Untitled

I mean, each to their own here, but I think them being 100% the same has no real basis in canon and that interpretation of them often feels like it stems from wanting to make them into a murder-husbands sort of deal. In the book and the information around their relationship that we get from JKR, they were different already at that point. Albus supporting Gellert in his ideas during those two months was horrible (and I am not saying anything else!) and yes, he also had an appetite for power (which, I believe, greatly was aided by how powerless and trapped he felt in Godrics Hollow after his mothers death)

They were alike in that they both were brilliant and powerful, and similar in that they both were lonely in their brilliance before they met the other. But Gellert is described as an "almost dark twin" for a reason; they are twinning in how they both are intelligent, powerful, ambitious and arrogant, but Gellert put all of that in another direction than Albus did already in and before 1899. JKR describes it as Albus losing his moral compass and that he filled in gaps in Gellert's personality with what he wanted to see due to being so in love with him. Albus supporting those ideas and aiding them that summer is in almost every way described as a dark, corruptive spiral he ends up in due to being so in love with Gellert. (In fact, even being compared to Bellatrix here; Albus that summer almost being a Bellatrix to Gellerts Voldemort.)

One quote from just a year after DH released being this; "“He’s an innately good man, what would make him do that. I didnt even think it through that way, it just seemed to come to me, I thought ‘I know why he did it, he fell in love.’ And whether they physically consummated this infatuation or not is not the issue. The issue is love. It’s not about sex. So that’s what I knew about Dumbledore. And it’s relevant only in so much as he fell in love and was made an utter fool of by love. He lost his moral compass completely when he fell in love"

And in DH, we see also their differences clear as day. Doge's eulogy, no matter how much trust you put in him, paints Albus as someone who made it clear during his school years that he didn't agree with his father's actions or bigotry. We also see Albus put his skills into academic pursuits, while Gellert got expelled for his violent behaviour. Even in their approach to the resurrection stone we see their difference; Gellert is implied to have thought of inferi armies, Albus wanted his parents back so he wouldn't have to be a caretaker anymore.

Even in 1899, in that letter to Gellert, we see Albus in a letter that almost comes across as trying to quell some of Gellerts likely more violent ideas, by first introducing the concept of Greater Good but also bringing up Gellerts expulsion and his use of force at his school as a mistake on his part.

For me, I just frankly don't see the appeal in making them identical. I personally enjoy the difference here, and seeing Albus as the inherently good man he is described to be also being capable of becoming radicalised, partly due to his family circumstances, partly due to love. I dont think him actually being considered as becoming radicalised that summer even has to take away from his culpability in aiding Gellert, because his actions still are his own, but I think that viewpoint and how they are described show a great deal of difference between the two. And I think it says a lot that Gellerts takeaway from that summer is how to use almost an utilitarian sort of speech that focuses on a "greater good" - because even in Albus's darkest time there, Albus still approach the horrible concept with sort of stressing the benefit for both wizards and responsibility towards Muggles rather than "Muggle torture" as Gellert's schemes are described as, and also talks about having scruples and clearly not having his whole heart into it. (Like of course, one could argue that the letter shows that Gellert too approach it from a "wizard dominance is good for muggles" but all the rest we see of him during that particular time is steeped in desire to commit violence towards Muggles in a way I don't think we actually see from Albus)

"Oh, I had a few scruples. I assuaged my conscience with empty words. It would all be for the greater good, and any harm done would be repaid a hundredfold in benefits for wizards. Did I know, in my heart of hearts, what Gellert Grindelwald was? I think I did, but I closed my eyes."

vs

"He vanished, with his plans for seizing power, and his schemes for Muggle torture"

both quotes I think show how different they were. Not to mention that their respective capacity for violence too is so different in 1899 - Gellert tortures Aberforth for daring to not only try to talk Albus down from leaving, but for raising his wand against them, something I don't think Albus that summer would even consider doing, it would be unthinkable to him.

I think both the idea of Albus as a poor softie that never did anything wrong and the idea of him and Gellert being just the same with just the same appetite for violence and harm are wrong. Albus, to me, is arrogant and manipulative but we know he feels shame and that he, despite that arrogance and power, actually does have a great capacity for gentleness and care too that Gellert mostly seems to lack (other than perhaps towards Albus)

Dumbledore: LOL hey Severus isn't it so funny how i depend on your for virtually everything with no breaks and refuse to let you have any rewards or accolades for your accomplishments and heroism?

Dumbledore: LOL hey Severus isn't it hilarious that i tell the boy whose face triggers you daily about your sexual assault and other traumas lies about why you protect him? Of course i never had to tell him the truth, but isn't the lie just SO funny? Like, that it's because you OWE JAMES, your TORTURER AND SEXUAL ASSAULTER, for saving his and his friends' own asses from a situation Sirius willingly put them all in? Don't you just love that? Didn't you love when i swore you to secrecy and ensured you never processed almost being killed by a monster at 15? Severus?

