Shaken, not stirred.

[pauraque_bk]

This is a question I haven't been able to answer satisfactorily for my own purposes, which is a bit embarrassing (and burdensome, as a writer), so I'd like to get some fresh opinions.

How could Dumbledore not know Peter was the spy?

Peter was in the Order; presumably he and Dumbledore had some interaction. Dumbledore is an expert Legilimens. Peter is very emotionally demonstrative -- he seems the last person who would be able to conceal such a secret.

Perhaps Peter was so underestimated that Dumbledore would never have thought he was a traitor, no matter how odd his behavior. Or maybe his behavior actually didn't seem odd: He's a nervous person, everyone knew that, and no one thought anything of elevated anxiety during wartime.

Is it possible that Peter was not afraid of the prospect of being found out, either because he placed such trust in Voldemort, or due to some other aspect of the circumstance?

Or might Peter have done such a good job at diverting suspicion onto Remus that it was never really questioned by those who were in the loop?

Whatever the case, it seems odd that Dumbledore wouldn't check everyone in the Order from time to time -- it appears that all he has to do to get a quick read on someone is to look into their eyes. This leads to the thought that something was hindering Dumbledore's ability to read Peter. Many have suggested that Voldemort taught Peter a few tricks, as it were -- could Occlumency be one of them? The Occlumency/Legilimency experts we know (Snape, Dumbledore, Voldemort), are all socially maladjusted in one way or another; Peter would make an interesting addition to this group.

Or might Voldemort have placed Peter under something like the Fidelius Charm, preventing him from revealing the secret?

This one is a bit of a stumper for me. All suggestions welcome.

Comments

[caesia390.livejournal.com]

I think it would be well not to over-estimate the competence of Dumbledore. We've seen from OotP and GoF that is he is quite capable of misjudgement and mistakes; he just presents the picture of omniscience.

We know (largely thanks to you, I might add) that Peter is very good at seeming insignificant and adapting. Survival is something he doesn't even have to think about, so even in the stressful situation of being a spy in the midst of a war, I think he'd unconsciously know what to do to put everyone off his track. Which means drawing attention to Remus (or more likely, presenting information and viewpoints so that others draw attention to Remus), acting in accordance with his loyal-friend-to-James persona (I still haven't decided under what circumstances he betrayed James - still obsessed? regretful?), and basically being not worth the bother to even suspect.

Dumbledore seems very pro-Gryffindor, meaning he values action and bold moves. He wouldn't associate those qualities with Peter, but on the other hand, Peter isn't a Slytherin, to be adept at sneakiness. Not that Dumbledore isn't old or wise enough to imagine shades of grey, but he's the leader of a war effort, under a great deal of pressure himself, and it seems like his own natural prejudices have a certain amount of sway over his thoughts.

Also, I wonder if another failing of Dumbledore isn't hubris - suspecting members of his Order means admitting his own fallability. ...But on the other hand, if he had to suspect someone (which we know he did), then Peter seems a prime suspect in terms of seeming off... which brings us back to square one.

Someday, I am going to be able to make an argument that has a point, I swear...

[arwencordelia.livejournal.com]

I wonder if another failing of Dumbledore isn't hubris - suspecting members of his Order means admitting his own fallability

Hubris is, in my opinion, the most likely explanation for Dumbledore's behavior. Dumbledore wouldn't have been respected for so long if he weren't both competent, and intelligent. But it seems to me that at some point (perhaps during/after the business with Grindenwald?), the WW began to regard Dumbledore as infallible. Sooner or later, Dumbledore himself must have started to believe this.

He just seems to be someone who's convinced he cannot be mistaken. The one notable time he admits his own fallibility to Harry, at the end of OOTP, he explains that the only reason he made a mistake is because his motives were so noble: he so loved Harry, he didn't want to burden him with vital information; he kept an already emotionally disturbed Sirius locked up only to try and save his life. In other words, Dumbledore's brain would never had failed him, if his heart weren't so darn good. And if that's not hubris, or at least arrogance, I don't know what is...