(no subject)

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

Am I the only one a little bothered by Dumbledore? Not only with the fact he could end up in the Guinness Book Of World Records for "Most Incompetent Headmaster of All Time" (though I'm sure there's worse. :P), but also because...he just bugs me. I know JKR was trying to write him as the "flawed Yoda", so to speak (and to be fair, he's nowhere near Yoda. XD), but it's also how...preachy he gets. Towards Fudge, for example. You know, in Goblet of Fire, with, "You place too much importance on purity of blood, yadda yadda et cetera et cetera" -- which considering how he treated Tom Riddle and the Slytherins is...slightly hypocritical isn't it? Probably bad writing on JKR's part, though. :/

Anyways, sorry 'bout the rambling. Thoughts?

Comments

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm with you. I have no love for Dumbledore. And I think JKR was not trying to paint him as the 'flawed Yoda' so much as the "epitome of good" (her words) who made one mistake as a youth and then was sorry and never did anything bad again, minus a few small mistakes with Harry that the latter readily forgave. That is, I don't think we are supposed to see him as deeply flawed.

But he is. He is a hypocrite and a bad headmaster, yes. He's also narcissistic, empathy-deprived, manipulative, and willing to use people for his own ends so long as he can convince himself that it's for the 'greater good.' He's a liar and has far too rosy a view of himself and his motives. He's controlling and secretive to the detriment of his own cause - he actually AIDS Voldie by keeping his identity as Tom Riddle secret - because he doesn't want to deal with the fallout of having been the one to bring the clearly already troubled and violent boy into Hogwarts without warning anyone; covering his own arse comes ahead of other people (the same thing happens with Severus and Remus later). He often fails to give people important information because he insists on keeping everything to himself, contributng in at least one case (Snape's) to that person's death. He's not nearly so self-sacrificial as many make him out to be; he only accepts death on the Tower because he's already dying and at least if he manipulates Snape into killing him he still has control over the when and how of it (and over Snape's conscience). And he has, to put it mildly, very strange views of what love is.

I could say more but I have ranted enough. I don't like Dumbledore, and I especially don't like his preachiness. You're not alone.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

Awww, thanks. :) I think it was rereading the books that made me go, "Oh, *wow*, Dumbledore's a fricking *douchequake*." Seriously, between you and me, I think I like Michael Gambon's version better. (Eep! XD)

So his strange views of love...do you think it might have come from the Grindelwald experience? *Curious*

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

Am I the only one a little bothered by Dumbledore?

You haven't been here long, have you? :p

only with the fact he could end up in the Guinness Book Of World Records for "Most Incompetent Headmaster of All Time" (though I'm sure there's worse. :P)

It's hard to imagine how anyone could have been worse without actively attacking the students. He's incapable of spotting his old friend is actually a psychotic DE in disguise, he hires Lockhart despite the implication that he knew his secret all along (and despite the fact that Lupin would almost certainly have been available and willing), he hires Hagrid, he lets Draco continue his murder schemes even after Katie almost dies, he didn't realise that Myrtle's death could, as far as we know, only have been caused by a basilisk and that oh look, there's a burgeoning sociopath who happens to be a Parselmouth... actually I'm not sure if incompetent is the right word so much as dangerously negligent. The leader of a vigilante antiterrorist force should not be the headmaster of the only school in the country (not that he was a very good leader of a vigilante antiterrorist force either).

I know JKR was trying to write him as the "flawed Yoda", so to speak (and to be fair, he's nowhere near Yoda. XD)

I'm not even sure she was aware of how flawed he was by the end. I strongly suspect that as far as she was concerned, he made some mistakes when it came to Grindelwald but after that he was perfect and all-wise and spotless (vomits).

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

"
It's hard to imagine how anyone could have been worse without actively attacking the students. He's incapable of spotting his old friend is actually a psychotic DE in disguise, he hires Lockhart despite the implication that he knew his secret all along (and despite the fact that Lupin would almost certainly have been available and willing), he hires Hagrid, he lets Draco continue his murder schemes even after Katie almost dies, he didn't realise that Myrtle's death could, as far as we know, only have been caused by a basilisk and that oh look, there's a burgeoning sociopath who happens to be a Parselmouth... actually I'm not sure if incompetent is the right word so much as dangerously negligent. The leader of a vigilante antiterrorist force should not be the headmaster of the only school in the country (not that he was a very good leader of a vigilante antiterrorist force either)."