Dumbledore: LOL Severus, you simply MUST adore how much i dismiss your very real suffering. Also don't you love being terminally hated? Do you enjoy the death sentence i've secured for you? I worked very hard to get you that, it's quite special.

Dumbledore: LOL hey Severus, don't you just love how i give you orders and withhold information from you in thinly veiled insults to rile you up, then give you a compliment, then pimp slap your brain with another comment i know will upset you?

Dumbledore: LOL hey Severus

Dumbledore: LOL hey Severus isn't it so funny how i depend on your for virtually everything

Does Dumbledore depend heavily on Snape? Yes. Was Snape essential to winning the war? Yes. Did Snape literally save Dumbledore's life? Also yes. Does it mean that Dumbledore was relying on Snape for virtually everything? I disagree, especially since Snape was relying on Dumbledore too.

with no breaks

What kind of breaks could Dumbledore give Snape? For the school job part, did Dumbledore forbid Snape from having vacation time like the other teachers?

For the war part, well, it's war. People's life depend on this stuff, Dumbledore can't very well stroll up to Voldemort and ask him for a time out could he? Plus I'm pretty sure Snape himself wouldn't want to take a break, he's committed to the cause too.

refuse to let you have any rewards or accolades for your accomplishments and heroism

When did Dumbledore refuse to give Snape any reward or accolades? And what kind of reward could Dumbledore give Snape?

for saving his and his friends' own asses from a situation Sirius willingly put them all in?

Saving Sirius and Remus's asses (and Snape's life) only here at the risk for his own life, James himself was not directly linked to the situation beyond being Snape's primary bully, which I don't think would land him in much hot water in the 70s, certainly not enough to warrant risking his life. Regardless, that is a nitpick, your core point here is valid. I don't know why Dumbledore lied to Harry at the expense of Snape there, but it's true that what Dumbledore did here was pretty shit.

Didn't you love when i swore you to secrecy

Valid move by Dumbledore in order to not screw over Remus here, who was innocent in this situation (aside from the general bullying.) But it's still true that the situation here was not handled well by Dumbledore at all. The marauders should have also been sworn into secrecy too, and whether or not Sirius was punished for what he did, it clearly was not effective so Dumbledore failed there too.

adore how much i dismiss your very real suffering

If you are talking about that scene in book 1 again then fair point, you can also add onto that the scene in POA with Snape freaking out about Sirius escaping. I don't think Dumbledore could have warned or told Snape about anything there, especially since Fudge was right next to them, and I also don't think that Dumbledore trusted Snape to act rationally about the information about Sirius in his currently very emotional state. Nevertheless Dumbledore showed amusement in there with his twinkling eyes, which is also pretty shitty, he should have just kept a calm and solemn face.

Also don't you love being terminally hated?

Why is that on Dumbledore? He is the one that continually insisted on Snape being trustworthy, and hid Snape's involvement in the prophecy from Harry even though Harry deserved to know, and then still tried very hard to defend Snape when Harry found out and was angry about it. If this is talking about Dumbledore having Snape kill him , then this would be a very unfair criticism IMO, it was a decision that Dumbledore and Snape both agreed upon in order to protect Draco from death, protect the students from harm under Voldemort's regime by having Snape as headmaster, and then furthermore protect an innumerable number of people from death and torture because Snape's trusted position would be key to winning the war.

Do you enjoy the death sentence i've secured for you?

Interesting topic that actually, Dumbledore setting up Snape's death with the Elder Wand makes no sense, especially since Dumbledore's plan relied on Snape surviving till the very end so that he could tell Harry about the scarcrux, it would utterly ruin Dumbledore's plan for the war if Snape died like this. Plus Dumbledore setting up Snape is never given any weight by the narrative, Harry doesn't blame Dumbledore for setting up Snape's death when his opinion of Dumbledore was at it's lowest in 'The Forest Again'. In 'King's Cross', Harry never blames Dumbledore for it and makes no comment even when Dumbledore says the "Poor Severus" quote. Harry comes out of limbo/whatever-it-is bragging about how Snape was 'Dumbledore's man' all along to everyone. Harry puts Severus's name after Albus's in 'Albus Severus Potter' in the epilogue. Those actions make zero sense if we're meant to believe that Dumbledore intentionally set up Snape for death.

I give you orders and withhold information from you

Dumbledore is doing his job as a resistance leader trying to stop a genocidal tyrant by keeping a good information policy. Especially since Snape is spending most of his time as a spy near Voldemort, a powerful Legillmens. That is also an unfair criticism IMO.

in thinly veiled insults to rile you up

Last he knew - they refused making him secret keeper and discussed making Sirius secret keeper.

