An interesting point about Dumbledore’s protection charm over the Dursley’s has been brought up and being the nerd I am I would LOVE to hear everyone’s thoughts on it because I think the book does not give a clear enough answer! From looking at the online debate on different forums it seems like there’s contention as to whether Dumbledore’s charm protects Harry only at the Dursley’s home, or whether it’s an all encompassing protection. I believe there’s two sides of this debate - 1. Dumbledore sealed Lily’s protection by placing Harry at the Dursley’s and so Harry must return to the Dursley’s yearly for that all encompassing protection to persist. 2. Dumbledore created a second charm that protects Harry while he is at the Dursley’s home specifically. This is in addition to the protection Lily conferred that protects Harry from being touched by Voldemort no matter where he is. I’m personally on the side of #2! I’m going to share my arguments why and I’m interested to know if people agree or disagree. Dumbledore tells Harry: “She took you, and in doing so, she sealed the charm I placed upon you.[…]While you can still call home the place where your mother's blood dwells, there you cannot be touched or harmed by Voldemort[…]You need return there only once a year, but as long as you can still call it home, there he cannot hurt you.” So the use of the word “there” two times makes it seem to me like this is an added charm over the house that is separate from Lily’s blood protection. When Voldemort takes Harry’s blood in GoF and renders Lily’s protection useless, the charm over the house still holds which is why I think it’s separate, and also because Harry confers the same protection over everyone at the battle of Hogwarts, without the need for an additional charm. So this feels like an unnecessary protection Dumbledore cast, considering Harry had Lily’s blood protection for the first 14 years of his life and then for the next three he barely spent any time at the Dursleys anyway! I’m also curious how far this protection against Voldemort at the home extends. I mean the Dursleys take Harry to the zoo, could Voldemort theoretically have jumped him there? 😂 Let me know your thoughts on this!!

I didn't know when clicking on this video that it would lead to multiple Mikaila's shouting abuse at each other, but I'm all for it.

Jacob. Was. *RIGHT* . *THERE* . No, but seriously, I had to make that make sense in my head, so I've got two headcanons: 1) The magic goat (which I will now call it *forever* , thank you Mikaela), being magic, *had* to choose someone with magic to rule. 2) The wizarding world misinterprets what it's actually judging - the magic goat doesn't actually choose someone of pure heart, but of pure *motives* . Dumbledore isn't perfect, no one is (except Jacob, of course), but his motives in that moment were pure - more pure than the other candidate even - because he wasn't trying to be elected, he was only trying to stop Grinde-Mads and allow people the chance to have a good and true leader. That's why it went to him first, then to the next best option: someone who *did* want to win, but for noble reasons. Edit: Yes, I am a Ravenclaw.

"HARRYPOTTAHDIDYOUPUTYOURNAMEINTHEGOBLETOFFIRE" Dumbledore said camly 🔪 will always be a ✨vibe✨

I would say he was good generally, but he was not perfect. And I think those imperfections made him a better character than some abstract pure goodness would be. He was still a human with his own thoughts, feelings, goals and ulterior motives

I was rereading it recently and something that really struck me about Lily's magic is that Dumbledore said that as long as Harry considers Privet Drive a home, the magic will persist. but Harry NEVER considered Privet Drive a home or the Dursleys as his family, he is surprised when he realizes that Petunia is related to Lily, not exactly because he did not know it but because he had not taken into account it, they were sisters, they shared a bond and cared about each other and it never crossed Harry's mind.

GOD I love the point you made that the books don't address these morally complex questions/themes with enough time or sensitivity, which leaves a void for the fandom to fill in. You're SO right and I've never seen it explained like that. 10/10 would watch multiple mikailas debate again.

2:12 As long as Harry could consider the Dursley’s place his “home,” he was protected from Voldemort (by his mother’s sacrifice). So he needed to stay there at least part of each summer. It had to be considered his home, but he was protected everywhere as long as his “home” was with his family. He wasn’t protected from Dementors or House Elves, just Voldemort. So living in a cupboard for 11 years made it possible for him to survive every encounter with Voldemort. (Dumbledore still could have done a lot to make them treat Harry better!!)

