I think lack of love only is a part of it to me. (Prefacing by saying a lot of my own hc comes from wanting to make his origins both in bigotry and personality different from Voldemorts)
Since I tend to put him in a richer environment, I think he has entitlement issues stemming from having access to wealth and prestige early. I don't think he is the absolutely richest or from the most respected family, but that he had a very different upbringing from Albus in that way.
I think the lack of family comes in here: I don't think his parents made him out of love but out of duty. They knew they needed a child and made one and that was all there was too it. I think they were not very interested in him at all. I also think some hereditary thing is at play here, either one or both of his parents having some sort of disorder that you might not have had the right way to deal with during the 1800s. I know JKR once said that Grindelwald was a sociopath and while I might not really see that as 100% canon confirmed psychological evaluated (mostly due to my own somewhat disinterest in how that disorder is used in fiction) I think it wouldn't be too out there to think he has some sort of personality disorder, which of course doesn't make him blameless for his actions. I tend not to want to focus too much on that aspect though since I think it at times can come across as stigmatising or as if I am using that as a shortform for his evil, which I really am not.
I tend to write he had a lot of nannies and governesses going in and out, very few managing to stay on for long due to Gellert's behavioural issues, these made worse by his parents due to lack of interest but having a lot of pride never taking the governesses side in whatever issues they have with him. Imagine having a temperamental, arrogant boy that you aren't allowed to tell "You can't do that" because you know his parents will take his side or perhaps even take your job from you if you are too firm with him.
This, ofc, adding to his sense of loneliness and not having anyone around that actually cares, because he never has a fixed adult in his life that will give him that affection and routine a child needs. I think very small him was very confused over why no one ever stayed, and if he was visibly upset over it, I think his parents might make fun of him. Who cries over a silly nanny leaving, after all, when there are lines of others you can hire? Any emotional vulnerability would be met with either mocking or stern disapproval.
I think he still had the time to learn during his childhood how to be charming and gentlemanly though, and he might hone that into some manipulation (without being aware of it at first) in an attempt at guilt tripping the staff into staying, wanting to show he isn't always disorderly.
The lack of discipline and never really being told no making him crash out a bit at Durmstrang, because suddenly he is in an environment with other students, perhaps with parents too like his, students where some are perhaps even richer and more important, and teachers that too either have a certain social status, or just don't accept his behaviour. I think going from "I can do whatever I want" to suddenly being punished and admonished, sometimes in front of other students, would have made him feel very humiliated and an angry child.
At Durmstrang, since he can't leverage his social status or wealth and has no parents that can come in and send away whoever tries to straighten out those darker moments in him, I think he used 1) his power and 2) manipulation to then avoid having to feel consequences for any wrongdoings. I think he probably made his teachers be scared of him early on (Very different from Tom Riddle, who had the teachers love him) but that he also was very good at talking himself out of trouble, especially if his parents backed him up whenever things got too serious, because while they as said cannot fire any teacher questioning their son, parents can still intimidate and make life difficult for teachers. I think he had some teachers he respected more and didn't cause too much issues with. I think he had some teachers that genuinely wanted to help him and some that only wanted him gone.
I think him managing to seamlessly shift between being a charming jokester and suddenly having some major angry breakdown over the slightest insult probably was very amusing in the beginning to some of his classmates, some of who in the early days of Durmstrang likely wanted to trigger that explosion in him, until his behaviour actually started to become frightening to most, and after that people would try not to bother him. I don't think he ever had the social circle that Albus had as a student. I go back and forth a bit on how his social circle tended to look, sometimes making him a bit of a loner, sometimes making people be drawn to him in those charming moments of his, or be drawn to the darkness in him and thinking it is exciting. I always think Albus was the first true connection he ever had in his life, which was why he was so desperate not to lose him.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
The qilin should have bowed to Jacob. Not even to Dumbledore for him to deny it. It would have been interesting to see that reaction of that, and Jacob is the opposite of everything Grindelwald stands for.
i dont think i'll ever actually understand this take and the explanations are usually just that people either think Albus sucks or that it would be cooler because Jacob is a muggle and it would piss of Gellert more. Which Feels like a cheesy thing a Marvel movie would do. Albus fits it better, him and Gellert being opposites and being the two to battle it out in the end.