*This*, just this! :D

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

I'm not even sure she was aware of how flawed he was by the end. I strongly suspect that as far as she was concerned, he made some mistakes when it came to Grindelwald but after that he was perfect and all-wise and spotless (vomits).

The part that throws me, that makes me wonder if she is, in fact, very aware of how flawed Dumbledore is, is the scene in Snape's memories where Snape says:

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 –

I feel like those few lines summarize very well how Dumbledore has misused and mistreated both Snape and Harry.

Would she have had Snape speak them if she couldn't see the truth in them?

[snapes-witch.livejournal.com]

I'm not even sure she was aware of how flawed he was by the end. I strongly suspect that as far as she was concerned, he made some mistakes when it came to Grindelwald but after that he was perfect and all-wise and spotless (vomits).

When one considers her canonical treatment and post-DH opinion of her truly heroic character I wonder if she even knows what she wrote . . .

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

Considering some of the mistakes discussed a little earlier, I think that's the case. I guess she was thinking, "Well, I'm a best-selling author now; it's not like I have to reread my work or anything!" (Or maybe she had it planned from the beginning a la Lucas...*Shudders at thought*)

[oryx_leucoryx]

Pretty much each time Dumbles opens his mouth to preach or criticize anyone to their face he is being either hypocritical, self-deluded, completely misses the point or some combination of the above.

Like telling Severus off about mourning Lily - that like him the Potters trusted the wrong person. Well, the person Severus trusted was you, Albus! (Had he trusted Tom's word would he have met Albus on the hilltop and promised him 'Anything'?)

Or telling Petunia off for her treatment of Harry, as if he couldn't have prevented the whole mess, or as if his plans did not benefit from it?

Or telling young Tom that he had been using his magic in ways that are not acceptable at Hogwarts when he was teaching Transfiguration, where students do unspeakable harm to animals or when he as headmaster let students bully each other with no intervention.

Oh, and he warns Harry that Horace may try to 'collect' him - as if he hadn't been doing the same thing all along.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

This, just this! :D

"Or telling young Tom that he had been using his magic in ways that are not acceptable at Hogwarts when he was teaching Transfiguration, where students do unspeakable harm to animals or when he as headmaster let students bully each other with no intervention."

It's Okay If A Gryffindor Does It? :P

But yeah, I understand what you mean. :3

[sunnyskywalker]

Telling Tom they have rules about good conduct at school is nonsensical when you look at everything they let kids do there.

I wonder if his rant to Snape was a bit of projection? After all, his dabble with the dark side and trusting a dark wizard is what got his sister killed. Wizards rarely seem to move on from anything, so maybe he's still working out his issues there, with Snape as proxy. Ditto Slughorn, because you're right, Dumbledore operates very similarly, right down to having an organization of people he's helped and who now do him favors in return.

[nx74defiant.livejournal.com]

When Horace "collects" some one it is" you help me and I will help you.

With Dumbledore it is: you help me and I will help you if it is convenient for me or helping you benefits me/my plans goals. If I need to ruin your life - well it is for "The Greater Good", so you have no right to refuse or complain.

[night-axe.livejournal.com]

Pretty much each time Dumbles opens his mouth to preach or criticize anyone to their face he is being either hypocritical, self-deluded, completely misses the point or some combination of the above.

QFT.

Like telling Severus off about mourning Lily - that like him the Potters trusted the wrong person. Well, the person Severus trusted was you, Albus!

I was tempted to scratch this line up to Dumbledore's manipulative skills: saying the most hurtful thing possible in order to throw Snape off balance and make him easier to exploit. Dumbledore knows just which buttons to push. Except when he doesn't. The "sort too soon" thing was another brutal remark...intended as a compliment. IDEK.