I think it’s clear in the books how much goodness, kindness and love was in Dumbledore. I would even say that he is quite noble. He is flawed, he made mistakes in his youth but just the fact that he avoided power because he knew it was his weakness shows how much he wanted to be better. He’s a man who always wanted to do the right thing, to act for the greater good, and he was ready to make sacrifices for the greater good and expected the same from everyone too. And honestly, the fact that he always gave second chances to people that many others wouldn’t, like Hagrid, Lupin, Draco, Snape also proves what kind of person he is. And he definitely loved and cared for Harry a lot, book readers know that.

The question of asking "is Dumbledore bad" is just another way of asking "how far you have to go to achieve the greater good". Because thats all what Dumbledore is about, from his youth to his adult life.

No matter if Dumbledore was good or bad, he was a crucial part to the books and I love him as a character 😊

Wizard CPS. Imagine how young Tom Riddle would feel. LMAO

Dumbledore: Today we'll be abandoning this kid edit: first comment i've posted in years and it got more likes than my older comments combined

“The world isn’t split into good people and Death Eaters. We’ve all got both light and dark inside us. What matters is the part we choose to act on. That’s who we really are.” Dumbledore was neither good nor evil. In my opinion he was always working for the Greater Good, his vision on what the Greater Good was just changed over time. He was a brilliant, powerful, and wise man, but also manipulative combined with- a rather large ego at times. He sometimes seemed to believe that he knew better than anyone else, and acted upon that thought, shutting other people out, not including them in his plans, but still expecting them to follow along, trust him blindly, while manipulating them. On the whole he did have a massive responsibility, he was trying to rescue the entire wizarding world from the grasp of Voldemort, and he obviously couldn't just tell everyone and their neighbors his plans. His goals were good, he had a good heart, and plenty of love to give to those he cared for. He was a well rounded character that had both light and dark inside of him.

This is why Dumbledore is so confusing to me, when i try to put him in situations, or to write some fanfic about him, i can't figure out what how he would do some things and how he would do some other things, or if he would do them at all, which is why i try to avoid write about him or to give very minor roles in those 3-4 short fanfics i wrote...even when his role is to give advices i'm not sure how to write him doing so.

This is why i think Harry Potter has some of the best fictional characters: its one of the few that readers can walk away, debating on whether the characters are good or bad. Whether its dumbledore, snape, sirius, james.....the series did an excellent job giving these characters the complexity we need to return time and time again....our perspective changes with each read.

Honestly, the same people who say Dumbledore or even the Weasleys are "evil" are usually the same people who say Draco isn't a villain. I am sorry, but if Malfoy isn't a villain, if Snape isn't a villain, Dumbledore most certainly isn't. Is he perfect? Far from it. But he is at least TRYING to do good. His intentions aren't malicious. I think people underestimate the responsibility that being the one to hear the prophecy puts on Dumbledore. There's clearly a reason he and he alone was the one the prophecy was made to. And I don't like Harry being left with the Dursleys anymore than anyone, but for the character we grow to learn, it makes sense that Dumbledore prioritises protecting Harry from Voldemort above all else. Dumbledore himself has admitted that being smarter than most people means his mistakes are correspondingly huger despite being fewer and further between. I understand people acknowledging those mistakes, but there are some crazy conclusions, and a sign of reading illiteracy if you come out with the impression that Dumbledore has "gone evil". Are you serious. We have the likes of Voldemort and Bellatrix as a litmus test for evil, get a grip. I did thoroughly enjoy Mikaila's video, as usual. And that internal debate is actually what makes Dumbledore a fantastic character. But definitely not even a question about him being evil. I'd agree that even Malfoy and Snape aren't evil, and they're certainly closer on the spectrum than Dumbledore. I think it's okay if you can't understand Harry's understanding of Dumbledore's actions, I actually don't think it's a flaw in the writing. If you've ever read any book with a character that the world or circumstance has decided has the responsibility to save the world (and people don't know about the prophecy, so Dumbledore IS that person to everyone), you have to make horrifying choices, as Mikaila pointed out. I both understand Dumbledore's choice, Harry's betrayal, and ultimate acceptance. I find it much harder to understand Harry naming his child after Snape, as myself, but I understand Harry's sense of honour makes it make sense. I really can't believe Ginny agreed to that.