What if Dumbledore only let Remus into Hogwarts so he had a werewolf on side should he need one?
Look at what we know (and a little of what we don't):
Dumbledore was aware of Tom, and kept a close eye on him though his relationship may have been one such as any student with some notability (intelligent, coming from a care home) would have with a teacher who isn't their head of house. Dumbledore became headmaster in Tom's fourth or fifth year. Despite this, Dumbledore is one of the few who tracks Tom's growth to Voldemort.
We don't know of any other werewolf getting through Hogwarts before Remus, but we do know how werewolves are regarded in the wizarding world - enough that Remus was 'let' in, and that was an anomaly - the tree wasn't there before him, so it stands to reason no werewolf was either.
We know that Dumbledore has previously been involved in a big thing with Grindelwald - I don't remember enough to call it a war, but it certainly showed his ability to plan and organise himself, if not others. This may include him being able to spot the signs of something bigger coming, but it's speculative. We also know that he had a game plan for Harry, so he was capable of looking several steps ahead and not opposed to raising children to do it.
So?
Remus comes along at the cusp of the 1970s, when Voldemort truly begins his rise to power. He gets into school. Neither he nor Sirius are suspended or expelled when he is used to almost kill Severus - it wasn't Remus' fault, but it couldn't have happened without him. Everyone knows he can't get a job in the wizarding world, but he's trained up as a wizard anyway and trusted with a wand. He then joins the order - a thing one can only join when someone has a) come of age and b) left school (confirmed by Sirius Black no less!)
What else could he have done by that point except join the order? Withdraw to the muggle world? After Dumbledore has just done him the biggest favour of letting him into school? Not to mention, OOTP Remus tells Molly that the 1994+ Order is better prepared than the original, suggesting things were desperate and haphazard when he joined the first time. What's more compelling than someone being desperate, and having recently done you a favour? Remus runs away from a lot, but he doesn't run away from loyalty.
So...
Was it a kindness, or was he an extra piece on Albus Dumbledore's chess board?
First, Dumbledore did not become headmaster in Tom's fifth year. Dippet was still a headmaster at that point. Dumbledore is usually thought to become a headmaster around the 60s.
I tend to think this theory is just a bit strange and a gamble.
What is more likely, really, that he lets a werewolf go to school just on the little chance that that werewolf might become useful to him in a war later on, or that a scholar known for preaching inclusivity just wanted Remus, just like any other child, to have the chance for an education? We know Dumbledore argued against Hagrid being expelled and wanted him to stay at Hogwarts, his character is in general one that tries his best to make sure children can go to school.
Like this theory shows up a lot (and I wish people had the decency to tag it Dumbledore bashing, because that is what it reads as; taking a decent action from a character and twisting it into something nefarious) and usually it just feels like it only works if Dumbledore has read the Harry Potter books and knows how Remus will develop. Which he hasn't, since he is in them.
It also takes away a lot for Remus character in itself. One of the few brave things we see him do in canon is joining the Order. Why can't that be chalked up to him being brave, kind, believing what is right and wanting, just like his friends, to fight against evil, instead of there being some grand plan regarding him in the background?
Dumbledore's own little sister was, due to the danger the ministry would think she possessed to the Wizarding world if they found out about her condition, hidden away for most of her life because their mother feared they would harm her if it would come out, and was thus denied a life outside of the home and education. Wouldn't it really be more in line in his character for this sort of childhood to have radicalised Dumbledore enough to not want any child to suffer for a condition they couldn't control?
Can't you that dislike Dumbledore at least save that for the anti tags instead of his main tag? It is so annoying seeing constant hate in a tag for a character you like. Wasn't the salt tag enough for the post?
My favorite hc is that Dumbledore borrowed the cloak knowing that Peter would betray the Potters. He took away their only means of survival in order to ensure that Harry becomes the chosen one to defeat Voldemort. When Snape told Dumbledore that Peter was a death eater, Dumbledore chose to do nothing. Snape had to bargain with Voldemort for Lily’s life because he KNEW Dumbledore wouldn’t save her.