[sunnyskywalker]

I would have been fine with him - if he had ended up as, say, a tragic figure who thought brought down by his fatal flaws despite some good intentions here and there, who at last sacrificed himself and handed off the quest to someone more suited. And then did not act as a wise mentor in the Train Station of the Afterlife, just said, "Yep, I screwed up, and I'm very sorry." Or even if he never recognized his failings, but Harry did and moved on to making his own decisions about how the endgame of the Voldemort situation was going to go (and maybe forgave Dumbledore in the train station, because he is supposed to be a hero after all). Or even if he had been a villain - not a Voldemort-allied one, because as Sirius points out, the world isn't divided into good people and DEs - but an entirely mundane, out-for-himself one made all the creepier because he's so ordinary (for a wizard), having normal jobs like "Headmaster" and such, and because he's convinced himself that he's right and doing good. Or even if he'd pegged Harry as a budding dark lord and planned all along for him and Voldemort to wipe each other out for everyone's safety, along with anyone else he saw as a threat to the ww - DEs, would-be teen murderers like Sirius who never regret almost using their friends as weapons, werewolves who endanger hundreds of children because they won't take their medicine, Aurors who've gotten too paranoid, teachers who let dark lords share their heads or mindwipe people and steal their stories, centuries-old alchemists who are doing who-knows-what but maybe it's not good, wannabe dictators like Umbridge... That could be an interesting anti-heroic quest, and seeing how Harry reacted would be fascinating.

Probably any change to that last scene in the train station would be an improvement. You just plain can't go, "Yep, I screwed up and am deeply flawed... but actually, I was right about everything, my mistakes weren't mistakes or weren't that bad after all, and it all turned out just as I planned, go me!" and expect it to sound good.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

"Probably any change to that last scene in the train station would be an improvement. You just plain can't go, "Yep, I screwed up and am deeply flawed... but actually, I was right about everything, my mistakes weren't mistakes or weren't that bad after all, and it all turned out just as I planned, go me!" and expect it to sound good."

I remember in the DEATHLY HALLOWS do-over, Sirius actually appeared to Harry instead of Dumbles -- and TBH, it worked a lot better. ^__^ (Then again, I think a *lot* of elements in the DH Do Over worked a lot better. :)

[darth-eldritch.livejournal.com]

Are you kidding me, lol! He makes Yoda at his worse look like a saint!

Dumbledore got on my nerves! I couldn't stand his preachiness.

[sunnyskywalker]

Maybe Dumbledore secretly took Yoda's advice too seriously XD

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

I really hate the way people worship Dumbledore and excuse away all the crap he did as being a 'flaw' that just makes him even more realistic and AWESOME instead of 'too perfect'. I don't think anyone objective would make the mistake of thinking he's anywhere near perfect. The thing is, he's more of a villain than most of the bad guys in the book, just not obviously so, and this goes over the audience's head, it seems. He plays with people's lives, he uses them as tools, he manipulates their emotions to make them fall in line with his plans and die at his whim. He's such frakking abhorrent I can't stand it. And yet people fawn all over him. UGH.

He doesn't give a damn about the students, he's not a good headmaster at all, he's willing to sacrifice the future of every last kid there, whether it be literally- by letting Draco cannonball around HBP with his murder plots or Quirrelmort remain at Hogwarts when he knew something was wrong with him, and in fact, seemed to have deliberately lured him to Hogwarts (and considering his 'omnipotence', one wonders when he realized Ginny was possessed or when Moody was a DE)- or in the sense that he hires mostly incompetent or inappropriate staff members who really have no business being in a school, because they're useful to him. Screw the kids' futures! Who needs to learn anything of value?

And I hate the way everyone takes his statements as these benevolent, kindly words when they're so horrible and demeaning- like that 'we sort too soon' line that everyone d'awws over, thinking it's a deep insight into the flaws of the sorting system (well, he's the HEADMASTER, he could've changed that if he wanted but no!) instead of a further condemnation of Slytherin and a slap in the face to Snape, or the line about how Merope didn't choose to live because she didn't love her son enough or some crap like that, as if a woman ever CHOOSES TO DIE IN CHILDBIRTH. Instead they take the words at face value, 'don't judge her too harshly', rather than the disgusting implications that are in those lines.

Everything about this man makes me want to scream in outrage and claw his eyes out. I don't think I've ever hated a fictional character so much. And it's even worse by the fact that most of fandom treats him as a god. >:[

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

Holy shit, *this*.