Every so often I see people saying they hate Dumbledore and that he’s a terrible person or something. I’m always baffled by this. “He didn’t care about Harry. He only raised him like a pig for slaughter as a tool to fight Voldemort”. No. He did indeed care about Harry. He’s a kind and caring person. But he also knew that Harry would be the key to ending Voldemort. Dumbledore knew that for Voldemort to be defeated, Voldemort had to cast Avada Kedavra at Harry, but Dumbledore also suspected Harry might survive the encounter, which he did. Not very “raising him for slaughter” If you ask me. And even without knowing Harry would survive, what would you have him do? He had three choices: A) Avoidance - hide Harry from danger forever. This is not sustainable since eventually Voldemort conquers and rules the world. B) Brutal Honesty - tell Harry from day one that he’s got to one day let Voldemort kill him (and that it might be temporary lol). This would still save the world from Voldemort, yes, but it would also destroy Harry’s chance at enjoying his life at Hogwarts. That revelation would loom over him constantly like a dark cloud and sap the joy out of life. C) Merciful Ignorance - let Harry have as normal a life at Hogwarts as humanly possible. Harry can make friends. Have fun. Enjoy quidditch. Goof around. No looming death date choking the joy out of life. If Dumbledore didn’t care about Harry and only saw him as a pawn to end Voldemort (as some claim) then he’d have gone with option B and tell Harry everything upfront, not caring if the news would give this poor child a mental breakdown. Dumbledore chose option C - the option that is the least cruel to Harry while still saving the world from Voldemort. It’s not hard to see why Dumbledore felt that this was his only choice. How do you keep a super OP strong and wise character interesting? By giving them a terrible choice. Superman with all his strength still can’t save everyone. Dumbledore is an interesting and compelling character because he cares deeply about people but still has to orchestrate Voldemort’s demise. But I keep seeing people saying “Dumbledore is the worst!” and I have to surmise that they just misunderstood the story. Either that or they are just trying to sound unique and edgy.

When it comes to Dumbledore "raising Harry like a pig for slaughter", I think there are two ways of looking at it. 1. Morally: This is the complicated way of looking at it. He's putting a kid through tons of pain and suffering, just for him to die. But in doing so, he saves far more souls from experiencing that. So technically right but also wrong. I think here, there is no answer. 2. Logically: I think undoubtedly, he logically did the correct thing. It's very logical to eliminate one to save millions. I think there can be no way to say that he logically did the wrong thing.

Dumbledore is my favorite character for these shades of gray. Is he perfect? Hell no, but I don't want him to be either. At the end of the day, Dumbledore did everything in his power to give Harry a fighting chance. Hell, he even set up his own death to help Harry win. He took an near impossible situation and found a path to win the war, and save Harry. Most people wouldn't have even attempted what Dumbledore did, and would have just let Harry die. One life for many? It would have been the easy choice. In my opinion, a lot of the issues people have with Dumbledore is due to the early books. Rowling started off very whimsical, with the Dursleys being over-the-top abusive, and the adults being very useless (such as leaving a baby on the doorstep). It doesn't translate well when we get into the later books, where the tone becomes far more serious and characters like Dumbledore become increasingly important. It's hard to look at book 1 Dumbledore vs book 5/6/7 Dumbledore. The whimsical nature of the books, while wonderful to read, hampers character development and proper world building. A lot of the arguments against Dumbledore could have been avoided if it was the Ministry who left Harry at the Dursleys, and not Dumbledore himself. Which, logically, should have been the case.

In my opinion, he's not good nor bad, but rather a complex character, he has his good moments and other times he comes off as deeply misguided and even downright questionable at times, but to me what Herman's the type of person someone is is rather the intentions behind the actions rather than the actions themselves.

Regarding the Dursleys, if Dumbledore really thought Harry had to live there, he should have spoken to them and made a deal. (The fact that he didn't bother to knock on the Dursleys' door tells me he knew what kind of people they were.) If he simply had Harry in a room that the Durlseys couldn't get to, that instead had a vanishing cabinet that led to a different home, where he would be raised by a loving family, but slept in the Dursley home. Regarding the Horcrux in Harry: That is more complicated. One item I consider is that the Horcrux in the diary was leaving (to manifest as Tom Riddle) without destroying the diary, which means that there is a way for Horcruxes to be transferred to something else. If Dumbledore were willing to search out more information on Horcruxes, consulting other people besides himself, he might have found a way. For all he knew, every Gringotts cursebreaker knows how to transfer or destroy Horcruxes, because they are commonly found in Egyptian tombs. My point is that I believe he never consulted anyone. He got one book on them (the one Hermione summoned out of his office) and that was all the information he had. Regarding Harry, Dumbledore always did what was easy, rather than what was right. Most of his actions prove that he was either evil, stupid, or lazy.