Snape didn't know Peter was a death eater and Dumbledore wanting Voldemort to kill the Potters makes no sense. How would he have known that Voldemort would have given Lily a chance to live, or that Voldemort just wouldn't have killed Harry before James and Lily had the time to stop him? He hasn't read the Harry Potter books, he doesn't know Lily would have the time to run upstairs and shield Harry with her body and that Voldemort would give her the chance to step aside, the only thing that allowed Harry to live.
Plus, the books outright say that the cloak wouldn't have helped them. Harry, who has seen Voldemorts attack on them through Voldemorts eyes, says that to Dumbledore when he himself expresses sadness over having the cloak believing he might have robbed them of the chance to survive, something Harry comforts him with by saying he didn't. James didn't even have the time to pick up his wand and Voldemort watched them from the window before striking. How would they have time to hide under the cloak, when Voldemort already was there watching them?
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
the truth is that if Voldemort didn't pose such a threat to Albus Dumbledore's standing, reputation and place of power, Dumbledore would have not even lifted a finger to aid in the war.
he would have been one of those 'I'm neutral' guys.
every single move he made was in his best interest and in order to retain power. he fought against Voldemort to keep the position of power he had. he went out like a hero and everyone mourned his death because he was just that careful about which parts of himself he let the wizarding world see.
so no, Dumbledore is not morally grey. he's a power hungry capitalist where Voldemort is a fascist, and that is what I have to say.
This makes no sense at all. Even from his childhood he is described as someone reaching out his hand to vulnerable people. He had two months yes where he dreamt of overtaking the world with his boyfriend in 1899, but after that he is constantly described as someone who rejects bigotry in the narrative and tries to do what is right even when it is against his best interests. Voldemort was not even his only enemy, he defeated Grindelwald before that because he wanted to protect innocent lives.
He just is not the type to be neutral. He is not even neutral when it could benefit him, and for that he is attacked by the pureblood bigots and the ministry in the books.
Also capitalist? What did you get that from? What means of production does he own? Even if you argue he is supportive of capitalism itself, I don't get when he ever did that. If anything, canon shows he is for high regulations and for labour rights. Like, that is an entire thing in the plot.
I imagine at one point Dumbledore was a good man. Overtime, his perspective changed from doing “the greater good” to just winning the war. At that point he stopped caring about innocent people and starting letting people die and children fight for him. He could have stopped every problem before they even became problems but he didn’t care.
If it wasn’t for him, Tom Riddle wouldn’t have ever become Voldemort.
Sometimes I go into the Albus Dumbledore tag and wonder if people read some entirely different book series than I did, because this take just makes no sense at all to me with the canon characterisation and what we know of him.
Dumbledore, Tom Riddle, and what makes a psychopath
First of all, I'm not a licensed therapist or psychiatrist, but I love reading things online. I also love analyzing fictional characters, so why not do both and show why Albus Dumbledore shows just as many signs of ASPD (Antisocial Personality Disorder) as Tom Marvolo Riddle and that both men are much more similar than they'd like to think.
Whats ASPD?
ASPD, also known as Antisocial Personality Disorder, is a personality disorder. This disorder encapsulates both what people commonly call "psychopaths" and "sociopaths" and is actually mischaracterized often. It is a real mental disorder and not all real-life people with ASPD are dangerous to be around like the fictional ones, some live completely lawful murder-free lives. This post is mostly an interesting thought exercise and not meant to be a diagnostic tool or to be seen as how all people with ASPD are.
So, personality disorders refer to mental disorders that affect thought processes, personality, and how a person interacts with the world as a whole. ASPD, as its name suggests, focuses on social interactions. It is categorized by a lack of empathy, a penchant for lying, irresponsibility, and disregard for other's rights or feelings along with a lack of remorse.
All in all it sounds a lot like what we'd associate with Tom Riddle, but Dumbledore fits just as many of the symptoms required for an ASPD diagnosis.
How is ASPD diagnosed?
The DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) categorizes and describes how to diagnose all clinically recognized mental illnesses. The DSM-5's diagnostic criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder:
A pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others, since age 15 years, as indicated by three (or more) of the following:
Disregarding the law, indicated by repeatedly committing acts that are grounds for arrest
Being deceitful, indicated by lying repeatedly, using aliases, or conning others for personal gain or pleasure
Acting impulsively or not planning ahead
Being easily provoked or aggressive, indicated by constantly getting into physical fights or assaulting others
Recklessly disregarding their safety or the safety of others
Consistently acting irresponsibly, indicated by quitting a job with no plans for another one or not paying bills
Not feeling remorse, indicated by indifference to or rationalization of hurting or mistreating others
2. The individual is at least age 18 years.
3. Evidence of conduct disorder typically with onset before age 15 years.
4. The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.
So let's look at the boys, shall we?