And seconded regarding Merope dying in childbirth. I mean...damn. :( :(

[dracasadiablo.livejournal.com]

I dislike Dumbledore. He is a deeply flawed, manipulative, attention and adoration seeking, sociopaths with gigantic "holier than thou" attitude.
There is not one positive thing about him. Honestly, in war of two evil Dumbledore vs Voldy I think that the Dumbledore is the worst one.
Sure Tom is "pure evil" (don't get me started on villains that are born evil or that do thing for evil) but at lest he don't expect his victims to love him and be loyal to him. *roll eyes*

If I never read any of the JKR interviews I might have went on cheerfully hating him, but thinking that maybe there is a bigger image and readers are supposed to see him as a negative character but... *sigh*
Dumbledore as a god figure? As a paragon of "pure good"?
If it wasn't so sad it would be funny.

To me the surest sign that a character is a pure monster is there (dis)regard for people. If a character is seeing people as a means to an end and pawns in their own chess game they are monstrous.

Dumbledore?
He doesn't have one healthy, warm or normal in any way, relationship with any of the other characters. None.

He have sycophants, awed admirers, people indebted to him and people that are in some kind of servitude to him.
How exactly is he the Greatest Light Wizard?
From everything he does / doesn't do (like actuality protecting the children entrusted in his care, finding Harry a nice stable home, helping Sirius, treating Snape as a human and not as a tool,....) it only natural to see him as a dark wizard.
True he is not using dark magic but I do think that a person can be just as destructive with their actions. No need to use anything dark when you can manipulate things without ever directly getting involved.

The examples of his disregard of everybody else are too numerous to count.

Harry who ends up naming his child after him? He could have named another child Tom Marvolo to continue the collection.
Yes, Tom did kill his parents and he did his best to kill Harry but Dumbledore orchestrated his whole life in an attempt to make him as miserable and controllable as possible.

Sirius, who goes pretty much insane under Dumbledore's tender care. And dies as a fugitive because Dumbledore couldn't be bothered to help him clear his name? And why would he?
As a escaped convict he was much easier to control and it would do for him and Harry to form a stronger relationship.
Btw. I remember being disgusted by the fact that In Goblet of Fire Sirius lives in a cave and survives on eating rats.
How hard would it be for Dumbledore to send him an elf with food every week or two?

All Hogwarts students who learned that it is unimportant how many points they earn, Gryffindor / Harry will win in the end?

Slytherins who are hated simply for being sorted in their house?

Order of Phoenix who have less dignity and integrity then the Death Eaters? They are not branded but they are brainwashed. Btw. Isn't it strange that nobody in the order ever question Dumbledore? Or that all people in the order are in the first place loyal to him?
And how is it that (beside the Moody and Minerva) there are no "older" members of the order? Everybody in the order was at one point taught by Dumbledore (when he was still a teacher) or had him as the Headmaster for years.

Severus Snape? I'm not even going to start listing in how many ways Dumbledore destroyed his life.

[sunnyskywalker]

You know, this reminds me of the movie The Curse of the Golden Flower. While I was watching it, I kept looking at all the Emperor's decisions - made because that's what his position required, essentially - and found myself thinking, "Wow, authoritarianism and patriarchy wreck everything, even the guy who's supposed to be at the top" (since he wasn't very happy and lost just about everything he had left to care about). Then I watched the making-of documentary, and the director basically said that was the point. The Emperor chose to put himself in this isolated position where he couldn't relate to anyone as an equal, and that position slowly became a trap for him that he couldn't escape and destroyed everyone connected to him - and him too.

There's a lot less emphasis on the patriarchy aspect with Dumbledore (although he does go for the grandfatherly "head of the clan" role in a way), but the isolation at the top and increasingly ruthless decisions, paranoia, and secrecy required to keep him there look pretty similar. Even the excuse that it's all to restore order to the country, sort of.

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

All I can really do is echo everyone else, especially Condwiramurs. Dumbledore is a horrible, horrible person. And - as Sydpad said in her comic, that's actually kind of cool, or would be if I could believe Rowling intended it. But I don't think she did.

