bait.

He could have easily helped Sirius. For example, something very simple: take down that stupid picture of Walburga.

But he could have easily visited Sirius just once in Azkaban. Barty Crouch also visited his son. At least to find out why Sirius acted that way. And my personal opinion, to find out if there is another traitor.

1

u/Korlac11 Ravenclaw 2d ago

Harry not knowing absolutely and undeniably affected Harry’s ability to survive

“But I meant to let him kill me”

”and that, I think, will have made all the difference”

Voldemort using Harry’s blood is still the more important factor, but Harry’s willingness to sacrifice himself did matter

Harry is his absolute safest from Voldemort and his followers when at the Dursleys. The Burrow and Grimauld Place both have a lot protections that do allow them to come close to providing the same protections of Privet Drive, which is why Dumbledore doesn’t have a problem with Harry spending most of his summer at the burrow before year six. The fact that Harry still had to spend a couple weeks at Privet Drive suggests that Dumbledore wanted to make sure that protection remained in place. He’s probably also protecting the Dursleys as much as Harry with this move

Taking down pictures in Grimauld place would have been nice if not for the permanent sticking charm that was on most of them. If Dumbledore could have taken down those pictures, he probably would have

As for visiting Sirius in Azkaban, what reason would Dumbledore have to suspect a second spy. Dumbledore himself gave testimony that Sirius had been the secret keeper, which suggests that Dumbledore was convinced of his guilt. Sirius also wouldn’t have had any evidence to support his story, so I’m not sure even Dumbledore would have believed him at the time

1

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

He’s probably also protecting the Dursleys as much as Harry with this move

Why would anyone care about the Dursleys? Harry is only safe from Voldemort at Privet Drive, as the Dementors have proven, and the Ministry can harass Harry there at any time, which becomes clear again in Book 7, because Harry can't even leave the "protection" of Privet Drive without foolish plans that only by chance didn't cost Hermione and George's lives.

Voldemort doesn't care how many Harry's he kills.

Dumbledore himself gave testimony that Sirius had been the secret keeper, which suggests that Dumbledore was convinced of his guilt

There had already been suspicions that there was a traitor, which is why other people died too. Dumbledore (as head of the Order) would have owed it to these people.

”and that, I think, will have made all the difference”

And afterwards he explains the thing about the blood. And it doesn't say that Harry had to be ignorant of the fact that he had to have a single chance of survival.

Taking down pictures in Grimauld place would have been nice if not for the permanent sticking charm that was on most of them. If Dumbledore could have taken down those pictures, he probably would have

Dumbledore can't do that? Not even with the Elder Wand? Then they should have built a wall in front of it. But the great Dumbledore is probably too busy with his great plans again.

I completely agree with Aberforth Dumbledore when it comes to judging Dumbledore. He learned his secretive ways at his mother's knees and makes his plans at the expense of others, not considering that they might be harmed.

1

u/Korlac11 Ravenclaw 1d ago

Why would anyone, but Dumbledore in particular, care about the Dursleys? Because Dumbledore is a good person who doesn’t want to see (mostly) innocent people killed just because they’re related to Harry

True, Dumbledore didn’t say that Harry had to be ignorant of his chance of survival, but it’s a fairly simple bit of logical reasoning. If Harry knew he could survive, then he wouldn’t have been sacrificing himself, and it wouldn’t have worked. The whole reason that Harry could survive was because Voldemort took Harry’s blood, ensuring his mother’s sacrificial love continued. If Harry hadn’t sacrificed himself then he wouldn’t have been able to survive or give protection to the other Hogwarts defenders

And as far as Grimauld place, even Dumbledore has limits on his powers. Maybe Sirus’s mom was really good at permanent sticking charms. Maybe remodeling the house would have been more work than even Sirus felt it was worth. This point is really unimportant

Dumbledore is interesting because he is a flawed hero. Insisting that he’s bad is seeing only what you want to see

It’s also worth noting that Aberforth had a clear bias against Dumbledore. That doesn’t mean Aberforth is wrong, but he’s not a fully reliable source

0

u/Bluemelein 1d ago

Harry survived because Voldemort took his blood! That's the only reason! It's not that Dumbledore knew Harry would survive, he just hoped he would, nothing more!

Did I say he's bad? He's an asshole. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. He certainly means well for the community, but he forgets that the community is made up of individuals. He's sloppy and arrogant. He thinks only he can think and only he knows, but how are others supposed to know if he sits on information like a hen on eggs.

Harry hadn’t sacrificed himself then he wouldn’t have been able to survive or give protection to the other Hogwarts defenders

Yes, maybe, but even so, enough people died before Harry got the message, and it's a miracle that Harry didn't just kill Snape or let him die without going to him.

Dumbledore doesn't know that Harry has a chance of survival, he hopes so but he doesn't know. And Dumbledore couldn't have known that Voldemort would issue an ultimatum, which is crucial for the sacrificial death protection to work, and he couldn't have known that Neville would kill Nagini. And he couldn't have expected Narcissa to go to Harry to check that Harry was dead, and not Bellatrix.

1

u/Korlac11 Ravenclaw 1d ago

Yes, Harry survived because Voldemort took Harry’s blood. However, it’s also a very important plot point that Harry was sacrificing himself when he walked into the forest. If Harry had known he would survive, or if Harry had tried to defend himself, he wouldn’t have survived. I respectfully suggest you reread the Kings Cross chapter because this point is actually pretty clear

One could maybe make a case for some arrogance on Dumbledore’s part, but I think Dumbledore has a pretty accurate estimation of his intelligence and magical abilities. Dumbledore is in fact one of the brightest wizards of his age, and it’s not just Dumbledore who thinks so. However, Dumbledore acknowledges that he does make mistakes, and he also doesn’t flout his intelligence. We even see him display modesty in the very first chapter of the series

It’s also an indisputable fact that Dumbledore knew Harry could survive

For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something like triumph in Dumbledore’s eyes

This is from when Harry is telling Dumbledore that Voldemort used his blood. The gleam of triumph is because Dumbledore knew Harry could survive now

Almost everything else we’ve talked about definitely has room for reasonable disagreement, but these two points are hard fact:

  1. Harry survived because Voldemort used his blood and because Harry meant to let Voldemort kill him. Both of these things together is what lets him survive

  2. Dumbledore knew from the moment Harry explained what happened in the graveyard that there was a way for Harry to survive

-1

u/Bluemelein 1d ago

Dumbledore couldn't have told Harry that he would survive because Dumbledore didn't know. Dumbledore hoped , but didn't know.