This isn't meant to be a professional diagnosis, I just want to show how similar Tom and Dumbledore are in certain ways neither of them would like to confess and for that, we'll look through the behavior patterns used to diagnose ASPD.
1. Disregarding the law, indicated by repeatedly committing acts that are grounds for arrest
With Tom, this category of behavior is easy to tick off. He murdered multiple people. He led a terrorist organization. He cast illegal dark magic, including all three unforgivables, I don't think anyone would argue Tom didn't do many illegal things.
The thing is, Dumbledore disregards the law just as much, if, in different ways.
The Order of the Phoenix that he leads is an illegal paramilitary group separate from the government that is kept a secret from law enforcement at large and the general population, as shown in the news article leading to the publication of Rita's book:
WHAT was the real purpose of the secret organization known as the Order of the Phoenix?
(DH, 24)
This organization is illegal in their world. Additionally, Dumbledore shows no care for the ministry or its laws once it suits him. (It's not necessarily a bad thing because the Ministry of Magic sucks, but still). He showed as much in all his interactions with people like Fudge and Umbridge, going as far as actually resisting arrest in OotP after the DA was discovered. (again, he is right for doing it, but it still shows a disregard for their law, which I personally consider healthy because it's the Ministry of Magic)
And then, of course, there was Dumbledore's quest for muggle domination with Grindelwald:
Your point about Wizard dominance being FOR THE MUGGLES’ OWN GOOD—this, I think is the crucial point. Yes, we have been given power and yes, that power gives up the right to rule, but it also gives us responsibilities over the ruled. We must stress this point, it will be the foundation stone upon which we build. Where we are opposed, as we surely will be, this must be the basis of all our counterarguments. We seize control FOR THE GREATER GOOD.
(DH, 309)
None of which sounds awfully legal. His intentions back then were to rule over the muggles and take control by force if they had to. Showing that even in his youth, Dumbledore didn't have much consideration for the law.
2. Being deceitful, indicated by lying repeatedly, using aliases, or conning others for personal gain or pleasure
There are many examples of Tom lying for various reasons, I picked out one of them to exibit here:
Riddle laughed his high laugh again.
“It was my word against Hagrid’s, Harry. Well, you can imagine how it looked to old Armando Dippet. On the one hand, Tom Riddle, poor but brilliant, parentless but so brave, school prefect, model student . . . on the other hand, big, blundering Hagrid, in trouble every other week, trying to raise werewolf cubs under his bed
(CoS, 288)
But Tom lies a lot. Both at school, at the orphanage, and about his identity. He lies to his followers often and I'd say he also lies to himself, but that's another matter. This category literally mentions using an alias and that is one of the things Tom (or, well, Voldemort) is well known for.
As for Dumbledore, he lies and conceals just as much. Abeforth said he was always this way:
“I can’t leave,” said Harry. “I’ve got a job—”
“Give it to someone else!”
“I can’t. It’s got to be me, Dumbledore explained it all—”
“Oh, did he now? And did he tell you everything, was he honest with you?”
Harry wanted with all his heart to say “Yes,” but somehow the simple word would not rise to his lips, Aberforth seemed to know what he was thinking.
“I knew my brother, Potter. He learned secrecy at our mother’s knee. Secrets and lies, that’s how we grew up, and Albus. . . he was a natural.”
(DH, 477-478)
The "greater good" was all for the sake of appearances, it was a deception — a lie to make muggle domination more palatable for the general population. He lied in his position as headmaster and in his relationship with Harry:
Not telling Harry about, well, anything, and justifying it to himself by telling himself Harry would be better off not knowing, even when it isn't necessarily true.
Lying to Lockhart to get him in a dangerous position Dumbledore knew he was unfit for.
Lying about Lupin being a werewolf (this one is a lie that does have a good intention behind it, but I count it here anyway)
Lying about the petrifications in 2nd year. Dumbledore was at the school last time the Chamber opened and knew what was going on, still waited for Harry to act.