“So Black was the Potters’ Secret-Keeper?” whispered Madam Rosmerta. “Naturally,” said Professor McGonagall. “James Potter told Dumbledore that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself… and yet, Dumbledore remained worried. I remember him offering to be the Potters’ Secret-Keeper himself.” (PoA ch10)

Then Sirius, a known capable Wizard compared to Peter,

“Pettigrew… that fat little boy who was always tagging around after them at Hogwarts?” said Madam Rosmerta. “Hero-worshipped Black and Potter,” said Professor McGonagall. “Never quite in their league, talent-wise. I was often rather sharp with him. You can imagine how I—how I regret that now…” She sounded as though she had a sudden head cold. [...] Professor McGonagall blew her nose and said thickly, “Stupid boy… foolish boy… he was always hopeless at dueling… should have left it to the Ministry…” [...] “You don’t know what you’re talking about, Hagrid,” said Fudge sharply. “Nobody but trained Hit Wizards from the Magical Law Enforcement Squad would have stood a chance against Black once he was cornered. (PoA ch10)

...betrayed the Potters, killed Peter and a bunch of Muggles - with many witnesses. Sirius laughed when he was taken in by Aurors and didn't fight for his innocence - he went easy.

“Anyway, they cornered Black in the middle of a street full of Muggles an’ Black took out ’is wand and ’e blasted ’alf the street apart, an’ a wizard got it, an’ so did a dozen Muggles what got in the way. ’Orrible, eh? An’ you know what Black did then?” Stan continued in a dramatic whisper. “What?” said Harry. “Laughed,” said Stan. “Jus’ stood there an’ laughed. An’ when reinforcements from the Ministry of Magic got there, ’e went wiv ’em quiet as anyfink, still laughing ’is ’ead off. ’Cos ’e’s mad, inee, Ern? Inee mad?” (PoA ch3)

“There, now, Minerva,” said Fudge kindly, “Pettigrew died a hero’s death. Eyewitnesses—Muggles, of course, we wiped their memories later—told us how Pettigrew cornered Black. They say he was sobbing, ‘Lily and James, Sirius! How could you?’ And then he went for his wand. Well, of course, Black was quicker. Blew Pettigrew to smithereens…” [...] I was Junior Minister in the Department of Magical Catastrophes at the time, and I was one of the first on the scene after Black murdered all those people. I—I will never forget it. I still dream about it sometimes. A crater in the middle of the street, so deep it had cracked the sewer below. Bodies everywhere. Muggles screaming. And Black standing there laughing, with what was left of Pettigrew in front of him… a heap of bloodstained robes and a few—a few fragments—” Fudge’s voice stopped abruptly. (PoA ch10)

Dumbledore wasn't there for any of that. He was at Hogwarts. He didn't get to see Sirius before he was taken by Aurors.

I do think he suspected Sirius was innocent, though - because he was so ready to take massive risks to save him at the end of PoA, even with limited and very biased information. He talked to some kids and Sirius himself and believed them.

But before that: he accepted the Dementors patrolling the school. Even though he hates Dementors. They probably killed his dad. (though tbf - thats also out of his hands. The Ministry decided Dementors were required and he lacks the power to overrule them.) He tried hard to keep Harry in the school, safe. Severus was intense, McGonagall was strict - Dumbledore came out to watch Quidditch games himself, which is unusual for him.

He didn't know for sure. He had no proof Sirius was innocent.

The idea that Dumbledore could have done much to help Sirius, even with suspicions of innocence, is a bit ridiculous. He is giving evidence, he isn't leading the case - and what is he supposed to say? "I know there are many witnesses who all say the same thing, many corpses - and the last I heard Sirius was their Secret Keeper... but like... the vibes are wrong"

Considering Dumbledore, on the spot, made a plan that involved trusting children to use a time-turner illegally and dangerously to save Sirius Black (and hopefully a hippogriff)... has a long-standing aversion to Dementors and likely Azkaban in general... and was in contact with Sirius when he was free, finding ways to safely hide him...

Last he knew - they refused making him secret keeper and discussed making Sirius secret keeper.

And it was coming off the year where it was noted that someone specifically close to the potters had been leaking information, "He was sure that somebody close to the Potters had been keeping You-Know-Who informed of their movements," said Professor McGonagall darkly. "Indeed, he had suspected for some time that someone on our side had turned traitor and was passing a lot of information to You-Know-Who."

Even the marauders started suspecting Lupin. What I mean is it didn't come completely out of nowhere, it was already known and accepted that someone was a spy against the order I want to emphasize on a point you made though.

(though tbf - thats also out of his hands. The Ministry decided Dementors were required and he lacks the power to overrule them.)

This! This this this! POA is the book where we get told straight up multiple times that Dumbledore hates Dementors, while I don't think he was overruled, since we get told straight up that Dumbledore allowed them, we were still told that he did it grudginly. "Of course he knows. We had to ask him if he minds the Azkaban guards stationing themselves around the entrances to the school grounds. He wasn't happy about it, but he agreed."