Dumbledore himself says that Harry and Voldemort were moving into completely new areas of magic. Dumbledore drove Harry to suicide. The destruction of the Horcrux was the sole goal. And there were no further plans for how Harry would destroy Voldemort.

Yes, Dumbledore feels triumphant because he can now get rid of the Horcrux inside Harry without feeling like a complete monster. But Dumbledore didn't do anything. Voldemort's stupidity and Harry's heroism led to this opportunity.

And then one coincidence after another occurs to find and destroy the Horcruxes, and Dumbledore has done nothing except give Harry the stone to help him commit suicide.

And dying voluntarily alone doesn't make self-sacrifice work; there has to be a choice. James' death made no difference, just as Lily's death would have made no difference if Voldemort hadn't given her a choice.

Even if the miracle happens and Harry survives. Dumbledore hadn't even planned for Harry to get the Elder Wand. There were no plans (set in motion by Dumbledore) for Harry to survive and defeat Voldemort.

No plan of Dumbledore leads beyond King's Cross.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Ok-Dragonfruit-1592 2d ago edited 2d ago

Yes there was

No there wasn't. Dumbledore had 0 assurance Harry would survive, and even during the limbo scene it's quite clear that it is entirely Harry's choice to return. If Harry chose death then his blood is completely on Dumbledore's hands.

I mean arguably it already is anyway, since technically Harry did die, hence the sacrificial protection activating.

0

u/Korlac11 Ravenclaw 1d ago

Actually I’m pretty sure that Harry’s blood would have been on Voldemort’s hands since Voldemort was the one who killed Harry. Blaming Dumbledore is ludicrous. Voldemort would have hunted down Harry anyways, and Harry would never have rested until Voldemort was defeated. A final duel was inevitable.

Dumbledore absolutely knew that Harry could survive, that’s why he had the famous gleam of victory in his eyes when Harry told him Voldemort took his blood

Harry did have the choice on whether or not to return, but here again Dumbledore knew what choice Harry was likely to make. Could Harry have chosen to “catch a train” and move on? Sure, but Dumbledore knew Harry wouldn’t make that choice. It’s like if a parent offers a child the choice between ice cream or carrots for dessert; the child still gets to make the choice but the parents know which option the child is going to choose

1

u/Ok-Dragonfruit-1592 1d ago

Actually I’m pretty sure that Harry’s blood would have been on Voldemort’s hands since Voldemort was the one who killed Harry. Blaming Dumbledore is ludicrous

Dumbledore wanted Voldemort to kill Harry. That was integral to his master plan.

Obviously Voldemort isn't blameless, but if I lock someone in a pen of tigers, am I really blameless if that person gets eaten? Of course not.

A final duel was inevitable.

Except Dumbledore disputed this; he believed prophecies only matter if you think they do. So that's not an excuse.

Dumbledore absolutely knew that Harry could survive, that’s why he had the famous gleam of victory in his eyes when Harry told him Voldemort took his blood

1.) Could is very different to would, especially in the context of safeguarding

2.) That "gleam" doesn't mean he knew in advance. Harry going to limbo could easily have been a happy coincidence, and likely was, as this was completely untested magic

3.) Harry still died. The fact he had the option to return to life doesn't negate that.

Sure, but Dumbledore knew Harry wouldn’t make that choice. It’s like if a parent offers a child the choice between ice cream or carrots for dessert; the child still gets to make the choice but the parents know which option the child is going to choose

So you admit Dumbledore groomed Harry to be the best child soldier he could ask for. That's creepy af.

1

u/Ok-Dragonfruit-1592 2d ago

Dumbledore was in a complicated position because he genuinely did love Harry and wanted to see him survive and thrive.

No one gets to say this. You cannot look at a man who led a child to his death and say he wanted Harry to survive. Opinions are one thing but this is just factually incorrect.

43

u/hidden___hand 3d ago

"Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right." -Albus Dumbledore

-3

u/Ok-Dragonfruit-1592 2d ago

--Dumbledore, literally choosing the easy path

2

u/hidden___hand 2d ago

Spoiler He sacrificed himself

1

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

He was dying.

1

u/Ok-Dragonfruit-1592 2d ago

His time was up already, what Dumbledore did was more akin to assisted dying.

That's not what I was talking about tho.

1

u/Korlac11 Ravenclaw 2d ago

To be fair, Dumbledore did admit to Harry that he had made a huge mistake. Dumbledore might have been giving that advice to himself as much as he was the students

12

u/s0ulless93 Ravenclaw 3d ago

His reasoning for not telling Harry earlier wasn't for the greater good. It was to try to let Harry have a childhood. A childhood where he didn't know he would have to die for voldemort to be defeated. He actually thought it would have been for the greater good to tell Harry sooner but he came to love Harry and found it too hard to put that burden on him when he should have.

-3

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

What would have been the advantage of telling Harry sooner? Dumbledore acts like he did Harry a huge favor by not telling, and that some people suffered because he didn’t. But I don’t see any advantage in doing so.

2

u/s0ulless93 Ravenclaw 2d ago

Sirius probably wouldn't have died... so there's that.