Same in 1st year. Harry himself says he's pretty sure Dumbledore always knew about Quirrell but wanted to give Harry the chance to face Voldemort.
Lying to Harry about Malfoy not being anything to worry about, even though he knows what's going on. But instead of agreeing there is concern and it is being dealt with he just tries to gaslight Harry.
I can go on, but I think the gist is clear.
3. Acting impulsively or not planning ahead
They are actually both planners when they want to be. But they can also be impulsive on occasion, if more rare for them. We'll consider this a symptom they don't have, mostly.
4. Being easily provoked or aggressive, indicated by constantly getting into physical fights or assaulting others
Now, Tom can get provoked and react aggressively, although, I won't call it easily. Tom actually avoids unnecessary bloodshed when possible:
He saw the small boy’s smile falter as he ran near enough to see beneath the hood of the cloak, saw the fear cloud his painted face. Then the child turned and ran away. . . . Beneath the robe be fingered the hand of his wand. . . One simple movement and the child would never reach his mother. . . but unnecessary, quite unnecessary. . . .
(DH, 295)
I mean, he wouldn't have been prefect and head boy if he constantly got into fights. So I feel safe in saying Tom didn't get into fights often and much of the behavior we see towards his followers is fueled by both general frustration and his feeling they deserve this punishment. These punishments are planned, they aren't often impulsive and in the moment of rage (and when they are, it's only when Harry Potter is involved).
Dumbledore is quite the same. He is capable of getting angry when provoked, but avoids violence he doesn't see as necessary.
We'll consider this a symptom they don't have.
5. Recklessly disregarding their safety or the safety of others
So many times... for both of them...
For Tom:
He clearly doesn't care about most of his Death Eaters, he wouldn't mind if they died and he endangered them often.
He also endagers himself just as much, if not more; by mutilating himself to create Horcruxes.
And by charging into battle himself often.
For Dumbledore:
Dumbledore endangers the Order's safety repeatedly. Yes, they made the decision to join, but he is still the one sending Hagrid to negotiate with the giants and Remus to talk to the werewolves. He is still the one who sends them towards danger and is willing to risk them.
Dumbledore endangers Snape, he manipulates him into the position of a spy and wilfully disregards Snape's safety.
Harry. Just everything, since he placed him on the doorstep of the Dursleys Dumbledore has willfully endangered Harry — from the abuse to setting Harry up to face the various yearly adventures every year.
Dumbledore tells Harry in HBP he takes his student's safety seriously, but he really doesn't: he knows about the Chamber, but still waits for Harry to resolve it, even when students are getting petrified. He knew Malfoy was planning something in HBP, but allowed him to continue with his ploys that sent Katie Bell to St. Mongos for months. There are more, but I think you get the gist.
Dumbledore also endangers himself quite carelessly from how he picked up the ring, his willingness to go into battle, his drinking of the potion in the locket's cave, and his willingness to die for his own plans.
6. Consistently acting irresponsibly, indicated by quitting a job with no plans for another one or not paying bills
We actually see both of them are capable of holding jobs for a long time (Dumbledore at Hogwarts and Tom at Borgin and Burkes) and even when Tom leaves Borgin and Burkes, he has a plan for his leave.
Both show irresponsibility in other ways. Tom allows his Death Eaters to wreak havoc in the ministry in book 7 while he's off chasing the Elder Wand, Dumbledore repeatedly shows how unconcerned he is with the education of the students at Hogwarts (his actual job) by hiring people like Lockhart, who he knew to be a fraud and allowing Umbridge to be hired (he had the Order, he could've convinced the real Mad-Eye Moody to come teach, or even Tonks, but no, he needed to teach Harry a lesson about the ministry so he allowed Umbridge into the school).
7. Not feeling remorse, indicated by indifference to or rationalization of hurting or mistreating others
Well, not feeling remorse is kind of a big part of Tom's character, isn't it:
“It’s your one last chance,” said Harry, “it’s all you’ve got left. . . . I’ve seen what you’ll be otherwise. . . . Be a man . . . try . . . Try for some remorse. . . .”
“You dare—?” said Voldemort again.