This was said by Arthur too, so if Dumbledore was forced into it he would have said so IMO. But regardless, he only allowed the dementors to be around Hogwarts, and he really really really didn't want Dementors inside it. "Oh yes," said Dumbledore coldly. "But I'm afraid no dementor will cross the threshold of this castle while I am headmaster." This is one of the few times where we see Dumbledore talk 'coldly' (And it's the first ever time we see Dumbledore too it too, and this is the children's book version of Dumbledore too! The ultra tropey whimsical one), and leading from that, the dementors entering the quidditch pitch made Dumbledore go batshit insane. "Dumbledore was really angry," Hermione said in a quaking voice. "I've never seen him like that before. He ran onto the field as You fell, waved his wand, and you sort of slowed down before you hit the ground. Then he whirled his wand at the dementors. Shot silver stuff at them. They left the stadium right away (I know that Hermione's voice was probably quaking here due to Harry being injured, but a part of be can't help but think that it was also due to seeing Dumbledore's anger.) That anger is emphasized again here Lupin looked at him quickly. "Yes, I did. I don't think any of us have seen Professor Dumbledore that angry And here too Harry saw no hint of a dementor within the grounds. Dumbledore's anger seemed to be keeping them at their stations at the entrances (I like to think that it wasn't just Dumbledore's patronus that scared the dementors lol) Dumbledore's anger is referenced even more after this too, but I think I made my point

I do think he suspected Sirius was innocent, though - because he was so ready to take massive risks to save him at the end of PoA, even with limited and very biased information. He talked to some kids and Sirius himself and believed them.

I agree with this, but I don't think it was just for Sirius in general, but for everyone. I don't think Dumbledore would have liked to believe anyone to be the spy, but he had to because information was being leaked. I would like to say that the proof Sirius brings is massive though, or at the very least not limited. Sure none of it could be 100% proven, if Dumbledore used Legillmency then Sirius could have used Occlumency, and Sirius could have genuinely just been unable to take down Harry, but.. Sirius still had an Animagus form that Dumbledore completely didn't know about, Sirius had multiple chances to kill Harry at the shrieking shack alone , and the fact that he didn't was strong proof on it's own, neverminded if he also mentioned the firebolt he got Harry...

I think he did give a fuck.

But first, I need to talk about a book called "Mastiff."

"Mastiff" is the third book in the Provost's Dog trilogy by Tamora Pierce, that follows a young cop called Beka Cooper. You don't need to know much about it to understand why I'm talking about this. What you need to know is that in book 3, Beka receives iron-clad information that one of three people very close to her (mentor, friend, romantic partner) is a traitor working against her.

this could be a great plot device. but something weird happened to me when I read it, and I've talked to other people who have had the same experience, which is that once I knew it HAD to be one of those three....mentally, emotionally, I turned on all of them. I stopped liking all of them the same way. I felt like i had to harden my heart to all three of them. When the traitor was eventually revealed, I almost didn't care. I wasn't even glad for the other two, and i STILL liked them less than I had before I had to come to terms with the fact that they might be a traitor.

I feel like that experience gives me the exact perspective of what Albus is going through at the end of the First War. He knows, according to McGonagall in PoA, that someone "close to the Potters" (I interpret this to mean Remus, Peter, and Sirius) is passing information to Voldemort, and has been for quite a while. He offers to be their Secret-Keeper himself, because the only person he can 100% count on not to be a traitor, controlled, deluded, or misguided by Voldemort is himself. He's already mentally accepted (has had to!) that one of them is a traitor. He did not believe any of them were, but if ONE has to be, then they all CAN be. He has to accept that it is possible each of them COULD be betraying James and Lily. Emotionally, he's hardened himself to it.

It also reminds me of the King's Dilemma in the Stormlight Archives. If you know 3 shepherds in your town have murdered an innocent man, and there are 4 shepherds in your town, and you have no way to know which one is innocent, can the Just King afford to let any of them go free? Can the Just King afford to hang any of them? What if there were 5 shepherds in the town? What if there were 1,000? One king says even if there were 1,000, they must all hang. The other says even if 999 were murderers, he could not hang any of them, because any one might be the innocent one.

If the responsibility of protecting people from traitors is your job, how many can you afford to let go free?

So I remembered the scene where Sirius sent for Harry and co. to meet him near hogsmeade, and how it's made a point (in a weird amalgamation of a serious/comedic tone that was probably not intended to be taken in any way other than 'Wow Sirius cares about Harry this much!', but I digress) that Sirius was starving in there, his general appearance has degraded again to matted hair and torn robes, he was described as thin, he had to quite literally eat rats! And Dumbledore is involved with this: “You are not Sirius’s only correspondent,” said Dumbledore. “I have also been in contact with him ever since he left Hogwarts last year. It was I who suggested the mountainside cave as the safest place for him to stay.”