That time Dumbledore played ding dong ditch with a baby😢😂😂 love ur vids Mikaila

I think it is hard to truly argue that Dumbledore is bad. Does he make some mistakes? Yes, but he is strong enough to commit atrocities greater than Voldemort and instead chooses the path to try and stop him. In the end he allows himself to die and has one of the people closest to him to do it to basically save Malfoy. I think truly it is hard to even argue him as a grey character and he more so lands along the lines of good but fucks up every now and again and in a position of power that makes it impossible for him to not make a wrong decision. It’s easy to judge someone with hindsight

Watching the Super Carlin brother's "Dumbledore's big plan" really clears up his character

HE PLAYED DINGDONG DITCH WITH A BABY! This line caught me so off guard that I laughed for 20 minutes after the video ended. Thank you for that. 😂😂

early! i mean...i always thought of dumbledore as more of a gray (grey?) character, but yeah ive seen a lot of stuff whether on he was a villain or not i think you explained the stuff well and yeah since he's a complicated character, its rly js up to the person to decide how they see him

Dumbledore's biggest fault was too much secret keeping IMO. Is good of one outweigh the good of many? I would say NO for most people. But Dumbledore didn't have to act in the heat of the moment, he had 16 YEARS to make that decision and while he did try to find alternatives, it was only on his own. Yeah, he was an amazing wizard with lots of great achievements, but if he had clued in 5-10-50 other people into the secret, maybe a third option would have been found. After all, wizarding world had many ways to ensure secrecy, like Unbreakable Vow. He also stated many times about many people that he trusted them with his life.

ran here as soon as i saw the notification off-topic but i adore your bangs!!

People need an yes / no or good/bad answer but 'The world isn't split into good people and death eaters, we have all got both light and dark inside us, what matters is the power we choose to act on, that's who we really are.

Mikaila with bangs, one of the many personalities that held more power over the others 🦍 👑

So happy you mentioned the Hunger Games! I’d like to add that the prequel, The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes delves even deeper into these ethical questions particularly how people deal with the aftermath of war, what the winning side does to ensure their continued victory is sound because clearly dealing with that kind of instability is never easy, and the mention of how children are viewed is extremely integral to the series as a whole. As innocent victims, pawns to be moved across the board, or killers every bit as capable as their adult counterparts parts.

The debate format of this video is ABSOLUTELY AMAZING! Literally exactly how me and my friends argue about fiction ❤

This was a really interesting format with the whole courthouse/self-debate, I hope that you do this again with other fandom issues (like with Twilight or Percy Jackson)!

One thing I have always wondered would be if there had been other options that Dumbledore could have chosen from. In the case of the Dursley's, did it have to be those related to his mother for the blood protection to work or could it be anyone that Harry was related to since the blood protection is for him? And in the case of the "pig for slaughter," did Dumbledore ever try and look for a way to save Harry while also getting rid of the horcrux or did he simply never look because he believed the only way to destroy the horcrux was to kill Harry? Dumbledore definitely can be seen as good and evil. He is very grey.

Absolutely brilliant stuff....wonderful, mikaila...its not easy to argue on two sides of a debate, and you did just that....hats off

Superb analysis. You cut through the implicit assumptions of the questions given and give a much deeper analysis than a simple reading of what is present in the text allows. Your conclusion is inspiring, illustrating the value of the fandom and their interpretation of these characters.

When I read the first chapter of book 1, and Dumbledore left a toddler (who could presumably walk at 15 months old) on a doorstep overnight in November (after Halloween = beginning of November) I assumed for the rest of the story that he is a villain and I haven't seen a strong enough argument to convince me otherwise since. There is no excuse to leave a child in an abusive home. Ever.