(DH, 625)
That he isn't sorry for what he did at any point to anyone. Yes, he shows affection to Nagini and Bellatrix, but he takes occasional joy in emberessing Bellatrix.
He truly isn't sorry because he doesn't care. He is indifferent to the suffering of most.
The thing is, Dumbledore is the same.
He shows complete cold disregard for Lockhart's situation after his loss of memories, rationalizing it as "deserved".
As I mentioned, he doesn't care when Katie gets cursed by the necklace or when students get petrified in 2nd year. He allows it to happen because it isn't happening to anyone important.
Dumbledore is hellbent on killing Tom, on utterly destroying him, this is weird for a person who supposedly believes in second chances, especially a person who let Gallert Grindlewald live. Grindelwald had a much higher death count than Voldemort. He killed and hurt way more people, but Dumbledore likes him, so he rationalizes killing Tom, but not Gallert.
He disregards Harry's pain and hurt over Sirius's death:
“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.”
“YOU DON’T KNOW HOW I FEEL!” Harry roared. “YOU —
STANDING THERE — YOU —”
(OotP, 824)
He speaks calmly and coldly throughout the whole exchange, just waiting for Harry to calm down enough so he can tell him about the prophecy. Dumbledore doesn't empathize with Harry's pain.
He disregards Harry's abuse:
“Five years ago, then,” continued Dumbledore, as though he had
not paused in his story, “you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor as well nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy as I could have hoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my plan was working well.
(OotP, 837)
He says he knew Harry to be mistreated (and starved!) since 1st year, but he does nothing until 6th year when he needs Harry. No, instead he rationalizes Harry's abuse, it's necessary for the plan, so Harry won't be spoiled, it's for the greater good.
And, of course, he raised Harry like a "pig to slaughter":
“We have protected him because it has been essential to teach him, to raise him, to let him try his strength,” said Dumbledore, his eyes still tight shut. “Meanwhile, the connection between them grows ever stronger, a parasitic growth. Sometimes I have thought he suspects it himself. If I know him, he will have arranged matters so that when he does set out to meet his death, it will truly mean the end of Voldemort.”
Dumbledore opened his eyes. Snape looked horrified.
“You have kept him alive so that he can die at the right moment?”
“Don’t be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?”
“Lately, only those whom I could not save,” said Snape. He stood up. “You have used me.”
“Meaning?”
“I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. Everything was supposed to be to keep Lily Potter’s son safe. Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter—”
“But this is touching, Severus,” said Dumbledore seriously. “Have you grown to care for the boy, after all?”
“For him?” shouted Snape. “Expecto Patronum!”
(DH, 580)
I think it's telling how Severus Snape, who despises the concept of Harry, reacts more sympatheticly and emotionally to Harry's death than Dumbledore. Dumbledore is cold and uncaring, he just calls Snape out for caring as if Snape is in the wrong for reacting the way any human would. Because Dumbledore is cold enough to rationalize any sacrifice he considers necessary.
The last quote was also about how Dumbledore used Severus. He manipulated Snape into oaths and bonds to spy for him and protect Harry. Twisted Snape's guilt to get some use out of him. And for Dumbledore, it was justified, it was for the greater good.
Results
So, Tom got 5/7 for ASPD symptoms, and Dumbledore got 5/7. And you only need 3 for a diagnosis, so, yeah...
What I wanted to talk about and get to with all of this is Tom and Dumbledore's similarities that both of them hate to see. Their despise for each other is partly fueled by it, I think. They look at each other and see some of their own traits mirrored back, but arranged all wrong.
Dumbledore sees the worst version of himself in Tom Riddle and Tom sees their similarities and Dumbledore's hypocrisy to those similarities and hates him for that.
They were both the most brilliant wizards of their respective generations, top students at Hogwarts, when they graduated, Dumbledore planned to go on a tour of the world to study magic abroad like Tom did. They both received offers for ministry positions, which they both declined because they wanted to be professors at Hogwarts. They both lead paramilitary organizations (Death Eaters and the Order of the Phoenix) and they are both willing to make sacrifices in the quest for their goals.
Tom is willing to kill and tear himself up to create Horcruxes because it's necessary in his eyes:
Beneath the robe be fingered the hand of his wand. . . One simple movement and the child would never reach his mother. . . but unnecessary, quite unnecessary. . . .
