Harry Potter: Dumbledore: Friend or Foe?

[Emily Spencer]

Albus Dumbledore is probably one of the most beloved characters of Harry Potter. Everyone loves Dumbledore, right? Wrong! I am not the biggest fan of the late Headmaster; allow me to explain why.

In my opinion, Dumbledore blatantly used Harry Potter. He manipulated a child to do his dirty work. It didn't matter if Harry got hurt or even killed; he served Dumbledore's purpose and really, that was all that mattered. Granted, one could argue that saving the Wizarding World is a noble purpose, but it should never have fallen squarely on the shoulders of an unsuspecting child; especially a child that you groomed specifically for that purpose. Dumbledore may have liked Harry, but I can almost guarantee that if it had been revealed that someone else (looking at you, Neville) had turned out to be the 'chosen one' then Harry's favored status with Dumbledore would have ended quite quickly.

What are your thoughts on this matter?

[Amy Darvill]

I'm definitely one of the ones whose opinion of Dumbledore had changed by the last book. To be fair, I always questioned sending Harry back to the Dursleys. I understand that they needed to keep the magic spell working, but there had to be much better alternatives.

In fact, that is something that I had read before, that sending him to the Dursleys, made Harry more grateful for coming to the magical world, and more grateful to Dumbledore. Never mind that they could have worked out a system where he stayed with the Dursleys the minimum of time, before staying even with Mrs. Figg. I suppose once I read about how Dumbledore was willing to let Harry die to save the world, it was harder to go back and not see at least some shade of manipulation in everything he did.

[Aurelia West]

While I think that more of the reveals of Dumbledore's past in the last book made him a more compelling character rather than just a mentor for Harry, I do think that several of the actions he took were very manipulative and some unnecessary. Leaving him at the Dursley's may have been the move at the time considering the upheaval the wizarding world was thrown into following Voldemort's 'demise', but just leaving them there for 10 years while he was clearly suffering from neglect seems like willful ignorance to me. It doesn't take too much to send someone to check in on Harry every once in a while, and it's not as if the Dursley's, particularly Vernon, kept their dislike of Harry a secret.

Though Dumbledore could always come up with a reason for his actions and he even apologized to Harry for what he put him through towards the end of the series, he wouldn't have needed to do any of that if he trusted people well enough on their own instead of feeling he had to manipulate their actions to get the end result he felt was best.

[February Fortescue]

I don't believe Dumbledore changed much from his youth. He always believed in the "Greater Good" and himself as a brilliant, smarter-than-your-above-average wizard who should be in charge, and it was unsurprising that he placed himself in the role of making the big decisions without including anyone else in on his full plans or thought processes. He did this for nearly everyone, and the only character who ever noticed or questioned him on it was Severus Snape. Snape made the decision to continue, but Harry, who trusted Dumbledore, had no idea how he was being used, but, knowing Harry, he would have continued on anyway, which he did. But to me there is something really creepy about Dumbledore using Harry and making those huge decisions for him, including sacrificing him.

[Prof. Will Lestrange]

I completely agree with Emily on everything she said! I actually came up with something called "Dumbledore Challenge" - which consists of carefully rereading the first two chapters of the series (while knowing how everything played out), paying attention to Albus Dumbledore, Minerva McGonagall, and the Dursleys. The "challenge" part was to see if your opinion about Dumbledore had changed throughout your reread.

The reason I think the challenge is so poignant is that upon reread, you can see how much work Professor McGonagall puts in to watch out for Harry, and how Headmaster Dumbledore dismisses Professor McGonagall's reasonable, legitimate concerns with... well... not telling her (who at this point is essentially his second in command) anything close to the whole truth. And Professor McGonagall is expected to go along with that, while Harry is left to spend ten years of suffering - then being forever in debt to the headmaster as his first 'friendly' contact in his memory! (Well, all right, Rubeus Hagrid was Harry's first true friendly contact, but given that Hagrid was loyal enough to Dumbledore that he didn't allow others to criticise Dumbledore in his presence...)