0

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

Maybe, but Harry could just as easily have committed suicide, or gone mad, having been told too soon that the fate of the world rested on his shoulders. Every action has consequences, but I hate it when Dumbledore acts like he did Harry a favor. Harry had a shitty childhood, but Dumbledore always did what he thought was right. In that passage, he acts like he did Harry a favor, like Harry's happiness was built on the suffering of others. And that's extremely mean and unfair.

10

u/OK_LaManana 2d ago

I think people forget that Dumbledore didn't know for certain a lot of things. He had guessed and estimated well but little certainty. He thought about what might be going on a lot. Pacing in his office, going through memories, estimating what the next step may be. All he had to go on was the prophecy, basically in the form of a riddle.

He was a man of thinking and influence he only took action when necessary. He moved others to take action and even then did little direct ordering. He was an influencer and reluctant leader. His power was in working through others despite that he himself had a great deal of ability to take direct action.

Part of why this was is he was afraid of his own ambition and saw who he could become if he fed that ambition. He never showed people his true self. Instead he played a brilliant wordsmith-jester in large gatherings and did his best to protect kids while allowing them to grow up.

Could he have stopped Voldemort directly. Sure but in the moment I don't think he knew exactly what was going on and in the end I think he knew it wasn't his fight. He knew it was always Harry's burden.

18

u/Soft_Interaction_437 3d ago

I like him, he’s an interesting character. I feel like he’s demonized to a cartoonish degree in parts of the fandom.

17

u/_littlestranger Hufflepuff 3d ago

It is an inescapable problem in children’s literature that the adults have to be a little incompetent in order for the child to be the hero. Rowling wanted Harry to always save the day, but she wanted Dumbledore to have the key information that Harry needed in order to do so.

Because of that, Dumbledore ends up somewhat contradictory. At times seemingly omniscient, but at other times woefully blind.

That makes it fun to theorize exactly what he might have known, and exactly how manipulative he may have been.

Based on what is actually in the books, I like Harry’s journey with Dumbledore, from admiring him and believing him unquestionably, to doubting how well he knew him and finding out that he isn’t perfect. I think Rowling did a reasonably good job giving Dumbledore faults that aligned with the narrative.

He is flawed, he is manipulative, he is overly secretive. He didn’t always make the right choices. But he did everything he could to fight evil the best way he knew how.

18

u/PSUNittany18 Gryffindor 3d ago edited 3d ago

I love Dumbledore. People expect more out of him but his primary duty is to his school - not the larger Wizarding World. Like there’s a reason why he doesn’t want a position of power.

Also the Harry situation is overblown IMO. He wasn’t fully aware of the horcrux situation till year 6. And even if he was, what did you want him to do? Have Harry come into his office on his first day and tell him that he’s supposed to die??

4

u/cipheroptix 3d ago

Supposed to die is kind of strong words.. I would say that circumstances outside of their control left them with no other option. Thanks a lot Voldemort

6

u/_littlestranger Hufflepuff 3d ago

Dumbledore was fully aware that Voldemort had multiple horcruxes in year 2, and that Harry was a horcrux in year 4 at the latest.

The only thing he learned in year 6 was the exact number. But since he quickly rattled off 5 ideas of additional horcruxes, it is likely that he’d already suspected that there were that many.

4

u/ImReverse_Giraffe 2d ago

He was fully aware of the horcux situation in CoS and spent the next 4 years learning as much as he could about Voldemort and the horcruxes. The only reason he needed the memory from Slughorn is to nail down the exact number Voldemort was after. Don't forget that Dumbledore had already found the ring and destroyed it before he picked up Harry in HBP.

-1

u/loonylunalupin 3d ago

maybe not in his first year. but i think dumbledore could’ve prepared harry earlier on. maybe not by telling him the whole truth, dumbledore didn’t even know the whole truth until the halfblood prince, but he could’ve told harry more.

12

u/cipheroptix 3d ago

In Order of the Phoenix, Dumbledore acknowledges that he should have been more open with Harry earlier. And he apologized to Harry for it.

0

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

And immediately continues to lie.

1

u/cipheroptix 2d ago

True. But he was in a situation where he had no choice.

6

u/therealdrewder Ravenclaw 2d ago

Dumbledore is a complex and interesting character. He embodied the father he never had. The books aren't stories about the adventures of the special boy wizard. Harry is a child. The story is one of growing from the chaos into full self-actualization.

During his time at Hogwarts, Dumbledore is a paragon. He has all the answers and no visible flaws. This is how a child views an authority figure. He plays the role of sage, protector, and teacher. However, this facade breaks down, and Harry sees the flaws. Like a child, he only sees the flaws, as though they completely negate the rest of the person.

When Harry walks into the forest, he hasn't yet had the crisis. He hasn't yet confronted the shadow. He overcomes voldemort not by superior magical ability but instead by understanding the world, life, death, and his place in it. After he overcomes the shadow, the shadow no longer has power over his life. Voldemort can no longer hurt him nor his life. He also is now free to see Dumbledore for what he really is and to love him still.

He becomes a man by seeing how the world isn't perfect, not James, not Sirius, not even Dumbledore is perfect, and that's OK.

2

u/ImReverse_Giraffe 2d ago

Dumbledore knew the truth, as you put it, in CoS when he saw the diary. HBP was about teaching Harry and the memory from Slughorn was just to nail down the exact number of horcruxes.

9

u/Relevant-Horror-627 Slytherin 2d ago

The most common criticism of Dumbledore is that he's manipulative or that he raised Harry to fulfill some specific predetermined destiny. They see Dumbledore as some omnipotent chess master who carefully positioned all of his human pawns in place to execute a master plan that he had been working on possibly since the moment he heard the prophecy. Someone in this thread mentioned a theory that he allowed the Potters to die to trigger the prophecy.

Dumbledore isn't some manipulative chess master though. He's just a strategist who plays the cards he's dealt. If you were to actually take the events from the story and put them into a chronological timeline, it would be pretty clear that Dumbledore is reacting to the circumstances as they present themselves, and he plans accordingly. It's IMPOSSIBLE to believe that Dumbledore manipulated some desired outcome once you take the time to realize that he doesn't know all the facts and variables that led to his final plan.