I haven’t seen the recent fantastic beasts movies, and hearing you describe it was wild 😂 I think Dumbledore was a human trying to do the best he could in crappy circumstances. I think he would have been a boring character if he was a perfect mentor

This was TERRIFIC! ❤😂,i loved it,thank you mikaila! Imao the ends justify the means only in cases were the persons affected agreed to the means so as to achieve the ends, i.e. harry agreed to sacrifice himself so it's fine,but should he decide not to,Dumbledore or anybody else has no right to force him. Which is exactly what happened, Dumbledore made sure he was old enough to make his own decision before revealing (kind of,at least wanting to) this plan,so that Harry can be fully prepared to make this decision (he had just that year come of age(lost trace)). But he never made a plan to firce him to do so,that was Harry's choice, Dumbledore left it up to him to decide if "the end justifys the means". This was very informative and hilarious,thank you! Glad i found your channel, very engaging stuff.

I think the reason for Dumbledore fearing himself in power is because of choices he made in the past. He used to believe that wizards are and should be superior to Muggles and was willing to suppress them. He did change though, and I suppose the Qilin only sees the heart of a person at present. Dumbledore does make some questionable choices, but his intentions are good. And I suppose that this is what the Qilin sees. I think Dumbledore's failures in the books are a result of his self doubt. Back in the past he let his emotions guide him, so with Harry he is trying to follow logic and not let his feelings interfere. So he is allowing all of these things happening to Harry even though it feels wrong because he stopped using his feelings as a compass. On the other hand he is still protecting Muggles and Zentaurs and respects all of them and his goal is peace and freedom for wizards and Muggles alike. He is complex and I think this is what makes him such a compelling character. He has a lot of wisdom but still is not without flaws. His heart can still be good though, not pure in a naive sort of way, but pure in a vulnerable "I can see the mistakes I made in the past and will put all my efforts to rectify my mistakes and make the world a better place without seeking power" sort of way. .. but of course I might just try and justify why I still do like Dumbledore in spite of it all.

Mikayla, this is amazing! I love your analysis of Dumbledore. As I started getting more into the fandom, I started getting a more negative perception of him but you’re really really put everything in perspective and truth of the winners are those of us who are in the fandom and to add more complexity to the story.

Awesome as always thanks ❤

Honestly tho, it would have been LEGENDARY if the magic goat had picked Jacob and the wizards hat to put up with an muggle president. I would put something about the goat's choice being magically bindinh or smtg.

I love your bangs hairstyle!

This was brilliant 👏 And now to go watch OSPs trope talk video on the pure of heart and dive deeper into the subject 🎉

I feel like one part that is often forgotten in the discussion about Dumbledore is his treatment of Snape. And I don't mean that he used Snape like a tool, that is often discussed but Snape bullying others. As his headmaster it is his job to make sure that all teachers behave and that all students are treated equally. We all know he completely favors Gryffindor which makes it even more confusing that he never stopped Snape. He isn't blameless in Snape bullying children, it was his responsibility to stop him (or any teacher when they harm children) and he didn't do anything. Being the headmaster is not just an empty title.

Supreme mugwump, minister or magic, and president are all different. Dumbledore refused the presidency but on his chocolate from card and in court it's mentioned he's supreme mugwump

Love this video, thank you!

Really great conclusion, loved the video!

I think what summarizes my thoughts on Dumbledore is that he was a great man, but he wasn't necessarily a good man. He made a lot of tough decisions in order to win the war, but there were a lot of things he could have done to make Harry's life better. And, it seemed like his actions were more motivated by redemption for the things he did in his youth instead of how much he cared for Harry and other people. Also kind of a side note, but I am a strong believer that Dumbledore should have been a Slytherin :)

I wanna quote Dumbledore himself and Sirius on this matter: "It is not our abilities that show who we are. It is our choices " "We all have both light and dark insides us. What matters is what side we choose to act on" Therefore I declare Dumbledore a manipulative person who acted on behalf of the good. He's flawed but good

Woahhhh i am early!!! Going to enjoy this one 😌🤍 thank u Mikaila

You know, Mikaila, I’ve seen some of content up to this point…. But this one won me over. You got yourself a subscriber!

JUSTICE FOR JACOB!!! 🦡 How could they not have made him the hair of Hufflepuff? It would have been perfect!!! Also, I adored watching you argue with yourself! 😂 Every Mikailas answers were super convincing! Loved all the perspectives! ❤

"Jacob Kowalski was standing right there." - I remember thinking the same thing as I watched the movie

Morally grey but written like a good guy. JK Rowling don’t want us to even think he was bad. She just know good or evil no between

Sis! as a potterhead I like your videos❤️:) Keep going 😊

I love this video. Keep it up Mikayla!!! 🤩

I think the writer of the movie was trying to go for a captain america theme. Like Capt America couldnt lift Mjollnir until he revealed tonys parents killer (thus freeing his conscious and making him worthy). I guess the writer thought him finally getting on the front line and opposing Grindelwald instead of just watching...... I wonder if the writer realized that they foreshadowed Jacob the entire movie as being pure of heart and literally put him RIGHT THERE.