[Emily Spencer]

You bring up a very good point, Will. Going back and rereading that shows Dumbledore's character blatantly spelled out from the very beginning. You've made me want to go back and read the books again to see what else I might have missed

[Rhaneyra Black]

I had watched the movies regarding Dumbledore's character at first. So I had never had any issues with him, till I realized something. Why did he keep sending that poor boy continually back to the Dursley's, even though he obviously and blatantly knew of how they were treating him. Blood wards could not have been the only reason. I had not once seen a death eater, or Voldemort ever say "Let's look for Potter in Little Whinging."

Another thing, when I watched the final movie, I was a bit upset with the way Dumbledore behaved, setting up Harry to be killed, but reading about it, when I ended up getting the books, my blood blatantly boiled. At the beginning he was a child! How did no one notice how he acted after returning from the Dursleys. And the Weasleys had to have complained about the bars on his window. And his actions in Book 6 Order of the Phoenix made so much sense. It wasn't that he distanced himself because of the Dark Lord, he had to remember that this boy, was going to die by the Dark Lords hand anyway.

[Anne-Marie Gagne]

Oh boy do I have some Thoughts about one Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore. Basically, I think Albus Dumbledore was so far up his own bum that he thought he knew best for everyone in the magical world and wouldn't do anything unless he thought it would help his plan to make the magical world to be what he wanted it to be.

First, he sent a child back to relatives who abused him. One can say that Harry never really confessed that they abused him, just told him that they didn't like him. But Dumbledore put him with them even with the warning from McGonagall. He should have checked up on him personally. He put a squib on the next street over like that was enough protection for him. I'm sure Mrs. Figg told him what she saw happen to Harry.

Also on that thread of thought, who leaves a 15 month old child on a doorstep in the middle of the night?! It was November! It had to have been freezing and also a kid is walking by 15 months. Considering Harry was riding a broom, he was definitely walking. He could have walked away!

Moving on to Harry's first year. He basically dangled the Philosopher's Stone in front of Harry's face! Had Hagrid get the stone from Gringott's at the same time that he took Harry to get his school supplies. Dumbledore knows that Hagrid can't keep a secret for anything. He knows that an eleven year old child is gonna be curious about something that someone is being extra shifty about.

Also those tasks? Were absolutely a test for Harry more than a deterrent for Voldemort. I refuse to believe that those were the actual protections the professors came up with. I believe Dumbledore changed them for the trio to get through them. It's the only thing that makes sense to me and I refuse to believe anything else.

Harry's second year is honestly one of the worse ones where we see Dumbledore doing jack all for not just Harry, but Hagrid as well. Dumbledore should have stepped in when the school turned against Harry. But we know why he didn't. Dumbledore wrote Tom Riddle off as an evil wizard at eleven when he visited him to give him his letter all because he was a Parselmouth. (Let's not get into Dumbledore making another small child go back to an abusive situation in the middle of a war where bombs were falling all over London.)

I'm gonna stop here but I have issues with just about everything Albus Dumbledore has ever done. Especially about him keeping valuable information about everything to himself and barely letting anyone in the know on things that they should have known from the get go in order to do the job he gave them properly.

So do I think he's a friend or a foe? Definitely a foe for the sole purpose of him refusing to lift a finger to help unless it benefits his worldview.

Merlin I despise this man.

[Blake Gaunt]

I wholeheartedly agree with the original poster. Dumbledor is not my favorite by far. There are far darker wizards that I would gladly take a seat next to before accepting the presence of Dumbledor. I agree that Dumbledor used Harry and knew exactly what he was doing. Dumbledor showed exactly how easy it is to manipulate a child, especially one who’s been previously abused, by making them trust you and fully grooming them into following you blindly. The fate of the world should have never been put on Harry without him being fully explained the risks, and the most probable outcome for his being. Dumbledor repeatedly sent Harry back to the Dursleys and I believe this was just another tactic he used. If he sent Harry back to the Dursleys where they were abusive to him proudly and without regard, then Dumbledor would appear to be the saving grace at the beginning of every school year. He knew what he was doing and even if the Wizarding World was at risk, Harry should have been more aware of what he was agreeing to. He should have known what he already was as soon as he was capable of understanding yet Dumbledor quite literally stood in the shadows and watched everything unfold just as he had expected.

[Ellie Vernez]

I loved Dumbledore but the more you look into and realise what he was doing it makes you wonder if he was really 100% the good guy.