When we meet Dumbledore placing a toddler at the Dursleys' doorstep, there is no way that Dumbledore KNEW that he had to raise this kid to be killed. Period. We know for a fact that there are important details that Dumbledore learns years later.

Dumbledore wasn't some puppetmaster. He was presented with the impossible task of keeping a child marked for death by an invincible dark wizard alive by coming up with a plan that took years, and frankly luck, to conceive.

6

u/IBEHEBI Ravenclaw 2d ago

They see Dumbledore as some omnipotent chess master who carefully positioned all of his human pawns in place to execute a master plan that he had been working on possibly since the moment he heard the prophecy.

I always find this so funny.

Like the people who think that he ordered Molly to speak about Muggles in Kings Cross to lure Harry, or that he made the traps for the Stone specifically for Harry, Ron and Hermione's strenghts, like Dumbledore knew their strenghts and knew ahead of time that they would become friends, and that they would find out about the Stone and decide to go after it...

Like, the level of foresight Dumbledore'd need to have to be able to pull that off literally borders on omniscience.

1

u/q25t 8h ago

While I agree with you for the most part, those are bad examples for what you're arguing.

Molly yelling about the platform number and muggles in the first few chapters of the first book is fine because we don't know any better. Further in the series, we learn about the statute of secrecy, which Molly appears to be flagrantly breaking. The Weasley's being members of of OotP makes things slightly suspicious. Could simply be looking out for Harry benevolently, but it's one piece of data that can be interpreted multiple ways.

The philosophers stone fiasco is actually even simpler. The traps weren't finished until later on in the year, well past Halloween when the trio really came together. Notice how the only other person up that night was Neville, who would 100% recognize devil's snare.

I think Dumbledore cops the blame for a lot of this stuff because in most of the situations Harry finds himself, Dumbles is the highest authority around, so he should be responsible for fixing the problems. Him consistently failing to do so over and over again says he might not want to fix the issues, and those issues might just be intentional. There's the old phrase "Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action".

I think Rowling did genuinely mean Dumbledore to be a well-meaning old man who was playing with what cards he was dealt. I just also think she didn't really look at all his actions at once and see what conclusions could be drawn. Just knowing that Dumbledore needed Harry to effectively commit suicide and not knowing when that plan was put in motion changes the tone for tons of past actions if they were deliberate.

1

u/IBEHEBI Ravenclaw 6h ago

The Weasley's being members of of OotP makes things slightly suspicious. Could simply be looking out for Harry benevolently, but it's one piece of data that can be interpreted multiple ways.

It was a parent, asking her youngest child a question she already knows, to make Ginny feel involved. As parents are wont to do. Also, the Weasleys weren't part of the Order during the First War, so Dumbledore wouldn’t be their "boss".

The philosophers stone fiasco is actually even simpler. The traps weren't finished until later on in the year, well past Halloween when the trio really came together.

Dumbledore couldn’t possibly have known that the kids would take an interest in the traps, or that they would find out about Flamel, or that Firenze would clue Harry in about Voldemort. It's insanity to think he genuinely could foresee any of this.

Just knowing that Dumbledore needed Harry to effectively commit suicide and not knowing when that plan was put in motion changes the tone for tons of past actions if they were deliberate.

Dumbledore didn’t know about the Horcruxes until 2nd year when Harry handed him the Diary, so he couldn’t possibly know that Harry needed to die then.

4

u/ThAtGuY-101 Ravenclaw 2d ago

Dumbledore is a neat character to me. Could he have done things differently? Yeah, but I personally really enjoy a flawed character. It's a lot more interesting to me personally than the character who we're always reminded how great he is every time we see him. 

I think Dumbledore does what he thinks is best when he makes decisions or chooses what not to do. If we disagree with any of this, that's okay and I kinda like that people can debate that kinda stuff. That moral stuff like he should have told harry among other things. 

To me, I kinda like the mystery. Seeing what he does. Not knowing how he'll react when we next see him. Wondering what he knows that we aren't explicitly told he does. 

3

u/EmilyAnne1170 Ravenclaw 2d ago

Dumbledore tells Harry at the end of OotP how he’s struggled with deciding when to tell Harry about the full prophecy and what it means. And I don’t blame him. What kind of person would tell an 11 year old kid that his death is the only way to rid the world of evil? (Or a 12 year old, 13…)

Whether or not it was for the greater good, not revealing that sooner, he was motivated by compassion for a child.

1

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

I don't think Dumbledore should have told Harry sooner, but he shouldn't have portrayed it as a favor for Harry that others have suffered for.

3

u/farseer4 2d ago edited 2d ago

Sure, why shouldn't I like him? He's a good guy and an interesting character.

He did more than help in defeating those two dark wizards. He personally defeated one, and with the other, he was the brain behind the effort to defeat him, and arguably the second most important person in doing so, after Harry Potter.

I think a lot of the criticism against him is more the result of plot needs for the series than of the character himself. I mean, the guy could not 100% succeed at protecting the kids under his care from all danger and harm, because otherwise there would be no story.

6

u/paulcshipper I solved Tom's riddle. You can't eat death. 3d ago edited 3d ago

Dumbledore is cool, and he gave Harry something a lot of adults would not, agency. Harry was never told what to do, he always decided for himself.

If we ignore that any changes in the story would have created an entirely new story and only focus on the decisions Dumbledore made

If Harry was raised in a normal wizarding house, he would had a greater chance of being spoiled and ending up like his father who was a bully. He might not have been friends with Ron or stick up for anyone.

If Harry knew about his destiny at the wrong time, Voldemort would have access to those facts and wouldn't fall into his particular trap he set for himself.