Furthere point about Dumbledore raising Harry to be a sacrifice: as Harry understands on his way to meet Voldemort, Dumbledore CHOSE to love Harry. He knew Harry would have to surrender himself to stop Voldemort, and rather than distancing himself (except in book 5) he got to know Harry, he opened himself up to Harry. Harry wasn't just a piece to play, he was a sacrifice in the true meaning of the word. And it could only work because Harry chose to be the sacrifice.

8:02 we also see this conundrum present in OG ATLA.. though there’s a magical answer there. But we also see the same issue in ep. 10 with Jet. Good golly that show slaps and hits all the notes

1. Jacob was a non-mag, and thus not suitable as the leader of Wizarding world. While Qilins can understand people with good heart and approach them we see that they only bow at people who are suitable and worthy as a leader (which is revealed in the conversation they had at hogshead). So the Qilin's thing is not just about pure of heart, it is also about what constitutes a leader, which Jacob could never be for obvious reasons. 2. Dumbledore is meant to be a leader. In the Fantastic Beasts, we see Dumbledore orchestrating every plans and leading the team he formed towards fighting Grindelwald. The same could be seen in HP as well. He just lead people towards the goals which did not benefit himself, but the whole wizarding world. If this ain't a leadership quality, I don't know what else is.

10 points to Ravenclaw! Because we have her. And we need more folks like her. Thank you for being brilliant.

Mikhaila, did you ever do anime/manga stuff ? I'm curious. So much stuff I can see you do...

THAT WAS SOO AMAZING!!

He's both!!

This was interesting to see!

At 7:47 it sounds like you pulled from King Bumi’s logic in the Netflix series where he forces Aang to make a sacrifice and impossible choice. I just thought that was funny too. Lol

Great video 👍

Finally a potterhead who is also a Percy Jackson fan

First!❤ Love your videos mikalia!

I wonder if you'd ever be interested in doing analysis into fanworks about Harry Potter (and Percy Jackson), because I'd love to see your live reviews of some of the famous (and good) ones, as well as your analysis of not just the story but how it works as a fanwork.

Omg Mikaila.. I wouldn’t normally do this but I actually have to.. I need to recommend a 10 hour video.. but! This topic is covered at the top! But I think you’ll love it. I do. I still love the series because it got me through a dark dark childhood. But it’s also nice to recognize the faults. I think you can do both. It’s by Lily Simpson here on YT and called a brief look at Harry Potter

This video reminds me my favorite Dumbledork and Weasley bashing fanfictions

When people talk about 'pig for slaughter', I think it's important to remember, that Dumbledore wasn't the one who choose Harry to be one. It's all started with self-fulfilling prophecy, then after Harry became a horcrux his fate was set. He wouldn't have a normal peaceful life, even if Dumbledore didn't use and manipulated him. But of course it's hard to call Dumbledore 'pureharted'.

Every time I get an upload notification I keep praying it’s the Titans Curse reaction 🫣🥺

10:02 OMG WHAT IWOULDNT GIVE FOR A FAN ROUND TABLE…..I think it’s time for you to start a podcast ayyeeeeee

Great add read😂

I would like to add the fact that the events of the harry potter series HADN'T HAPPENED YET. Just a thought. The idea was up until this point he only MIGHT have killed his sister (which I personally don't believe he did but you can make that decision for yourself) which he spent the entirety of the rest of his life feeling really bad about. So do with this what you will its not my job to tell you what to think.

This was a good video, and it made me rethink the thoughts I already had on the man. I think I'm now of the mindset, "I understand your reasons, but I don’t support your decisions." As for the magic goat thing. . . I'm 1 of the people who pretend the 1st movie is a stand-alone and haven't seen the 3rd. Hadn't even heard of this goat thing before you brought it up. But no, I do not believe it was right to choose him. I don't know who all else was an option, but there was no way he was the best one. Especially if Jacob was an option.

