How does Dumbledore *know* ?

[Kristin]

There's something special about Dumbledore. He's nothing at all like any other wizard or witch.

Dumbledore always seems to know the truth. Even if no one else knows it or believes it. Dumbledore always is on the side of truth.

When Harry tells Dumbledore something and Dumbledore believes him, I get the impression that it's not because Dumbledore thinks or believes that Harry's telling the truth -- but that it's because Dumbledore knows Harry's telling the truth.

Dumbledore is the only one who doesn't like Tom Riddle. He knows Harry didn't open the Chamber of Secrets. He believes in Sirius's innocence. He knows Harry didn't put his name in the Goblet of Fire. Etc., etc.

My question is: Why? What special thing does Dumbledore have? Maybe it's just coincidence. Maybe he's just a good guy. But I don't think so.

[Elfëa]

Dumbledore is really presented as omnipotent character and that is rather dangerous - in PS he really seems to know that Voldemort is indeed in the castle, but allows to Harry go after him - perhaps to strenghten Harry.
Also in CoS he seems to know that there is a monster going around - and yet he cannot do anything about it... And no doupt he knew what the monster was... no school children can be wiser than their professors... not on second grade anyway :p

Perhpas he has a Giant Sneakoskope? :p

[amrael]

. He believes in Sirius's innocence.

Pity he didn't realize it the first time around. He could have spared Sirius those fourteen years in Azkaban.


And no doupt he knew what the monster was... no school children can be wiser than their professors... not on second grade anyway


But really that's the whole point about the books? They are children's books, and in them the kids are always too clever. Take a look into the animagus thing: it is supposed to be a difficult process but 3 kids manage. Even an incompetent 14-year-old like Pettigrew can manage it with the learned help of two cleverer kids that aren't even animagi then.

At the pace, I wouldn't be surprised to see Hermione brewing Wolfsbane in her next year. :rolleyes:

Trying to get on topic, maybe Dumbledore simply doesn't care? The Potters got killed? Just wait 15 years to see if the son manages. Ooops, he got killed as well? Pity. The Potters don't seem that good. Let's try with Weasleys. There's so many more of them...

What fun!!!!!

;) :D

[Colli]

It's because he's the token wise wizard.

The fourth Istari... Dumbledore the Purple. ;)

I don't think Dumbledore is omniscient, but he sure is something close to it...

[qleap]

Originally posted by Elfëa
Perhpas he has a Giant Sneakoskope? :p
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:


Originally posted by Colli
The fourth Istari... Dumbledore the Purple

hehehehehhe
SERIOUSLY I was about to post he's a Maia :D

[Pilgrim Grey]

Originally posted by amrael
Pity he didn't realize it the first time around. He could have spared Sirius those fourteen years in Azkaban.

He probably did, but Sirius didn't get a trial...

[Bleu Unicorn]

How Dumbledoor knows is beyond me...I think the Istari and Sneakoscope theories are pretty good ones, though!

Commenting on the Sirius thing, I think Dumbledoor probably did know he was innocent. But 1.) as Pilgrim Grey said, Sirius was never given a trial, so there was no way to really help him and 2.) there was never evidence of what happened to Wormtail (I hate calling him Pettigrew 'cause I know someone with that last name).

[Ravenclaw]

Originally posted by Bleu Unicorn
(I hate calling him Pettigrew 'cause I know someone with that last name).

Hehe. My friend's mum was on an airplane once. And the pilot spoke over the thing like he usually does...
"We hope you enjoy your flight. I'll be your pilot, Peter Pettigrew..."

Think. How would you like to have Peter Pettigrew flying you across the atlantic?

On a RELATED note

I read a book full of 'Talented' misfits (in otherwords, ESP people). And it's funny cause Dumbledore reminds me about one of the characters... All knowing, no speaking until others figure it out. Course, that's cause the people in my book could read minds... some of them, anyway.

[Seriphus]

Think. How would you like to have Peter Pettigrew flying you across the atlantic?LOL, I'd rather not.

And it's funny cause Dumbledore reminds me about one of the characters... All knowing, no speaking until others figure it out. Course, that's cause the people in my book could read minds... some of them, anyway. Maybe Dumbledore has some kind of mind-reading thing going on, probably not full-on 'I know what you're thinking', but perhaps a sense of whether some one is telling the truth and the kind of emotions they are feeling.