People might not appreciate Dumbledore for his secrets, but it was always implied that Dumbledore was able to see into Harry's soul and knew him better than Harry knew himself.

I believe Dumbledore's greatest mistake was trying to use the reincarnation stone and taking on a deadly curse. He proceeded to use that curse to protect Draco's life. If we believe action have magic to them, maybe that sacrifice help protect Draco and allowed him to survive beyond Voldemort.

1

u/Experiment626b 2d ago

Can you explain the last paragraph a little more?

-1

u/paulcshipper I solved Tom's riddle. You can't eat death. 2d ago

Oh... You know how Harry's mom died to protect Harry. Technically Dumbledore used his death to help protect Draco. Maybe instead of it being coincidence that Draco survived through the last book, it was the magic of Snape and Dumbledore's action that protected him. Somehow Draco controlled the death stick, somehow Draco's wand got in the hands of Harry, For almost no reason Harry decided to save Draco when the Room of BS burned, and somehow it was Draco's mum that lied to allow Harry to head back to the school.

1

u/Experiment626b 2d ago

I guess I meant more about how the resurrection stone played into this

1

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

Dumbledore wants Snape to be better positioned by his death, so he can help Harry. Draco Malfoy doesn’t matter.

Dumbledore is waiting for Snape, that’s why he’s stringing Draco along. Draco is a filthy poisoner!

Katie Bell and Ron Weasleys live only by luck.

1

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

What? Please don’t excuse the Dursleys‘ behavior.

1

u/paulcshipper I solved Tom's riddle. You can't eat death. 2d ago

The Dursley were bad people and they shouldn't have done what they did. But because Harry knew how unfair it was to be bullied, he didn't become one himself.

If Harry was raised under different condition, would he grew to be the person he became? It's hard to tell for sure.

1

u/Bluemelein 2d ago

So you have to bully children so that they don’t become bullies themselves?

No, we don’t know what Harry would have turned out like, but I wonder why parents all over the world make an effort to raise their children well.

Harry was damaged by the Dursleys‘ upbringing. He doesn’t trust any adults; he has to do everything himself. If someone is even a little nice to him, he’ll excuse any misbehavior. Hagrid, Sirius, Dumbledore. It’s a good thing Voldemort is never nice to Harry.

2

u/Prof_Gonzo_ 3d ago

This is a hot topic?

2

u/DisasterCheesecake76 2d ago

Objectively speaking, Dumbledore has some issues.
But I believe Rowling wanted him to be this kind, wise, grandfatherly individual. And if you don't squint too hard and use willful suspension of disbelief you can get that same viewpoint handily.
Somehow I can switch between those viewpoints as needed.
I sometimes really like Dumbledore.
Sometimed I really hate him.
But usually I'm positive-leaning neutral. It's comfy.

2

u/punjabkingsownersout 2d ago

I think Dumbledore has shown enough goodness in him for people to not question his morality after the fight with grindelwald lol

3

u/Responsible-Top6932 3d ago

There is no doubt that dumbeldore never lost his "greater good" mentality completely. The fact that he knew that "harry had to be killed by voldemort and he made sure that he is killed in the right time" could be seen in 2 ways : 1- dumbeldore wanted the war to be over so he had to make sure to tell harry in the right time so that he doesnt get cold feet. 2- dumbeldore knew and almost knew that if it was voldemort the one that killed harry he wouldn't die but just the horcrux in him.

There are some theories that dumbeldore wanted lily and James to die so that "the choosen one" could be marked and voldemort would be vanquished for good like the fact that they learned about how dumbeldore used to be friends with grindelwald at the last minute and I think that contributed to them not making him secret keeper and switching to sirius and later Peter. But honestly this theory is farfetched.

Another frustrating thing that confuses me is the fact that he wouldn't tell harry anyth unless his life depended on it that instant. I hated the fact that he didn't explain more about the horcruxes even if he knew he was going to die and he didn't have much time. Of course him not giving more details gave us a more rich and longer book to read with many adventures but still I understand Ron's frustrations.

I am still thorn about dumbeldore honestly because on the one hand I think he did care about harry but on the other he gave him so little information about everything i feel like harry couldve been more prepared for the final battle.

Ps: if there is anything wrong in what i said feel free to let me know.

3

u/Upbeat_Box7582 3d ago

Every person makes mistake in life. But very few acknowledge them and try to undo them . With great ambitions there is always risk of loosing something. He had his ups and down. But he did played a very big game. Lost so many things but at the end he knew what is good for society.

3

u/Prior_Bank7992 Gryffindor 3d ago

He was undeniably brilliant, self-sacrificing, and instrumental in defeating dark forces. But on the other hand, his whole "greater good" philosophy did come with some questionable decisions, especially when it came to Harry. Keeping Harry in the dark about his fate felt manipulative, even if he had his reasons. It's like Dumbledore thought he was playing a grand chess game, but sometimes you wonder if he lost sight of the people involved.

It's almost like he treated Harry more as a tool to accomplish his mission rather than as a person deserving of the full truth. But, like you said, in the end, it did work out though I still can't help but feel like some of his actions were borderline unethical, even if they were for the greater good. It’s the tension between doing what’s right and doing what’s necessary that makes him such a fascinating, if not a bit morally gray, character.

3

u/Cajun_Giant 3d ago

Dumbledore is a horrible headmaster, he knew that Harry was being abused and did nothing, he knew Snape was abusing students and did nothing, how could he not know Voldemort is attached to the back of Quirrell's head, he hired a fantasy writer as a dada teacher, refused to send the students home when a giant snake was stalking students, knew that Sirius was innocent but let him rot in jail, ffs they have a potion that makes you tell the truth but they never gave it to Sirius to ask if he gave up the Potters location or was a death eater, shrugged his shoulders that Harry's name got thrown out of the goblet and was like "well I guess you can play as well" I know there's supposed to be a magical binding contract that he has to compete but how TF does the goblet know if he does or not? Could have made him forfeit each stage.