What I cannot forgive in Dumbledore is his consistent cruelty to abused children. Tom, possibly; Harry and Sev, definitely. Arguably Sirius as well. In no case did he give these boys the guidance and help they needed to grow as human beings. Three of them managed some growth (however limited) in spite of him, and one did not. But it was Dumbledore's job to help them! He is partially responsible for the rise of Voldemort; he simply let Tom Riddle do whatever he liked. He is largely responsible for the divisions in Hogwarts. He is responsible for his failures where young Sev and Sirius are concerned, and he is steadily, cruelly abusive to Severus as a young adult, while conniving at the boy Harry's abuse.

I think all of that could have been interesting had Rowling actually intended it. But I don't think she wanted her readers to see Dumbledore as anything but good. He is not good, precisely because he is not aware of his own sinfulness. Snape? Now, he is good. He's capable of repentance, as Dumbledore is not.

My two cents.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

"I think all of that could have been interesting had Rowling actually intended it. But I don't think she wanted her readers to see Dumbledore as anything but good. He is not good, precisely because he is not aware of his own sinfulness. Snape? Now, he is good. He's capable of repentance, as Dumbledore is not."

Someone really ought to send this to TV Tropes. Seriously, guys? *That's* why people side with the Slytherins. :D

[fishinginthemud.livejournal.com]

I feel nothing for Dumbledore. He's a badly-written, nonsensical character, which admittedly took me some time to realize, because I did think his bizarre behavior was going to amount to something in the end. I think he just about works as a stand-in for many people's idea of God: the guy who's omniscient, omnipotent, and all-good but paradoxically allows evil to exist and won't share his grand plan with anyone, who nevertheless deserves unyielding faith and loyalty from his followers. I'm sure this was unintentional on Rowling's part, because she doesn't appear to have a subversive or blasphemous bone in her body, but it's a fascinating little temper tantrum she appears to have thrown in setting up Dumbledore as a punching bag in the final book, however subconsciously.

[sunnyskywalker]

Oh. And God killed Mom, or at least let her die. That makes a lot of sense.

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

I just read something that sums up my feelings on where Dumbledore's characterization failed:

When characters are flawed, I expect a bit of acknowledgment that what they're doing is, well, flawed. It doesn't have to be the characters themselves. Not everyone can be that self-aware, but their interactions with other characters, the dialogue, and the situations should indicate to the reader that this isn't the norm. Or if not, then I like the characters to evolve into an awareness of their actions with the progression of the plot, to the point where they can either continue that way (and become a villain), or improve (remaining a hero).

JKR totally bombed on this one. Every last bit of dialogue, opinion, interview, etc. revolved around how great Dumbledore was and how everyone idolizes this amazing embodiment of wisdom and altruism. *eyeroll* Harry just keep sucking up to him and excusing him for all his faults, all the way up to King's Cross, how gross.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

You said it, borg_princess. You said it. :(

If what Dumbledore's doing is the norm...all I can say is that Rowling has really weird views about humanity in general. :/

[fishinginthemud.livejournal.com]

I just realized what else makes Dumbledore ridiculous, to the point of being offensive. We're supposed to believe that an intelligent, reasonably physically attractive, emotionally manipulative gay man had *one* romantic attraction when he was 18 that he never acted on? Even in a world where everyone marries the first person they met in sixth grade, that's like saying the sky is red. In anything approaching real life, Dumbledore has had hundreds, if not thousands of lovers in his long, illustrious life. Snape has also had a few long-term relationships in his nearly 40 years on the planet, and has not spent his life pining for a girl he met before he hit puberty. I mean really.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

*This*, just this! :D

I just think Rowling has some really, really bizarre views of love, TBH. :/

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

"Rat!Bastard Dumbledore doesn't investigate Sirus' innocence claim. One legillimency session would have been all it would take to get to the bottom of the Potter affair. He allows his students to be placed in harm's way too many times to be thought of as a 'good guy' or responsible guardian. And on and on. JKR didn't really know how to play him consistently --- omnipotent and wise yet flawed has too many contradictions, as called out in the replies to this post. So in the end, all we were left with from JKR was --- well, I always though the guy was gay. Very unhelpful and insulting, frankly. I'd rather she said: well, he was a bit of a narcissit, and an inch from becoming a villan himself, don't you all think?"

*This*, just this!