He knew from the beginning that Harry would be the one that would eventually have to sacrifice himself to defeat Voldemort. He raised him like a pig for slaughter.
He could be seen as manipulative, especially when Voldemort figured out he could look into Harry's mind. It wouldn't surprise me if Dumbledore avoided Harry not because he thought if he wasn't close, Voldemort would leave him alone. I think it was because he knew Voldemort would try to lure Harry out and by doing so would allow Dumbledore to be able to confront Voldemort when he went after Harry in the ministry of magic.

He also sent Harry back to the durlseys even though he knew Harry wasn't happy their. Surely he also knew he was kept in a cupboard for most of the beginning of his life because it was on his hogwarts letter. And I think this was done so Harry would grow up to be strong and independent, rash and would have no regard for his own safety because he was treated so awfully he might believe he didn't deserve to be cared about.

Don't get me wrong I do believe he cared for Harry and he wanted what was best for him, but he did use him.

[Galena May]

I can easily see and agree with what Emily is trying to say here. Dumbledore may have felt genuine affection for the Golden trio through the process, but his intentions were quite manipulative. I agree that the same treatment would go to Neville instead, if Harry hadn't been the most likely candidate for " The Chosen One ". Dumbledore may have been working for a noble cause, but the weight was too much to bear for Harry's shoulders, and therefore irrespective of even Harry himself would want to sacrifice himself for a noble cause ( as did Hermione and Ron in their own ways), Harry deserved at least a little more clarity and many more explanations instead of the secrecy and behind-the-scenes operations that Dumbledore provided him with. Harry's childhood abuse may still have been a by-product of the Dursleys being his only Muggle relatives alive, and maybe Dumbledore though misguided genuinely thought that Harry was safest in the Muggle world (something, which by itself raises eyes, because if Voldemort wanted, he would easily find Harry there, and even kill the Dursleys to get to him). But, even when Harry came to Hogwarts, Dumbledore had many chances to tell Harry exactly what he was in for, instead of leaving the trio to decipher the puzzle (that would reduce the dramatic effect of the plot, though). Keeping a child in the dark, for fear of him not fulfilling his destiny, is obviously manipulative. Harry had no choice of his own until he was already too deep in the mud to get out.

[Lexa Winslow]

For the record, I am pretty on the fence about Dumbledore (I neither love or hate him), but I do want to pose a question- what would have happened if Dumbledore hadn't pulled the strings to make Harry what he was? Would Harry have been able to defeat Voldemort? Voldemort was a constant that wouldn't just go away, Dumbledore knew that. Voldemort had to be defeated, unless you want of course, the entire world to be controlled by him. Dumbledore had knowledge many others didn't (the true character of Voldemort, his Horcruxes, etc.). What would you have had Dumbledore do instead? I personally can see both sides of the issue, and I can't really say which side I stand on yet. I believe many actions of Dumbledore's were wrong, but I can see why he, has an imperfect human, chose to do them.

Is it wrong to manipulate people, especially children? 100%! Would Dumbledore have done so if Harry wasn't "The Chosen One?" Probably not.

Dumbledore wasn't evil. He had wrong ideas in his youth that he repented from and went on to become a champion of Muggle rights. We see when he drank the potion in the cave that he relived his regrets over his sister, Alberforth, and Grindlewald.

No one's perfect. JK Rowling showed us that with so many Harry Potter characters- Snape turned out to have some good in the end; Dumbledore turned out to have some bad in the end. As Sirius Black said, "We all have both light and dark inside us. What matters is the part we choose to act on."

(This definitely sounds like I am defending Dumbledore now , but again, I really don't know where I stand and would like to have more conversation on the topic.)

[Luna Ravenlong]

I have definitely changed my opinion on Dumbledore over the years and not for the better. Mainly, I just can’t justify him leaving Harry with an abusive family.He left Harry on the doorstep, as he knew Petunia would not be happy about it and he didn’t want to give her an option to say no. He states in”Half Blood Prince” that he knew Harry wouldn’t be loved in that house and criticised the Dursleys for how the treated him-but why did he wait so long to do this? Why did he not interfere earlier, why not tell them someone would be monitoring their treatment of Harry?