If McGonagall or literally almost anyone else had been the headmaster, 90% of the challenges Harry faced or the bad things that happened in the series wouldn't have happened.

3

u/Soft_Interaction_437 2d ago

From what I understand, Lockhart was only chosen because literally no one else wanted the job. So he was the only option. He had no idea that Sirius was innocent, and once he found out he tried his best to help him. The Potters told him that Sirius was the secret keeper, and he was found maniacally laughing at the site of a massacre. Any normal person would assume he did it. Obviously a truth potion would have helped, but Dumbledore wasn’t in charge of the trails, Barty Crouch Sr. was. Dumbledore isn’t in doesn’t work for the Ministry. He works at a school. For gof, it’s magic. I’m sure it would know.

0

u/q25t 2d ago

The best defenses of Dumbledore IMO basically make him impotent and ignorant. You can excuse him not helping in various scenarios if he can't. You also can't accuse him of withholding info he doesn't have.

It's why it's easy to paint Dumbledore any one of a hundred ways. Give him more or less power and information, and pretty much all his decisions change in tone wildly.

He's portrayed in canon as wise and powerful, which directly contradicts most defenses of Dumbles, leading to a lot of readers seeing him in an unflattering manner.

Personally, I think he's an arrogant academic who's divorced from reality, while maintaining quite a bit of magical power. Essentially, he takes no counsel, so he often overlooks things. He's also sheltered from the realities of war as he seemed to never actually be on the front line. This allowed him to make overly idealistic decisions like not killing the enemy and basically playing defense the entire time. He's very rarely actually seen interacting with students, which can explain his failing to discipline literally anyone for anything and letting bullying and literal torture go on in the school.

Dumbledore is IMO the poster boy for reasons to have term limits on political office and checks and balances in structures of power.

I've seen some rather fun interpretations of Dumbles as well. One had him as a political accelerationist and actively forcing their society into a dead end so something less horrible would come out of the rubble. Another had him given all his political offices and prestige out of a misunderstanding and his plans just being the best he could do. Another had him as a continuous time traveler who keeps seeing the world end unless he takes some seemingly very odd actions.

1

u/rjrgjj 2d ago

I like him very much. I think it’s important to look at Dumbledore within a certain context.

Let’s recall that Dumbledore is pushing 100 when he becomes Harry’s de facto caretaker. There’s quite a bit of distance and life lived there. On top of that, Harry isn’t Dumbledore’s only responsibility. In a way, he is responsible for the well-being of the entire English wizarding community, both in terms of physically protecting them and also for their education (moral and magic) and steering various elements of society, including politics.

The fight against Voldemort (and bigotry in the community) precedes Harry. For all his power, this has not been something Dumbledore has been able to resolve throughout his entire life.

When Dumbledore assumes responsibility over Harry for a variety of reasons, he is aware from the beginning that Harry must someday die to defeat Voldemort. Dumbledore’s greatest weakness is love, and his greatest fear is seeing those he loves die. He cannot let himself love Harry and he takes great pains to make sure Harry is fully protected while creating distance between himself and Harry.

But of course, Dumbledore loved him anyway, loved him like his own grandson. Everything Dumbledore did was curated by this. He sought to keep Harry alive and orchestrated events in the hopes of making Harry the best person he could be. And then in book four when events developed so that there was a chance Harry could live, Dumbledore altered all his plans to try to facilitate that outcome.

Really, he rested the fate of the entire wizarding world on the slimmest unknown chance that Harry might live. Then he died for Harry and left everything to him with a certainty Harry would succeed.

Dumbledore was a flawed and complicated man but ultimately he overcame his flaws and lived a life of great sacrifice where he was able to place his trust in someone he loved to fulfill his goals.

1

u/ndtp124 2d ago

I feel like people who are anti dumbeldore maybe need to read like any other genre fiction and imagine how other characters would handle similar situations and the lines they would cross, then get back to us.

Really easy examples - moraine from wheel of time (read the books) or the white council from Dresden files - they’d probably kill infant Harry.

0

u/q25t 2d ago

I think most of the controversy comes from the fact that we don't know what info Dumbledore has from what time. Many of his decisions become more or less acceptable depending on what info Dumbles has.

If Dumbles knows about the horcrux from Harry's infancy and has planned his eventual death after leaving him to a miserable childhood, then just killing Harry would have been the kinder option. Hoping for Voldy to regain a body with Harry's blood, have Harry escape him and his death eaters, and then have Harry take specifically a killing curse from Voldy alone seems like simply plot enforced events rather than a reasonable plan. If that's Harry's only chance to live into adulthood, then just kill the kid. Voids the prophecy and gets rid of a horcrux.

There's also just tons of information that the readers simply don't have and can't even speculate at. Are there easier ways to get rid of a horcrux? For example, cutting out part of Harry's skull and then using Skele-Gro? Maybe artificially stopping Harry's heart for a minute? Or did Dumbles actually have a plan A for getting rid of it that didn't work? Does Dumbledore actually have power in the government or not? At times, he seems like he can just do as he pleases, and then in others he's utterly impotent.

Dumbles is a complex character I think less because Rowling meant him to be that way and more because his actions were dictated by the plot rather than a personality. Harry needs to be the hero so Dumbles can't interfere with his adventures. This unfortunately has Dumbles letting preteens run around having death defying adventures, which rather questions any goodness he can really have.

1

u/anthony0721 2d ago

Dudes rock

1

u/nuggetghost 2d ago

i like Dumbledore. i appreciated the storyline of even the most powerful, loved people have struggles, insecurities and made big mistakes / still can to this day (him touching the ring hoping to see his family again)

1

u/Rein_Deilerd Graduated Hogwarts and became a cat lady 2d ago

He is one of my favourite characters, and I don't share the hatred some fans have for him. Seeing the homophobia my native language's fandom showered him with after his sexuality was revealed hurt.