Dumbledore had Mrs Figg as a neighbor keeping an eye on the kid, he had to know he was being abused. Also, how did Dumbledore came up with the ONLY solution being for Harry to get AK by Voldemort, without consulting with ANYONE ELSE, in the WHOLE of the Magical World. Also also, Basilisk's venom destroys horcruxes, and Harry was bitte by one, wouldn't that at least have weakened the horcrux?

you're amazing. and I'm so glad that you've found a psychotherapist you can work with. but as a therapist, I have to say: you would be a very tricky client to work with. you're highly intelligent, very emotionally aware, able to deal with conflict and confusion and still maintain your clarity and precision. so yeah, you're probably smarter than the vast majority of therapists -- which means, they won't be able to convince you of anything. but then the potential impasse is, how do you get past what you already know? in other words, who is your own fandom? who can see the flaws in the airtight logic you've built, for Harry, for the Hunger Games, for your depression and anxiety? I hope you keep looking for that. and not assuming anyone knows better than you -- but also not assuming that you know better than anyone. you're brilliant, and I admire you -- but you're also still learning, and you don't have many answers yet. not that answers solve anything -- just, they give you something to work with. sorry to totally mansplain you. just that I wish I'd been as insightful as you are, when I was your age. you fucking rock. I wish you the best!

I honestly thought Jacob was going to get chosen by the goat.

I have asked myself this for YEARS, and after this video, I am finally content just not knowing!

NO BUT when I saw the movie in theaters and saw the goat going towards the crowd my FIRST THOUGHT was JACOB. and it choose DUMBLEDORE???? JACOB. WAS. RIGHT. THERE.

He wasn’t perfect, no one is. But I do think he was a good person. I’m on the team “that probably wasn’t the best decision, but I get why you did that”

I mean, Dumbledore doesn‘t have to be a paragon. It‘s the whole question of whether ends justify the means again. Dumbledore does anything in his power to destroy Voldemort, even those actions taken by themselves are evil. Dumbledore only care about results.

I think the author confused wise, clever and good in Dumbledore’s case. She set him up to be the only character to know the prophecy, meaning he was the only one who could ever make the decision, and without ever consulting anyone. For this to be not a sad losing story, the character had to be incredibly clever AND wise (the difference between those wasn’t satisfyingly explored: in the canon Dumbledore is just good with magic, knows alchemy and has good intuition), but he did NOT have to be good. Just “not bad” enough to not want Voldemort to lose. And that’s exactly what he (unintentionally by author) turned out to be. Trying to flesh him out as a pure guy in his past (mind you just a couple decades after wanting to dominate the entire world) undermines his cleverness, but gives him good ground for wisdom in the future. And, again, it makes him just “not bad” when he realises that Grindelwald and him were after an evil goal. We have this sort of true neutral character. Did he deserve to rule the entire wizarding world? The fact that he at that point was capable of questioning the decision of the qilin show that maybe he was worthy. But not because of the pure goodness of his heart, which means that qilin couldn’t have bowed down before Dumbledore.

Mikaila really put all her comedic editing and writing skills into this vid and I appreciate it

I have a book series recommendation for you. It is kind of like Percy Jackson with fantasy and quite a bit of humor. Its about elves and stuff and theres alicorns and its a rlly good book series. Idk if youll see this, but i hope uou do!! The book series is called Keeper of the Lost Cities by Shannon Messenger (By the way, the series isnt completed with a 9.5 being revealed soon)

I think a thing that was missed here that made the whole magic ethics goat thing just... so so dumb... Was that it wasn't picking who was good, it was picking who was PURE. And even if Dumbledore is good, he's good in a complex way and is definitely not pure. Honestly, I think JKR really wanted Dumbledore to be this unequivocally good guy and in her head he was. She gets annoyed when fans point out that he's not, so she makes it a plot point the that goat of objective morality has decided that he's good.