(DH, 295)
Dumbledore is willing to sacrifice Harry and himself in the quest for the "greater good":
We seize control FOR THE GREATER GOOD.
(DH, 309)
I just find the fact that both of them show psychopathic traits in equal measure in similar ways super interesting. This distorted mirror is so fascinating, especially because the respective characters would despise being compared to each other.
You state in the post in the beginning that you aren't a licensed therapist or a psychiatrist. I am someone working in the field, and I think this post not only strikes me as a bit belittling of what ASPD is, but that you are forgetting one of the most important thing about this diagnose; the criterias are also judged based on the motivation and context around them.
I won't get too much into this post, other than that I think a lot of the things you write are taken out of context, or you make claims that are unsupported in the text. (For example, him not caring about Katie's attack when nothing of the sort is said in the text. The opposite really, Hagrid in HBP stating that he senses that Dumbledore is worried and saddened by the events unfolding at Hogwarts, and indirectly supported by the fact that one of the few times we see him get angry is when he witnesses his students being hurt, the scene with Umbridge and Marietta for example in OOTP)
The main point of difference between them is that Dumbledore does not do illegal acts for a self-serving purpose or out of disregard of what basic morals are. He goes against the ministry and the law when the ministry is corrupt, the laws are injust, or to fight injustice. Taking up his illegal movements with the Order and escape of capture as a point to him having this diagnosis does not make much sense and I can guarantee you I as, once more, someone who works in the field (I will not say what, as that is private) would not at all see as an indicator for this diagnosis.
The point about his plans with Grindelwald is all fair and well, but you don't bring up how he in canon too had objections about Grindelwald's plans too, even in the letter we see him trying to convince Gellert of choosing a less violent path, this being backed up in canon too by how Dumbledore describes trying to ignore his own morals and close his eyes to it because (as we later know) he was in love with Grindelwald, and Grindelwald offered him freedom out of Godric's Hollow.
But yes, he does have issues with power: that still do not a ASPD diagnose make.
Even the point of him lying I find issue with. Most of these are explained in the narrative as a (flawed) way of him protecting Harry or protecting others, or in Lockhart's case, a way for him to try to reveal Lockhart as a fraud as a way to prevent him from hurting others. You can fault him for lying to Harry, but he does not lie for personal gain in the way Voldemort does. He lies because he as a child has been taught secrecy is necessary to keep others alive. And he lies because he also of course knows that Harry and Voldemort's minds are connected, and telling him too much in this fantasy setting would be risky, despite Voldemort after OOTP being fearful of entering Harry's mind.
When looking at lying as a criteria for the ASPD diagnosis, one does not only look at the act of lying but why and what those lies are. Habitual lying is, after all, something that can exist in multiple diagnosis, and the lying Dumbledore does is once more not the type of lying typically associated with the ASPD diagnosis.
Point number 5, Dumbledore is the leader of a resistance movement against a genocidal dark wizard. Joining that movement poses risk; but it is not a reckless disregard of the safety of others. What is the reckless disregard here, that he and the people in the order are risking their lives to prevent mass murder? What should they have done? I hate comparing books to real life events, but this is like condemning the French resistance leaders during WWII for risking their and their members lives, because the Order IS likely inspired by these sort of movements. Again, not something I as a person in the field would even consider as a part of this. The other points I chalk up to the fact that this is a children's book where children have to save the day as a part of the genre (and nothing really even indicates he had other options here, he didn't know where the chamber was, there was in canon nowhere that was safer for Harry to be despite how horrible I find the Dursleys, and the Malfoy situation was a difficult one since Draco's and his family's lives where on the line too)
Point number 6: This just doesn't work with what we know in canon. The ministry wanted someone at the position, no one wants to be the DADA teacher since it is cursed, and convincing someone in the order to be it would certainly clash with criteria five, that would be more of a reckless endangerment than many of the points brought up. Tonks also had a real daytime job, and was much more valuable at the ministry than at Hogwarts.
Number 7: This is one of the criteria he matches the least. He constantly feels remorse, he is haunted by all his faults and his guilt, enough so that he is tormented into temporary madness by the potion he drinks in the cave. Just because he outwardly tries to keep up appearances to Harry does not mean he doesn't feel for others. Again, Hagrid comments on how worried he is during HBP. He cries in OOTP over what happened in the ministry and how he failed both Harry and Sirius.