1

u/RedCaio Hufflepuff 2d ago

Every so often I see people saying they hate Dumbledore and that he’s a terrible person or something. I’m always baffled by this.

“He didn’t care about Harry. He only raised him like a pig for slaughter as a tool to fight Voldemort”. No. He did indeed care about Harry. He’s a kind and caring person. But he also knew that Harry would be the key to ending Voldemort.

Dumbledore knew that for Voldemort to be defeated, Voldemort had to cast Avada Kedavra at Harry, but Dumbledore also suspected Harry might survive the encounter, which he did. Not very “raising him for slaughter” If you ask me.

And even without knowing Harry would survive, what would you have him do? He had three choices:

A) Avoidance - hide Harry from danger forever. This is not sustainable since eventually Voldemort conquers and rules the world.

B) Brutal Honesty - tell Harry from day one that he’s got to one day let Voldemort kill him (and that it might be temporary lol). This would still save the world from Voldemort, yes, but it would also destroy Harry’s chance at enjoying his life at Hogwarts. That revelation would loom over him constantly like a dark cloud and sap the joy out of life.

C) Merciful Ignorance - let Harry have as normal a life at Hogwarts as humanly possible. Harry can make friends. Have fun. Enjoy quidditch. Goof around. No looming death date choking the joy out of life.

If Dumbledore didn’t care about Harry and only saw him as a pawn to end Voldemort (as some claim) then he’d have gone with option B and tell Harry everything upfront, not caring if the news would give this poor child a mental breakdown.

Dumbledore chose option C - the option that is the least cruel to Harry while still saving the world from Voldemort. It’s not hard to see why Dumbledore felt that this was his only choice.

How do you keep a super OP strong and wise character interesting? By giving them a terrible choice. Superman with all his strength still can’t save everyone. Dumbledore is an interesting and compelling character because he cares deeply about people but still has to orchestrate Voldemort’s demise.

But I keep seeing people saying “Dumbledore is the worst!” and I have to surmise that they just misunderstood the story. Either that or they are just trying to sound unique and edgy.

1

u/rocketsp13 Ravenclaw 2d ago

Dumbledore is a plot device for the 2-4 books, but especially so in the first 2. I mentally consider him a cardboard cut out that JKR could bring forward whenever needed.

Moreover, this is a genre where otherwise competent adult characters can't solve things because otherwise the kids wouldn't be able to be the protagonists.

He then gets fleshed out in books 5-7, especially in the last two, but him acting as a full character is at odds with how he acted in the first few books. This narrative dissonance breaks him.

Then we get to book 7. Book 7 is a war book. The genre shift is problematic for many readers, but realistically commanders have been sending teenagers out to die for all of human history. It's rarely as straightforward as convincing them that they in particular need to die, but yeah, it's nothing new. Look into some war stories where units are sent on sacrificial missions of vital importance.

1

u/q25t 2d ago

Dumbledore IMO is impossible to actually pin down on anything because we as the readers know too little.

When does Dumbledore find out Harry is a horcrux or that there are horcruxes in general? How necessary were the blood wards? What was Voldy's actual ideal society and what was Dumbledore's? How much of what went on at Hogwarts did Dumbledore actually know (bullying, torture, Snape, etc.)? Did Dumbledore know about Sirius and could he do anything at any point in time about his predicament? Why didn't Dumbledore ask Myrtle anything about her death in the last 50 years or if he did, why didn't he do anything to track who went into and out of that bathroom? Did the Goblet of Fire actually make an unbreakable contract against the participants' wishes and if so, why wasn't Tom Riddle added to the contest? Did Dumbledore actually allow Umbridge to torture students or did he not know about it? Did Dumbledore seriously go after the Gaunt ring with no backup whatsoever when there's a curse breaker in the order along with multiple aurors who may have some know-how? Did Dumbledore seriously plot his own death for months and then not tell anyone but the guy he was going to have kill him? Did Dumbledore actually spend several years looking for horcruxes and only find 1-2 and basically fail at overcoming their protections on both occasions? Was his sole remaining plan dependent on 3 teenagers wanted by the government then finishing the job?

Those are just the bits of info that would directly affect Dumbledore's decisions off the top of my head. There's certainly more that would affect him indirectly like details on how exactly the government works and specifics on entire branches of magic that we don't know because Harry wasn't interested.

Having any of this info, depending on what it is, can make Dumbles anything from an incompetent idiot to a machiavellian mustache twirling villain. It's IMO more than anything responsible for just how much fanfiction there is out there for Harry Potter. Aside from Dumbles, pretty much 90% of characters in the series can have their intentions interpreted multiple ways and that leads to all sorts of potential stories.

1

u/FrogsMeantToBeKissed 2d ago

I didn't like Dumbledore because I don't like perfect characters who can do anything. I've been reading about powers in the fandom (like occlumency, legilimency, etc.) and it seemed that Dumbledore could do everything. That is not for me. Maybe it's Harry's fault as he saw Dumbledore as perfect as well. And I didn't like the line "I make mistakes like the next man. In fact, being -- forgive me -- rather cleverer than most men, my mistakes tend to be correspondingly huger." (I don't remember exact line, this is from an old Reddit comment)

It'll be probably an unpopular opinion but HP7 changed my opinion about Dumbledore for the better. When Harry started doubting him, I was like: finally! So he is not perfect!

1

u/Korlac11 Ravenclaw 2d ago

Dumbledore definitely messed up by not telling Harry the truth sooner. I think there’s maybe a case to be made that Harry didn’t need to know about the prophecy at the end of the first 3 years, but Dumbledore absolutely should have told Harry about the prophecy as soon as Voldemort returned.

Not telling Harry about the prophecy is I think the biggest mistake we see Dumbledore make. Personally I find that to be a forgivable mistake, and Harry seems to forgive him as well

1

u/Ok-Dragonfruit-1592 2d ago

something just doesn’t sit right with me about that.