Dumbledore certainly doesn't let on about his powers, but there are a few clues pointing towards the fact that we haven't seen nearly half of what he can do yet:

At that moment Harry fully understood for the forst time why people said Dumbledore was the only wizard Voldemort had ever feared. The look upon Dumbledore's face as he stared down at the unconscious Moody was more terrible than Harry could ever have imagined.

'I don't need a cloak to become invisible,' said Dumbledore gently...

[Colli]

The purple wizard is cunning, Harry. :D

Sorry.. I still don't have anything revelant to add. I'm going out of town this weekend, I'll think then. :)

Maybe Grindelwald (sp?) was a seer and transferred some of his powers to Dumbledore when he defeated him. ;)

[Smeagol]

originally posted by amrael Trying to get on topic, maybe Dumbledore simply doesn't care? The Potters got killed? Just wait 15 years to see if the son manages. Ooops, he got killed as well? Pity. The Potters don't seem that good. Let's try with Weasleys. There's so many more of them...

:rotfl: :rotfl:

the Maiar theory seems to work...had JKR ever expressed any love for Tolkien?

[Bleu Unicorn]

Originally posted by Ravenclaw
Hehe. My friend's mum was on an airplane once. And the pilot spoke over the thing like he usually does...
"We hope you enjoy your flight. I'll be your pilot, Peter Pettigrew..."

Think. How would you like to have Peter Pettigrew flying you across the atlantic?
That's just beyond disturbing, ok? [runs and hides far, far, far away]
Originally posted by Smeagol
the Maiar theory seems to work...had JKR ever expressed any love for Tolkien?
I believe in an interview on Scholastic she'd said she's never read the books. :jawdrop:

[Fleurdelacour]

Originally posted by Smeagol
the Maiar theory seems to work...had JKR ever expressed any love for Tolkien?

She said she read them when she was twenty-one, but didn't think much of them!! :jawdrop: :eek: :jawdrop:

They're the most amazing books I've ever read, next to HP of course ;) (I'm on The White Rider Chapter! :D!)

*


Do not question Dumbledore. Dumbledore is all knowing. Dumbledore, no cannot say. Just leave Dumbledore to himself. He is a wizard with a white beard! That says it all! Automatically makes to wise! Grow a white beard, and there you go! You're a wise old wizard!

[amrael]

Posted by bleu unicorn
Commenting on the Sirius thing, I think Dumbledoor probably did know he was innocent. But 1.) as Pilgrim Grey said, Sirius was never given a trial, so there was no way to really help him and 2.) there was never evidence of what happened to Wormtail





I have several objections:

1) Dumbledore's word was good enough to clear Sanpe of any doubts. Dear Sev wasn't tried, was 'vouched for' by Dumbledore. and even those who knew he had actually been a Death Eater were willing to take Dumbledore's word and allow him not only to go free, but to teach children!!!!!!


2) Lupin. If I'm Lupin, I learn about Sirius innocence and then I learn that Dumbledore knew all along... well, said Headmaster would better be in a safe place by the following full moon.

3) Harry. If I'm Harry, and after the events of PoA I realize that Dumbledore has been just messing around instead of telling me that the 'mass murderer' was actually my godfather and that he was fairly sure of his innocence, I'd go ballistic.

So I still think that Dumbledore wasn't really certain of Sirius innocence.

[Bleu Unicorn]

amrael, please don't take offense...but you've a very dizzying logic! :o :p

I think part of the theory (not that it's wrong) hinges on a lot that we don't really know yet. Granted Snape was "vouched for" by Dumbledoor, but who knows what proof Dumbledoor has that Snape really isn't on Voldemort's side. Plus...whatever it was that Snape did to avenge, or however you want to put it, himself was something that risked his life.

I'm not saying I disagree...but I'm not sure I agree either.

I do know, I'm fabulously confuzzled! :D

[sirius2004]

I think that dumbledore didn't necessarily know about Sirius, i don't think he knew until harry (or whoever...don't quite remember) told him, but i DO think that he was able to peice together the clues and figure out "hey, he's telling the truth"
I also think that Dumbledore has a gift, a very basic, fundemental but rare gift. He just gets it! he gets everything. Everything that he takes in just kinda clicks in his head, he understands people, knows how they work, what to look for when someone's lying,etc..., also...does anyone REALLY know how old he is? maybe he's got a few more years of experience than we'd all think, after all, practice makes perfect right?