Him being 'hellbent' on killing Voldemort being something that points to him having ASPD? The man trying to commit, once more, genocide, and wants to create an authoritarian empire with him on the top, immortal? The man who will not stop at anything to kill Harry, someone Dumbledore in canon loves, or Dumbledore himself?
Even there, he doesn't seem to be wanting to solely kill Voldemort in OOTP when they duel. Not grieving the death of a terrorist and a man who through that terrorism and murder tries to become a dictator isn't something that I, again, would see as an indicator of having any type of empathy disorder, especially not if the person in question showed clear capabilities of showing empathy, guilt and love in all other aspects of life.
The Lockhart point also is strange in the same manner. He just heard that the man lost his memory due to trying to attack two of his students trying to erase their memories. If you tried to for example mace an innocent child and you got the mace in your own eyes, I doubt many would feel sorry for you.
All of this really being a bit irrelevant, because once more, this diagnosis is very much based on context and motivation, and Dumbledore could easily fit other diagnoses better that take his own childhood trauma and his actual shows of empathy and guilt over the roles he has to play in account.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
An Archive of Our Own, a project of the Organization for Transformative Works
Chapters: 1/1
Fandom: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (Movies), Harry Potter - J. K. Rowling
Rating: Mature
Warnings: Creator Chose Not To Use Archive Warnings
Relationships: Albus Dumbledore/Anton Vogel, Albus Dumbledore/Gellert Grindelwald, Mentions of Albus Dumbledore/Other(s)
Characters: Albus Dumbledore, Anton Vogel, Gellert Grindelwald (referenced)
Additional Tags: Alternate Universe - Canon Divergence, Unrequited Lust, Unrequited Love, Consent Issues, References to Depression, Manipulative Albus Dumbledore, POV Albus Dumbledore, Bottom Albus Dumbledore, Implied/Referenced Dubious Consent, Grindelwald isn’t in the fic but he is constantly on Dumbledore’s mind, unsexy sex
Summary:
Instead of sending Newt to Berlin, Albus goes on his own.
-
In which Anton Vogel is both a love-sick fool and a creep, and Albus is willing to do whatever it takes to stop Gellert from standing in the election.
did dumbledore ever check to see if a horcrux could be removed from its container and transferred to a different one or did he jump directly to his 'groom harry for suicide' plan?
In canon, the only way for a horocrux to be destroyed is to completely destroy its vessel beyond repair, which means death for living horocruxes. There is never any canon or source from outside canon that suggests that there are any other methods for horocrux removal, so it seems really silly to judge canon and characters actions there on the basis of fanon concepts
@antonvogel Well this would be simply moving the Horcrux to another vessel (ie not Harry) and then destroying it there. And it’s true we don’t know if that’s possible but it’s a bit weird Dumbledore doesn’t even seem to have made much of an effort to check. Even if he knew it was a doomed effort if he truly cared about Harry you’d expect him to make a last ditch effort to check rather than just coldly telling Snape ‘lol Harry has to die. omg y r u upset? it is what it is lol.’
Furthermore there actually is some canonical evidence this may be possible since the Riddle in the diary actually tried to come out of the diary. It’s not clear exactly what he was trying to do but it was more than possession because he could already do that.
We don't know what Dumbledore's options were and what he checked, it seems very unlikely he actually wanted Harry dead just for the sake if it if there were other options. Speculating about that is just as silly as, for example, why Lupin didn't try to cure his lycanthropy by piercing his hands with nails, as that is a cure in some cultures. Fact is, the information we have on paper and from the author is that Harry had to die for it to disappear.
The conversation with Snape, furthermore, is still Dumbledore having a mask and pretending. At that point, he was rather sure Harry would live due to Voldemort taking Harry's blood in the graveyard, he just couldn't let Snape know that.
The Riddle in the Diary was anchored to a dead object, still, which I would not see as a canon evidence of it being possible to remove the horocrux from Harry and swap it to something else, for all we know, as soon as that part of his soul managed to anchor itself back to life again, the diary might as well been "used up", speculation too. In canon, it wasn't a horocrux moving from one object to another, still being an anchor, there it was draining a life force to actually come back to life.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