Something pointed out by the Super Carlin Brothers when they talked about Dumbledore’s Bug Plan as they call it is that Dumbledore hears that Voldemort took Harry’s blood into him, Dumbledore gets his signature twinkle in his eye. Dumbledore now knows Harry, making this decision hard, but now Dumbledore also knows… Harry will die, but Harry can live. Voldemort doomed himself and saved Harry. Harry isn’t told about this until King’s Cross in between, but Dumbledore knew that, when Harry would ultimately die, he still had a way to live. Dumbledore is by no means perfect, he pulled the strings and used people as chess pieces. But he also knew there was a way the cheat the board

I just love how complex and not straight forward Dumbledore's character is! He be saving the world but he also be real. He be making mistakes and dealing with the consequences. Does it make him a bad person? No, it just makes him human. Also, Snape is the LAST person who should try to throw shade on Dumbledore. Pig for slaughter? How about we talk about your bullying students and vindictive behaviour Snape before you start pointing fingers at Albus. Also the movies really didn't clarify Dumbledore's motives at ALL. It left so much important information out and I feel like that's a big part of the reason why a lot of people look at Dumbledore sus. They haven't read the books and therefore are missing crucial context. I was a child when the books came out and I haven't read them since then but I have watched the movies a ton and recently I read over the books and BOI the movies did Albus no favours. I forgot just how much stuff they left out because they figured the fans would fill in the blanks but for someone watching it without the context of the books, it really makes Albus look a kinda way, not gonna lie.

Fundamentally, I think the problem with Dumbledore is a meta one. The ones you brought up are very common debates in the fandom, but I don't think they're the right one to bring up when trying to explain why some do not think he's a good man. He's meant to be the wise, hyper-competent mentor figure in a story where children saved the day, because it's a kid's series and no kid wants to read about other kids watching a grown-up save the day. But JKR couldn't write both these elements in the same universe in a cohesive manner. She couldn't properly justify how Harry and his friends kept outdoing Dumbledore in a way that is reasonable. And so for many, including myself, the in-universe logic leads to two possible outcomes. Either, much like Lockhart, he's a coasting on a reputation he does not deserve, or there is sinister intent there. And it seems highly unlikely that he's a hack. To give a speed-run of different examples to prove my point (and keep in mind I am applying in-universe logic since that's the point of my argument, plot-holes are not a rebuttal): 1) In book 1 why, on Earth, if summoned urgently to the ministry would he decided to fly on a broom instead of apparate or floo ? He's going to London, from Scotland, even flying that would take hours. 2) In CoS are you telling me that in 50 years he couldn't figure out what took the gang weeks, with infinitely less starting knowledge and experience ? A kid died on his watch and he never pondered the how beyond Tom framed Hagrid ? Not to mention never tried to clear poor Hagrid's name so that he could use magic again legally ? 3) Then in the next book, Dumbledore is Chief Warlock, the biggest figure of Magical Britain's judicial branch and he can't just give Sirius sanctuary or a trial ? Can't intervene on his behalf ? Why ? Why send 2 teenagers through time instead ? 4) So BCJ, with a few weeks of observation, mostly from afar, can imitate Moody so well that his friend of several decades took nearly a year to notice. How is that possible ? 5) And finally, how is guarding the prophecy the best use of the Order's time to prepare for the war ? It does not give Voldemort any new information, he's already determined to kill Harry no matter what so it hardly changes his motivation, and only he or Harry can take it so what was the guard supposed to do if the BBEG showed up exactly ? I could list so many more, but this paragraph is already huge. I can think of many malicious reasons behind these actions, but I can't think of any logical ones that come from a benevolent figure, even one willing to make tough choices and sacrifices. And that is why he's so controversial. I really wish these points were discussed more in this debate, because I think that, even subconsciously, whether you pick up on this or not is more likely to inform your opinion of Dumbledore?

"He played Ding dong ditch with a baby!" 😂😂😂😂😂

You know, if the blood protection specifically states that so long as his mother's blood dwells in that house then technically Harry can live anywhere since the protection can also interpret Harry having his mother's blood be enough to protect him, the Dursleys was the unnecessary pick, especially for a recently orphaned 1-year-old who is btw magical.

I think it is not very "realistic" to pick Dumbledore. I would not call him evil but he is not as a good person as Jacob or Newt. But the real question is: they had 4 candidates for wizard president what if none of them where a good person?

I always view Dumbledore as a heavily flawed character who tries to be good and do good but never really opens up to anyone and isn’t good but not evil either

One thing that was pointed out by the Super Carlin Brothers channel some time ago, is Dumbledore totally thought Harry was a goner UNTIL Harry told him what Voldemort did to come back to life in the graveyard. The book said there was a glint of hope in his eye for a brief second, something like that. And that's when he thought there's a chance for Harry to live after the horcrux is killed out of him