Clear skies
Sirius (ths star...not the dog....:D )

[Seriphus]

JKR has said that Dumbledore is 150, which gives him a fair number of years of experience. I think you're right about him understanding people, even if he's not a mind reader per se he can read people well.

[amrael]

I think part of the theory (not that it's wrong) hinges on a lot that we don't really know yet. Granted Snape was "vouched for" by Dumbledoor, but who knows what proof Dumbledoor has that Snape really isn't on Voldemort's side.

Let's try to explain myself. This a two stage thing. First stage: one has to convince Dumbledore of his innocence. Second stage; Dumbledore uses his reputation or whatever to vouch for you.


Snape: he somehow convinced Dumbledore of his sincere change of mind (I WANT to know the hows and whys of this), he was willing to undertake risky missions against Dumbledore, and the headmaster vouches for him and that is enough to keep him out of Azkaban (let us remember he has been named as Death Eater at the very least in Karkaroff's trial) and yet Dumbledore's word seems to be enough.

Sirius: was convicted without trial. Nobody seems to have spoken for him, never, anywhere. Arthur Weasley is firmly convinced of his guilt (as seen in the opening chapters of PoA). So we have three options: First, Dumbledore thought him guilty or at least didn't believe him innocent. Second, Dumbledore knew he was innocent, tried to get him off Azkaban and failed (though it seems his word was good enough to clear Snape). Third, Dumbledore knew but for some reason let matters rest that way.

Of all three, the first looks to me the most reasonable, because I still think that Dumbledore's standing was sure and strong enough to have guaranteed Sirius at least a trial if he had really fought for it.

Of course, as Sirius2004 says, the moment Harry tells him about the second Shack Incident he is able to put two and two together, so he has no trouble realizing Sirius was innocent after all.

Am I making better sense?

[Aduial Estel]

One thing that worries me about Dumbledore, is this line in GoF:"For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something like triumph in Dumbledore's eyes." Mind you, this was right after Harry told him Voldemort could touch him without hurting himself. This makes me worry...is Dumbledore a quasi-omnipotent/omniscient force for evil? I mean, JKR wouldn't just throw that in there for craps and giggles. :( I sure hope he's not evil, lest it skew young children's perception of good and evil.

[lithorose]

That kinda worrites me too. To have someone who Harry (and lots of others) depend on so thoroughly turn out to be evil would be really traumatic and mean.:mad:

But there are other possibilities, like maybe (big maybe) now that Harry and Voldemort share the same blood if Voldemort tries to kill Harry he will harm himself? Or (I heard this somewhere) Voldemort now has more mortal blood in him, rendering him more, um, mortal. There's still too much unexplained to be able to guess.
BTW, your sig is hilarious!:LOL:

[Aduial Estel]

Ooh, I like that idea. Here's hoping for that idea, because Evil!Dumbledore would be too much to bear. ;) But then, I've heard they ARE thinking about getting Christopher Lee to play him [apparently Ian McKellan turned it down out of respect for Richard Harris]...and we all know what a superb evil wizard HE can be. :D Hee.

Thanks, it's a quote from the indominable Jack Handey. ;)

[Rivenlas]

Originally posted by Aduial Estel
One thing that worries me about Dumbledore, is this line in GoF: Mind you, this was right after Harry told him Voldemort could touch him without hurting himself. This makes me worry...is Dumbledore a quasi-omnipotent/omniscient force for evil? I mean, JKR wouldn't just throw that in there for craps and giggles. :( I sure hope he's not evil, lest it skew young children's perception of good and evil.

My idea about that...
Remember how Voldie can't touch Harry because of the mark that is mother left? Well, since Voldemort now has Harry's blood, maybe it will slowly destroy him, from the inside. Perhaps by using Harry's blood he has killed himself.

[Colli]

That's a good idea, Rivenlas. I had thought of something similar (i.e. Voldemort was now mortal and/or could only be killed by Harry, since a piece of Voldie was in Harry and a piece of Harry was in Voldie).

But I just might like yours more. :)

Anyway, back to Dumbledore.