Dumbledore is the one who suggested that hiding spot, so Dumbledore should have also known about Sirius's situation and sent up food, right? So why didn't he? Well, taking into account that it would literally take Dumbledore just asking either a house elf or Fawkes to send up food to Sirius really quick, as in it would take very very little effort for Dumbledore to solve this, my only answer is that... he didn't think about it (Yes my answer is just 'he forgor💀', deal with it.) As in, think about it, Dumbledore has no reason to not give Sirius food, even if you think that Dumbledore doesn't want Sirius near Harry (For some reason), then this attempt is like... really really bad, he knows that Sirius escaped from Azkaban just for Harry, and that a starving Sirius on the run from everyone and still freshly traumatized from Azkaban still took the time of day to send Harry a Christmas gift! (And also to watch Harry's quidditch game, but Dumbledore doesn't know that.) Dumbledore would know that starving Sirius wouldn't deter him from taking care of Harry, and that all what that move would accomplish would be having Harry love Sirius more, and perhaps also make Harry or Sirius distrust Dumbledore. If Dumbledore really didn't want Sirius to 'interfere' with Harry, he would have just.... not suggested him that good hiding spot that allows Sirius this exact thing, or even better, he would have let Sirius be there, and after some time he would just discreetly make someone (via confundus or something) stumble into that cave and then run away to call the aurors, and then Dumbledore would be like "Oh gee golly, see Sirius? This isn't safe here for you, better for you to fuck off out of the country." Back to the point though, again I think Dumbledore just never considered that this may be a problem. Not even in a "Oh I have a nice place for Sirius to hide, he could handle other stuff like food!" But in a "Oh I have a nice place for Sirius to hide!" and that's it, no thought of food or such. Because Dumbledore at that point would be living for decades in a castle with free infinite food cooked by multiple chefs, even his experience as a secret resistance leader wouldn't help here, because even if there was a rare mission or two where it requires a long term stay in another location (IE: Hagrid and Maxime to the giants), you get the feeling that it was kinda on the order members sent on the mission themselves to take care of the food and lodging and stuff. And also, Sirius wouldn't tell Dumbledore if he was starving (pretty sure he wouldn't tell Dumbledore even if he was... idk, if *insert angsty thing times 1000 here*.) Look at how Sirius was treating it, he didn't send Harry a letter saying "Oh Merlin, Harry I'm starving! I need food!" No, he told Harry to come primary to help Harry, and was then like "Oh btw bring some food along with you." Be at stile at end of road out of Hogsmeade (past Dervish and Banges) at two o’clock on Saturday afternoon. Bring as much food as you can. And then looking at the way he talks about it with Harry... it was in a light joking tone, as if he expects Harry to just be like 'feelsbadman' and move on, he didn't even ask Harry to keep on sending him food. “I’ve been living off rats mostly. Can’t steal too much food from Hogsmeade; I’d draw attention to myself.” He grinned up at Harry, but Harry returned the grin only reluctantly. Literally just grins at Harry while explaining how much he's starving, he totally just expected it to be a funny thing for Harry to laugh at, poor guy, my heart aches for him.

1. About Albus just plain forgetting that acquiring food might be a challenge for Sirius in his situation during GoF

You are so 100% right.

Here's the thing. one of the worst mistakes people make in trying to decipher Albus' actions is to assume that he is indeed omniscient (as was assumed by an 11 year old harry)

he's not. And this is exactly the kind of oversight he tends to make

He himself is so hypercompetent, as well as chronically self-reliant that he quite forgets that other people have needs that he might be able to meet better than they can. Combine that with the fact that Albus seems to have a tendency to get lost in his own thoughts, even when he has company and you get someone who can come off as uncaring and is indeed not really suited to attend to other's basic needs.

Case in point? He and Harry have just swum in the icy north sea and Albus doesn't realise that Harry doesn't know a drying or warming charm until, after a few minutes, he shivers so badly that he can barely speak.

This isn't a character flaw, btw. It's just the way Albus seems to be wired. (And psst, I find this relatable. I try to be attentive bc i care a lot, but it doesn't come naturally to me.)

2. About Albus "wanting to distance Sirius from Harry"

This isn't a point you made op, it's one you cite others making and I have to double down on your point about how ridiculous this notion is.

Throughout book 4, aka Sirius one year of freedom, Albus actively aids him in being as close to Harry as possible. In fact, it always strikes me just how much Albus treats him as he would Harry's parent. At the end of the book, he doesn't just permit Sirius to be present while he interrogates Harry about the graveyard, he actively facilitates him being there. And that's what you'd normally do when you have to question a minor on something emotionally taxing: you get the parent involved and have them be present the entire time.

That's exactly what Albus does here with Sirius, thus very much acknowledging his claim as the closest thing Harry has to a parent.

Book 5 then is a special case and imo an absolute clusterfuck of bad circumstances that lead to a bunch of people making some very dumb trauma-informed decisions.