My thought is that he NEEDED Harry to come into the Wizarding World with no connections in the muggle world-he was much more likely to be willing to die for it that way. I think Hagrid being his introduction to magic also shows this, as any other teacher (even Snape) likely would have kicked up much more of a fuss over the way the Dursleys acted. Hagrid was also incredibly biased about the Hogwarts houses, which was not the best introduction. Dumbledore also had Hagrid plant the seed of the philosophers stone-which definitely didn’t need to be hidden at Hogwarts. That really seems like it was a trap to see if Harry could handle another confrontation with Voldemort.

There’s several other things-the complete danger of having a Cerberus and Mountain Troll in the first year, not closing the school the minute the first student was petrified by the basilisk and how did he not know that it wasn’t the real Mad Eye Moody in “goblet of fire?” Either he was incredibly naive or purposefully ignored the problems at Hogwarts. I mean, in “Half Blood Prince” he spent most of the year out of the school he was supposed to be running-I know searching for the horcruxes was important, but he didn’t trust any of the order!? He left the mission with three barely of age students.

There’s also a lot of pre-Harry stuff, namely letting the Marauders get away with as much as they did, and letting the Hogwarts House division become so great. And it was great that Remus got an education, but those precautions were not enough and the fact that the group could run the forbidden forest as animals was INCREDIBLY dangerous. It’s amazing no one actually got hurt.(And was he the only werewolf that got a Hogwarts education ?)

Plus, I completely agree with everything Anne-Marie said-especially about young Tom Riddle. He was raised in a muggle orphanage (which, given the time period, would have likely been very religious and poor). And then being sent back during WW2-no wonder he became so obsessed with immortality! In fact, why weren’t they keeping ALL the muggle Norns in the school during that period? Surely Dumbledore would have had some idea what was happening when he did the home visits.

So yes, I’m not really a fan of Albus Dumbledore. He always thought he knew best, was incredibly cryptic for no reason and really should have let other actual adults help much earlier. Even if it did need to end with Harry sacrificing himself, he deserved to know that information much sooner. And if Dumbledore had let other people help, the final battle may not have ended up and Hogwarts-and less children would have died.

[Matthew Flitwick]

Your concerns about Dumbledore's treatment of Harry are not without merit. Indeed, Dumbledore's choices raise difficult ethical questions, especially regarding the morality of using a child as a pawn in a much larger, dangerous game. Dumbledore knew from the very beginning the immense burden that would fall on Harry, yet he allowed Harry to walk this perilous path, only revealing critical information when it was absolutely necessary—or perhaps, when it was too late to change course.

However, it's essential to consider the context in which Dumbledore operated. The wizarding world was facing an existential threat, one that required extraordinary measures to overcome. Dumbledore, wise and calculating, understood that Voldemort's downfall hinged on a prophecy, a prophecy that tied Harry inexorably to the Dark Lord. Could anyone else have fulfilled that role as effectively? Perhaps, but Dumbledore's actions suggest that he saw in Harry not just a weapon, but a person with the strength, courage, and moral integrity to do what needed to be done.

Now, could Dumbledore have treated Harry with more openness? Undoubtedly. His secrecy, though possibly well-intentioned, often left Harry in the dark, making him feel isolated and manipulated. Yet, one might argue that Dumbledore was caught between two terrible choices: burdening a child with the full weight of his destiny from the outset or guiding him as gently as possible toward that inevitable conclusion. Dumbledore chose the latter, perhaps believing that the knowledge of his true fate would break Harry's spirit too soon.

And as for your point about Neville—what an astute observation! If Neville had indeed been the chosen one, would Dumbledore's affections have shifted? Possibly. But it’s also worth noting that Dumbledore seemed to value Harry not just for his role in the prophecy, but for who he was—a young man with a heart full of love and a deep sense of justice, qualities that were crucial in the fight against Voldemort.

In the end, Dumbledore's actions are a study in the complexities of leadership and morality. He made difficult, sometimes morally ambiguous decisions, all while carrying his own heavy burden of guilt and regret. Whether he was right or wrong is a matter of perspective, but there’s no denying that his legacy is as complicated as it is profound.