I dunno.. this is something I don't really want to speculate on.. he's a suprise. A bag of tricks. :D Rowling's taking her time explaining him.. and I like it that way. :)

[Elfëa]

I'm just so overwhelmed because the weekend I had and the lj I'm starting (wohoo!)

so I must say that sounds quite good Rivenlas :)

I'd be dissapointed if our theory was proven true :)

[Aduial Estel]

You have set my worrying mind at ease, Rivenlas. Sounds like a good theory, I will hold to that one.

And Elfëa, congrats on the LJ. I've had one for quite some time and am quite fond of it. I used to be more diligent with updating, though...hmm, I should work on that. ;)

[Elfëa]

I don't think I'll have problems with updating it :o (I'm online everyday... :o)

[Moxie]

Originally posted by Kristin
Dumbledore always seems to know the truth. Why? What special thing does Dumbledore have?

Well, inside Hogwarts, he has a hundred or so house elves who I'd think make a pretty good spy network - but there's clearly more to it than that, since Dumbledore suspected Riddle rather than Hagrid back when the elves would have considered Headmaster Dippet the master they keep secrets for. Wisdom from experience would have been a factor even back then - Dumbledore would have been about 100 when Riddle opened the Chamber, and has 50 years more on his side these days. Fawkes may also be a part of it (I wonder how long Dumbledore's had him as a pet?); phoenix song "is reputed to increase the courage of the pure of heart and to strike fear into the hearts of the impure" Fantastic Beasts..., p. 32 so Dumbledore might learn a few things by observing how people react to his pet. I don't think we'll learn all Dumbedore's secrets until the end of Book 7, if even then.

[Ravenclaw]

About the triumphant gleam in the eyes of our favorite hopefully-not-evil headmaster...

You all have good theories that I like, especially Rivenlas (I think is very creative... never heard it before.)

But maybe the gleam holds something more obvious than that... more obvious, even, of his possible evilness.

My first reaction to that line was, as usual, Dumbledore knows something the rest of us don't. My theory on that reaction (kinda ties in with Trelawney and in a moment you'll see why): A prophecy was made a while ago and things are going to plan. And the Harry's blood in Voldie's was a pivital step in knowing if the prophecy was true or merely false pretendings of an eccentric Divination teacher.


My second reaction was maybe it wasn't triumph, but another emotion mistaken for triumph. Because if I knew things like he did (I'm an actress and can act like I'm smart when I'm not ;)), I know exactly the look I'd give when Harry told me that. I can't really explain it or put it into words... It's like, knowing it was going to happen all along... like... I don't know. I can't express it. But it certainly could be taken for triumph.

That's just my confusing thoughts.

[Colli]

I don't think the triumph thing is directly related to Trelawney's first prediction.

I thought about it, and I don't have any facts to support it. :p

It's just what I think. :D ;)

[glaelia]

ooh i found a great quote for you guys last night whilst re-reading gof!!!


...... you can bet old Karkaroff and Maxime won't be. THey'll have told theor champions everything they can. They want to win. THey want to beat Dumbledore. THEy'd like to prove he's only human.'

Moody gave a harsh laugh, and his magical eye swivelled around so fast it made Harry feel queasy to watch it.



i took moody's laugh to suggest that he knows dumbledore isn't 'human'......

so mmaaaaaaaaybe whoever it was that said Dumbledore was a 'Maia' of sorts wasn't far off the mark.... in all the history of wizards JKR has given us, she's never once suggested that wizards live any longer than normal human beings... and so, a lot of people estimate Dumbledore to be 150.... ??? i don't know how they got that figure... but come on!? how could he have got to 150 without being something 'special'? why would nicholas flamel have needed hte philosophers stone if wizards lived a long time...... think about it my friends....


;)

[Elfëa]

I guess that information about wizards age has been told by JKR in an interview? :)

McGonagal is 70, btw :)


But yes, your quote supports the Maia theory :p

[glaelia]

:p one day elfea... will you agree with my posts.... ?


:trout:


:hug:


:D


and i was suggesting that in the books she's never suggested that wizards have more than a human life-span... she's suggested they get old... but flamel needed the elixer of life to carry on living..... why should dumbledore be any different...... ?

[Elfëa]

Originally posted by glaelia
:p one day elfea... will you agree with my posts.... ?


Only if they aren't arguable :p

I think that it's normal for wizards to live longer - after all, they have magic in their bodies to "stop" or at least "slow down" the decaying of their bodies...

[Colli]

:D And Snapey-poo is about 35, which would have made the Potters in their early 20s when Harry was born.