Which brings me to my next point:

3. About the nature of Albus' feelings for Sirius.

You make the point that Albus loves Sirius and that this is why he kept him hidden. Because whom Albus loves, he seeks to protect and hiding people is how he learned to protect them.

I agree with the latter statement but I'm still debating with myself over whether the first statement is really the only logical conclusion here.

The thing is, you are 100% correct, imo, that Albus protecting Sirius in this particular manner, by confining him physically, follows directly from the way he himself was raised. There is one particular part in the lost prophecy chapter that always makes me stare off into space for like 5 minutes straight:

“Yeah, he did hate it!” said Harry [...]. “You made him stay shut up in that house and he hated it, that’s why he wanted to get out last night —”

“I was trying to keep Sirius alive,” said Dumbledore quietly.

“People don’t like being locked up!” Harry said furiously, rounding on him. “You did it to me all last summer —”

Dumbledore closed his eyes and buried his face in his long-fingered hands.

There is so much in this short passage. Harry starts off by, rightfully, stating that being locked up in the house of his childhood traumas was abysmal for Sirius mental state and that this did contribute to his reckless behaviour (though tbh, I think Sirius would have come to the ministry to save Harry in any situation no matter his own state of mind. Denying that gives Sirius too little credit. Though Harry not seeing that in this moment is understandable)

And i find it remarkable that after the way Albus mannerisms have been described in this chapter so far (calm, detached, almost cold), it is here that he seems to first melt and then crack. Obviously, "quietly" doesn't carry a lot of emotions in and off itself but coming off the previous descriptors of Albus' mannerisms, it comes off as almost meek, like Harry's outburst suddenly and finally pentrates his many emotional walls and he feels the need to justify himself.

And then Harry really seems to strike a nerve with "people don't like to be locked up! You did it to me all last summer —"

There are few interpretations I'm as set on as Albus very suddenly and violently being reminded of what that feels like and that's why this is where the ice around him cracks. (Because when Ariana was locked up it ended in disasters. When he himself was locked up it ended it disaster.)

I'm repeating myself but this is where Albus suddenly doesn't manage to be detached anymore. He's tried so so hard. But he knows this feeling and he knows this pattern and as he later says he's fallen into the trap he had forseen and still he didn't manage to avoid it.

And that trap ... was loving Harry.

And here comes my point: because I don't think him protecting Sirius by keeping him locked up somewhere safe is necessarily evidence of him loving Sirius. It's evidence of him loving Harry.

Because, as stated in point two, Albus knew full well that Sirius had very quickly grown to be one of (if not the) most important parental figure in Harry's life and in protecting Sirius he was protecting Harry from loosing one more person he could emotionally rely on.

1. About Albus just plain forgetting

What was that famous saying again? "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity" (Though I wouldn't be quite as scathing to Dumbledore here). Given how the fandom treats Albus, I think this saying fits perfectly, and it's basically what Albus said anyways in HBP “Naturally I do, but as I have already proven to you, I make mistakes like the next man. In fact, being — forgive me — rather cleverer than most men, my mistakes tend to be correspondingly huger.” And wow, that moment in the cave really is the perfect evidence for this! Albus was oblivious, but as soon as he noticed his mistake he corrected it immediately with an apology.

That's exactly what Albus does here with Sirius, thus very much acknowledging his claim as the closest thing Harry has to a parent.

There's another moment that shows Albus's acknowledgment of this, and it's him accepting Sirius's letter as a permission form for Harry to go to Hogsmeade. Given that the students could only go with permission from their guardian, it's basically Dumbledore saying that Sirius is Harry's de-facto guardian. it's less profound than what you mentioned, but it goes nicely with what you said.

(though tbh, I think Sirius would have come to the ministry to save Harry in any situation no matter his own state of mind.

We've already seen Sirius risk himself multiple times before this and not even just for Harry's safety, but for his comfort too. And a few paragraphs before this Dumbledore said that the thing Sirius cares most about was Harry. And some paragraphs before that too was this quote: Sirius was a brave, clever, and energetic man, and such men are not usually content to sit at home in hiding while they believe others to be in danger In general, I don't remember a moment in the books where Harry downplayed Sirius's care for him or thought that Sirius would see him as a bother, it's not impossible for this to happen, but it's a weird quote for me (especially since that thought process wasn't addressed by the narrative neither then or later)

And i find it remarkable that after the way Albus mannerisms have been described in this chapter so far (calm, detached, almost cold), it is here that he seems to first melt and then crack.