Seriously, Dumbles might as well have vinegar and water in his veins. :/

[darth-eldritch.livejournal.com]

You know, I just got to thinking, years ago, before Harry Potter was ever written, I had a school of sorcery in my D&D world. It was headed by a chaotic evil headmaster, who, while not a "conquer the world" (that was in his past), pull the wings off flies kind of evil, was definitely not a good guy. He was honest, efficient, even brutal, but he did far less damage than Dumbledore because he allowed no one else to carry out evil plans.

Interesting I thought of that.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

Care to elaborate a little more on this? It sounds interesting. :)

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

It's a shame that JKR doesn't seem to see how flawed Dumbledore is, as I think he could have provided an interesting opportunity to explore questions such as how far one can use morally grey ends to achieve moral means, and still remain a good person. As it is, though... *sighs*

And, in common with several other LJ-ers, I hate that whole "Why didn't Merope keep herself alive?" scene. It seems quite clear that Merope kept herself alive for as long as possible in order to find a safe place for her son, so why Harry thinks she just selfishly abandoned him is beyond me. And then Dumbledore doesn't point this out? It's a good thing young Snape was never driven to suicide by James's bullying, because then we'd probably be subjected to Harry and Dumbledore's self-righteous bitching about how weak and cowardly he was...

What do you know? GIFs are safer than nerd raeg. :P

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

Harry's a *beeping* idiot, that's why. I mean, to quote Confused Matthew, he never listens to anyone, he's not very nice, and he only cares about himself! >:(

(Sorry, the Merope thing just...really raised my hackles again. Plus, the idea of Dumbledore and Harry ridiculing Snape for being driven to suicide...urgh, it just makes my *blood boil*!)

http://media.photobucket.com/image/Eowyn%20gif/spartacusness/GIFS/reallyally4.gif

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ldt4qwKOGG1qexuk3o1_500.gif

http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lgxii1FzQh1qgfxqio1_500.gif

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lheotozdIX1qa2qjio1_500.gif

http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_laxkwhTaEh1qe4tx4o1_400.gif

http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lg0ui5SNUC1qc3pn1o1_250.gif

http://theliteraryomnivore.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/eowynandfaramirlove.gif?w=285&h=125

http://www.gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs/52627_o.gif

http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7on79wXqp1qzde9lo1_500.gif

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lb7y39Ga8E1qbj0fio1_500.gif

http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/fan/Iris_animation2.gif

http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/fan/Iris_animation3.gif

http://www.gifsoup.com/view3/1373070/no-god-please-no-o.gif

JKR can't write. 'Nuff said. :*( *Buries face in hands*

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Just wanted to mention (again) that, in addition to the Cat series that's been mentioned, there are several other excellent books about kids finding they are wizards. Terri, I and others have raved about Diane Duane, who is miles ahead of Rowling on so many levels - though I can see some readers who don't like SF being turned off by all the techspeak in these books. Then there's the Bartimaeus trilogy by Jonathan Stroud, and the classic Earthseabooks by LeGuin, and so many others!

I cannot assert that any of these influenced Rowling. I think it would have been better if they had.

My two cents. BTW, glad you liked the essay!

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

Diane Duane ♥

So totally recommend this series! I love the way it handled the main character being bullied, in a way that showed personal growth and strength of character as opposed to 'I and others, including those in authority, shall beat up this kid so that I can be confident in my natural superiority'.

Also, I just found a link to this page where JKR talks about her views on bullying: (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/faq_view.cfm?id=78)

What is your advice to children who are being bullied?

TELL SOMEONE, whether it is your Mum, Dad, Aunt, Uncle, a teacher, a brother, a sister, an adult friend – just tell someone. If the first person you tell doesn't seem to understand how bad the problem is, tell somebody else. I know that it is very hard to admit that you are being bullied, but it is absolutely crucial if you are to end the misery. Life in school can be very tough and any adult who has forgotten that is an idiot, so don't be ashamed... just tell.

LOOOOOL. Considering the way she glorifies bullying against Slytherins or other classmates who are in the main characters' way, I find that just...so hypocritical. Oh, poor woobie Harry, so bullied by that nasty boy Draco (despite Draco being the one ending up physically bashed on more than a few occasions and Harry never displaying any signs of being insecure or hurt by his comments). Marauders v Snape? LOLOL, boys will be boys!