That's weird to think about, isn't it? Voldemort wasn't after a couple of wizened wizards in opposition to him, he was after mere kids in his eyes.

Oops.. wrong thread.

Um... there's something odd about Dumbledore, that's for certain. :) Yup.

[Elfëa]

Perhaps it's Dumbledore who's Rowling's person in the book? That would explain that he always knows what's going on? :p

[glaelia]

Originally posted by Elfëa
Only if they aren't arguable :p

I think that it's normal for wizards to live longer - after all, they have magic in their bodies to "stop" or at least "slow down" the decaying of their bodies...


aha! but that's an assumption isn't it... nowhere is that actually stated!! why should 'magic' slow down decay??? how can anything slow down decay.... someone famous once said 'we start dying as soon as we're born' ....... with jkr's keeness and honesty in writing about death... why should it be any different with wizards?? she's already made us realise that it isn't with cedric dying and how harry has to deal with death.... why would she make wizards powerful against the only thing in the world that noone can claim power over.... death?

[Elfëa]

I stuck with that she has said in an interview, but yes :p (You just want me not to argue with you, don't you? :p)

But from a Lit student point of view, you're right. :p

[Colli]

:D Because "Wizards have a much longer life expectancy than Muggles. (Harry hasn't found out about that yet.) " and that's the most logical explanation Elfea could come up with. :)

[Elfëa]

Did I say something intelligent?

Must say my brain's starting to rot...
besides, all these threads are keeping me from writing, so pardon... ;)

[glaelia]

thankyou elfea! FINALLY you agree with me!!


and colli.... that's still assumption... JKR has never said that.... why should wizards have a longer life-expectancy than muggles?? there's no reasoning behind that... otherwise why on earth would nicolas flamel have needed the philosopher's stone???


and ANOTHER thing... i know i'm rambling tonight :rolleyes:.... but remember dumbledore worked with flamel on creating the elixer of life... so why did he never take it? i mean he could have done? ( well indeed, maybe he did.... JKRs never said otherwise... but in theory he would have told harry that he was going to die when he told him flamel was going to die) .... maybe he never took it because he never needed to..... maybe he knew how to make it because he 'isn't human'.......


and ANOTHER thing! why is dumbledore the only person voldemort is scared of? a little old man? he may be a powerful wizard, but so is voldemort... dumbledore is just and kind... and a little crazy... but surely voldemort could kill him easily!! why IS voldemort scared of him?? perhaps because dumbledore cannot be killed.... perhaps voldemort is afraid of the only thing that he, voldemort, is trying to attain and cannot reach.... immortality... perhaps that is why he is trying to attain immortality... he would have no reason to fear dumbledore if he, voldemort, could not be killed either.... after all... voldemorts quest for immortality is something JKR hasn't explained the reasoning behind .... yet... i mean... one can see why somebody would not want to die of course... but i mean, really would you want to be immortal?? would you want to watch all your friends and family die around you and the world change beyond your recognition??? really???? think of arwen!! ;) ;) at the end of the day... who would really want that... and all the responsibilities that would come with it!!


;)


:D

[Colli]

:) Actually, glae, that was a quote from Ms Rowling herself. :)


http://www.mugglenet.com/ewinterview1.shtml

[glaelia]

i um... just read that... thank you... but i couldn't see that quote... ??? maybe i'm being dumm... :confused: :confused:

[Colli]

:o That's because I linked to the wrong one.

For some reason my eyes keep on missing the first one, here's a link to a similar quote.

How old is Prof. Dumbledore and Prof. Snape?
Dumbledore's about 150 years old... Wizards have a longer life expectancy than us Muggles. Snape's 35 or 36.
http://www.mugglenet.com/bbcchat1.shtml

(edit) Found it! Thought I was losing my mind...

http://www.mugglenet.com/scholchat2.shtml about halfway down :)

[glaelia]

lol , thanks for that colli. i'd never seen that interview before :D


still... dumbledore IS still old... even for a wizard me suspects.... ;)


this was my fav question!!!

How did the Dursleys explain away the tail when Dudley had to have it removed at the hospital?
They went to a private hospital where the staff was very discreet, and said that a wart had got out of control.



bwahahaha... a wart!!


anyhoo... have you watched robin hood prince of thieves... one of my fav films and i'm sure you'd like alan rickman in it.... ! ;)