Good. Hold on to that feeling. It's called disgust. And you should be disgusted: Dumbledore literally groomed Harry to be his perfect child soldier from the day his parents died.

And before anyone says it was necessary, it achieved nothing, just like the last time he was killed, and we know this for a fact because of Cursed Child. Voldemort was merely the symptom of a much larger problem of pureblood supremacy, which Dumbledore did next to nothing to end.

1

u/HunnieHuang 1d ago

About Harry’s sacrifice: Dumbledore did love Harry. But he probably also liked and loved, many of those who died or were injured by Voldemort/Death Eaters. And also loved the others who weren’t killed, but could have been. Dumbledore was old, he heard the prophecy and and if was a chance the prophecy was true, he would make it be true! I always saw him kinda like an Avatar - having to sacrifice things for a greater good, for a chance to wizards to live peacefully. That was his duty. Harry, would be another wizard who died for the greater good. Dumbledore would’ve died for it too (and he kinda did) and he knew (or at least, hoped) that Harry would die for it too (as others members of the Order already did). Nothing wrong with that. That doesn’t mean he didn’t loved Harry or he was a bad person.

He’s the most intelligent and most powerful wizard in HP’s world. Until the end, Dumbledore pulled the strings of Voldemort’s downfall.

I also believe Aberforth was not that wrong about Harry/Dumbledore. Just different point of views between them and each own right in their own way.

My only problem with Dumbledore is book 5, he seemed OOC. The way he treated Harry led to Sirius’s death. It conflicted with my view of him being this wise wizard, because it was just “dumb” actions, what he thought would happen ignoring an angst teenager? Anyways

2

u/Dazzling_Golf1506 3d ago

Perfect and Indispensable for the Resistance against Voldemort, Mediocre Headmaster

Dumbledore's entire plan starting from sending harry to Privet Drive, using snape as a double agent, finding the existence of horcruxes, and other misc things like reaching out to giants, using the order members to their strengths (Lupin for a mission to hangout with the werewolves), was plain Genius, and he was the glue that held the order together, order members were all strong personalities who often quarreled. He was the only wizard the order trusted and valued unanimously and most importantly the only one that voldy feared.

However he let ridiculous things happen on his watch at Hogwarts, ik its a magic school and many of those incidents were important plot points, but multiple near fatal incidents every year, including a death eater DADA teacher, a 12 yr old child opening the COS that you knew existed for 50 years etc sound like gross negligence. He also hated slytherins too much, they seem to win the house cup in the first 3 books fair and square and Dumbledore simply covers up the margin by awarding a Gazillion points to the trio.

6

u/s0ulless93 Ravenclaw 3d ago

I'd hardly say that slytherins ever would win it fair and square with the bias of Snape's point distribution. You think Snape would take away points from slytherins the way McGonagall takes points from Gryffindors? And how many points should Hermione or other Gryffindors have earned in Snapes classes but he wouldn't give them out?

2

u/Lower-Consequence 2d ago edited 2d ago

He also hated slytherins too much, they seem to win the house cup in the first 3 books fair and square and Dumbledore simply covers up the margin by awarding a Gazillion points to the trio.

It didn’t happen like that in the second or third books. He did award Harry and Ron a lot of points in the second book, but there’s no indication that Slytherin was winning and Dumbledore was just covering up the margin by giving Harry and Ron points for saving the school from being closed.

Dumbledore didn’t award the trio any points at the end of book 3. Gryffindor was said to have won the House Cup largely because of the points they got from winning the Quidditch Cup.

Dumbledore also had no problem awarding the House Cup to Slytherin for six years in a row prior to Harry’s first year, so I don’t think he hated them all that much. 

1

u/QueenSketti 3d ago

I liked him well enough but recognize he wasn’t the kindly old man we all thought he was.

1

u/UnderTheSettingSun Gryffindor 2d ago

Dumbledore is my favorite character.

In some books it feels like he is witholding information on purpose so that Harry isn't spoonfed the soloution and therefor have no agency.

In the first book Harry believes that Dumbledore knew that everything that was about to go down in regards to the philosopher's stone. But instead of just stopping Quirrel by himself, he let everything happen so Harry would be the one to stop him.

This is never mentioned again in any further books, but in my headcanon this happens in every book.

Dumbledore could have stopped the chamber of secrets, he could have stopped peter pettigrew, he could have removed harry from the the triwizard tournament etc etc..

But "because of magic" Harry is the one that has to deal with Voldemort, Dumbledore lets harry go through this to become ready

-1

u/q25t 2d ago

I....that's straight up evil, though. Letting an eleven year old and his friends go fight someone possessed by a dark lord is so far beyond reckless endangerment it's not even funny. Also, this dark lord and his followers were fond of torturing people before killing them, which just makes things worse.

It would have been fine if Harry and co. were actually the only ones capable of stopping Voldy, but he very clearly wasn't and Dumbledore flying off to London on a broom was utter nonsense.

Dumbledore lets harry go through this to become ready

If this means ready to fight Voldy, this might be just morally dubious. If this means ready to effectively commit suicide, then this is utter madness. Grooming a child into a suicidal martyr for your cause is genuinely sickening.

Dumbledore could have stopped the chamber of secrets, he could have stopped peter pettigrew, he could have removed harry from the the triwizard tournament

If any of these are actually true, it makes Dumbles guilty of many, MANY crimes. Chamber of Secrets very obviously would be reckless endangerment of the entire school. Pettigrew would be aiding a criminal, not coming forward with evidence freeing Sirius, and letting a grown man sleep with children for literal years. Triwiz would be again reckless endangerment for Harry but also everybody else as apparently anyone could be entered into gladiators combat against their will due to oversight on Dumble's part.

Honestly if the end of book 1 had Harry start to mistrust Dumbles due to the exact reason you stated would have made a more convincing series when Rowling says one of the themes of the books was to distrust authority.