I find this interesting actually, because I hold a different opinion. I don't prescribe the detachedness to the whole scene before the point you mentioned, but only at that specific point in relation to a specific thing that Dumbledore said, As in, at the start, Dumbledore was indeed still calm, but he wasn't detached, he was also described as kindly, and even in his speech he showed some emotion like here with the exclamation mark. “Harry, suffering like this proves you are still a man! This pain is part of being human — You also mentioned how Dumbledore talking about Sirius quietly was a sort of melting point, and that it sounds meek, I 1000000% agree with that statement, I think you described it perfectly, same with the ice cracking around Albus when hit with the full force of what that isolation felt like, but there was also another moment before that where Dumbledore was talking quietly—very quietly, in fact: “I know how you are feeling, Harry,” said Dumbledore very quietly. I'm curious about what you think that statement conveys here, I think here it could be another expression of guilt and meekness that eeked out here, or it could be a precursor to the detachment that Dumbledore was described with, and speaking of: The moment he was described as detached was in here(I cut off the middle part of that quote): “You do care,” said Dumbledore. He had not flinched or made a single move to stop Harry demolishing his office. His expression was calm, almost detached. “You care so much you feel as though you will bleed to death with the pain of it.” . “Oh yes, you do,” said Dumbledore, still more calmly. “You have now lost your mother, your father, and the closest thing to a parent you have ever known. Of course you care.” This is Dumbledore explaining exactly how Harry feels in this situation with extreme accuracy, and that, plus the way he just viscerally described it makes me think that at that point, he was remembering his own past and what he felt when Ariana died. To explain what I think about the detachment here, I have to first say I think that Dumbledore was always feeling the intense emotions and guilt throughout this whole scene here, and that he's masking them (And from your post, I feel that you think the same?), both to give Harry something to rage out without feeling guilty, and also because well.... Albus really really really doesn't like showing vulnerability to people, he's always going to try and show himself as not being hurt, and the moment that broke that barrier for him and Harry is, like you said, after the "people don't like being locked up" quote. So take those two feelings, and multiply them by 1000X because not only will Albus be hit by the and longing and sadness regarding his family, but it's also his past and shame, it's the one thing that he never wants to share with anyone, and is the main driving point for Harry's feelings of betrayal in DH. And the result will be Dumbledore going really really overboard the calmness to the point of detachment. Dumbledore was then described as 'Serene' while refusing to let Harry out, which I think is a hold over from his detachment earlier, and also again him allowing Harry to rage at something without guilt. After that, Dumbledore's detachment begins to fade, he started acting generally calmly like earlier, though now with a bit more of emotion showing “You will,” said Dumbledore sadly. “Because you are not nearly as angry with me as you ought to be. . Harry looked up. He could see now that Dumbledore looked sad and tired. Now occasionally, Dumbledore will show more emotions like talking 'sadly' or 'heavily' or giving a deep sigh, all peppered between him talking 'calmly' or 'steadily', I think it's his mask over his emotions and vulnerabilities slipping further and further, until it's completely shattered by the moment you pointed to, the moment where Dumbledore was forced to show his emotions to Harry fully and even explain, and the moment where he finally admitted to loving Harry.

I'm always struck by this quote here “I feel I owe you another explanation, Harry,” said Dumbledore hesitantly. “You may, perhaps, have wondered why I never chose you as a prefect? I must confess . . . that I rather thought . . . you had enough responsibility to be going on with.” Harry looked up at him and saw a tear trickling down Dumbledore’s face into his long silver beard. It's the first moment we ever see Dumbledore hesitate and pause and almost stutter, it's the first time we ever see him cry! And it comes directly after that barrier of almost emotional distance was broken between him and Harry.

And here comes my point: because I don't think him protecting Sirius by keeping him locked up somewhere safe is necessarily evidence of him loving Sirius. It's evidence of him loving Harry.

I think that works too! And I'm stealing this for my interpretation. Interactions between Dumbledore and Sirius are scarce, and maybe I was jumping the gun a bit by saying that it's evidence of Dumbledore loving Sirius more (Though I still like the idea) Now though, I think it's a mixture of three things: 1: Dumbledore caring about Harry so much to the point that he'd be protective of those Harry loves. 2: Dumbledore feeling incredibly guilty and blaming himself for Sirius's time in Azkaban (Though that one is a headcanon, since we don't see Dumbledore talk about that, but considering his general character...) 3: Dumbledore caring about Sirius, perhaps only as much as any other order member, perhaps a bit more, but caring about him all the same.

Albus knew full well that Sirius had very quickly grown to be one of (if not the) most important parental figure in Harry's life

Not pointed to by the narrative at all, author probably didn't think about the timeline when writing this, and it shows, we never see Tom even once point to the war as a reason for staying at Hogwarts to DIppet, even thought it might have convinced him, and even disregarding that, if it was the war, then he could have asked to stay with one of his 'friends'\followers if he was worried about the bombings, Dippet would have no say over that. We never see Voldemort or Tom ever mention the war or the fear of bombs. Not even in his inner POV or when Teen Riddle was trying to manipulate Harry.

Dumbledore not letting him stay at schoo

Dippet, not Dumbledore, Dumbledore had absolutely nothing to do with this lmao, wasn't even his head of house and we don't know if he was the deputy then or not.

And then people wonder how he ended up developing absolute contempt for that world

His absolute contempt was from him thinking that they are supirior to muggles due to magic, not once had he, again, ever mentioned anything about the war, or muggles being savages or anything like that, it was all superiority over having magic and also the innate fear of death, which was also present before the war. Hell, he even hated the name 'Tom' because of how ordinary it is, this was made note of in the flashback chapter in HBP.

and sociopathic tendencies?

Were present waay before the war, Tom was torturing children and hanging rabbits before Dumbledore met him.

Albus like: I ALWAYS KNEW SOMETHING ABOUT HIM WAS WRONG

When did Albus phrase it like that? You are putting an unnecessary negative connotation over it. Albus was like "I was concerned for his tendencies of torturing children and animals, and I intended to distantly keep an eye on him like I would any alone and friendless boy... and also because he tortured children"

he does love harry, but he sends him back to an abusive household over and over; he does love harry, but that love leaves him teetering between giving too much, ruining harry's already ruined childhood which ends up with harry not knowing enough after dumbledore died

he vouches for snape, but uses him as well---he'd help a slytherin student trying to escape the deatheaters, no doubts---but he's biased against them anyway, and they'd never come to him

hes leading a war, he's in charge of hundreds of students; he made mistakes he'll regret till he dies, but he continues to make mistakes, seems incapable of not making mistakes

i dont like dumbledore glaze, but i dont like bashing either; i like it when he's human; when he's flawed and fucked up; when he's trying and still isnt enough

Just like I did with another post, I decided to make my own bringing up the same points, because I think they’re relevant enough to stand on their own. So I genuinely don’t understand where this idea comes from —that Harry was manipulated by Dumbledore from the very beginning, that he should never have trusted him — and from these ideas, people somehow jump to the conclusion that Harry was Dumbledore’s puppet the entire time, caught in some political game between him and Voldemort, while ignoring Voldemort being Harry’s equal, something confirmed in the books:

“He chose the boy he thought most likely to be a danger to him,” said Dumbledore. “And notice this, Harry. He chose, not the pureblood (which, according to his creed, is the only kind of wizard worth being or knowing), but the half-blood, like himself. He saw himself in you before he had ever seen you

OotP

Why did Voldemort pick Harry and not Neville?

JK Rowling: Dumbledore explains this in 'Order of the Phoenix'. Voldemort identified more with the half-blood boy and therefore decided he must be the greater risk.

Reinforced by the author herself.

‘The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches ... born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies... and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not... and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives ... the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies…’

And the quote above was even pointed out in an article on the official Harry Potter site that literally says: 7 times that Professor Trelawney actually got it right.

It’s worth noting that the same quote explicitly says “The one,” which refers to Harry himself, not to him as a tool for another character, or even for those who stood by him and helped him along the way. I’ve seen people try to lean on the idea of collectivity and the lesson on friendship of the series to argue otherwise, as if the core of the saga didn’t begin with Harry and Voldemort being marked as equals. It’s not about a collective standing above the individual and diluting the protagonist’s agency; it’s about how that very collective forms and organizes itself around him.

So, it doesn’t make sense for a series called Harry Potter to have its own protagonist reduced to being groomed into Dumbledore’s puppet. Harry didn’t even trust Dumbledore with everything, and he spent a good part of the series trying to hide things from him. Like in GoF, when he never told him about his dreams or the pain in his scar. In HBP, he fully disagrees with Dumbledore about Draco and Snape, proving he doesn’t always trust his judgments. He also sees Hermione as the one who trusts Dumbledore’s authority the most. Even if they share similar values, Harry literally grew up wary of Dumbledore’s secrecy, and he wasn’t one to be restrained when it came to pursuing things on his terms.

Harry has immense respect for him, not just because he believes in his intentions — in the cause behind them — but because there’s an almost paternal bond there. So why is that framed as blind trust? Their relationship is more complex than that!

It’s always about reducing things into easily digestible concepts— the same way people take the good vs evil framework, rendered as Harry (the hero) = pure and naive, Voldemort (the villain) = impure and heartless. And that’s the same logic here, because Dumbledore is a manipulative – “impure” – figure, Harry is then positioned against him, cast as the “pure” counterpart and automatically reduced to a passive lamb. All the nuance gets ignored, as if actions could only exist in a single, illogical dimension.

That kind of interpretation fails to account for Harry Potter himself.

Harry was a soldier— DA’s leader, carrying out a mission he believed in, just as much as Dumbledore did. And he had plenty of personal reasons for it; to end the war that had defined his entire life, and to make sure no one else had to die for something that was always meant to end with him. His sacrifice was a choice — one he had the courage and honor to make himself. Again, like a soldier, like a hero — not because he was being manipulated by Dumbledore.