Do you expect me to talk? / No, Mr. Pettigrew, I expect you to die!

[pauraque_bk]

A few days back I asked how Dumbledore could not have known Peter was a spy. The discussion went on for quite a while, and many wonderful answers were proposed, so here, have a summary. I've left out the theories from my original post, though those were debated too. It was a long thread!


He knew.

-Dumbledore did know Peter was a spy, but didn't have enough proof, or thought he could Legilimens information about Voldemort from Peter without his knowing. He thought the final decision was that Sirius would be Secret-Keeper, so he was not worried for the Potters' immediate safety. [link]

-He knew or suspected that Peter had been contacted by Voldemort, and was trying to give him an opportunity to prove his moral strength. Oops. [link]

-He has foreknowledge of what will happen because he is a time traveler, and allowed Peter to betray the Potters because he knew it would ultimately be necessary. [link]

This is an aspect of the Knight2King theory, which postulates that Dumbledore is Ron Weasley, gone back in time. K2K is always neat to look at, though it may be slightly beyond the scope of this discussion.

-He was simply trying to allow the terms of the prophecy to be fulfilled. [link]


He didn't know.

-The problem was hubris -- considering that one of his Gryffindors might have turned would have meant admitting his own fallibility. [link]

-Dumbledore avoided using Legilimency on the Order members, either out of respect for them, or because he didn't want them to become disgruntled. [link] [link]

-Dumbledore is not as great a Legilimens as we think, and/or it was because of Peter's betrayal that he became a Legilimens in the first place. [link] [link]


Trick question.

-There was nothing for Dumbledore to find out -- Peter turned traitor not long before the Potters died. [link]

Requires that we disbelieve Sirius's assertion that Peter was passing information to Voldemort for a year before the Potters died, and demands another explanation for where that information was leaking from.

-Dumbledore is an allegorical-type deus ex machina. Discussing his motives and abilities in realistic terms is the wrong level of analysis for his character. [link]

This is a fascinating topic, and I encourage you all to take a look at what donnaimmaculata had to say about it. ptyx also called Dumbledore an "impossible character" earlier in the discussion, which gets at the same idea.

Many thanks to everyone who contributed their thoughts. Damn, I love fandom.

Comments

[ptyx.livejournal.com]

Congrats for the summary! You did a wonderful work.

[modern-maria.livejournal.com]

I just got internet back at home, and that looks darned interesting. I have seriously got to go back in my FL and read some of this stuff. *cries because she missed most of it*

[maidenjedi]

I didn't join in the original discussion because, whoa. What a loaded question!!

But my favorite theory is that Peter became a traitor too close to the time of the Potters' death. Which leaves open the possibility that someone else was the actual spy, and that person could still be around. (I know a lot of fandom would like to say it's Snape, but my money is on someone we haven't met yet....)

Someone being the spy and Peter being the person who turns over the Potters makes a lot of sense. What we know of Peter, and IMHO all Rowling is ever going to *let* us know, is that he hides behind those who will protect him. We know he is extremely "infatuated" with the other Marauders - the boy's got a bad case of hero worship. I think his betrayal would have to take place over a very short period of time. He becomes the Secret Keeper because the spy has been spinning a web of mistrust in the Order (maybe it's someone with Dumbledore's ear who points very often to all of Remus' and Sirius' issues, or maybe the spy isn't doing it at all, and Sirius is the one to suggest Peter). The spy lets Voldemort know that Peter is Secret Keeper, or the spy has the presence of mind to act on this information independently. Peter goes to Voldemort, either willingly or by coercion (we can safely rule out Imperious, I think), and spills what he knows.

Then again, that's all rather complicated. It makes more sense that Peter premeditated a lot of what happened - he got himself in good enough to become Secret Keeper and then went to Voldemort. I think he was probably approached about this, by Lucius or Bellatrix or someone else with considerable power who would scare the shit out of him. From that point on he went willingly and committedly, and as I theorized in "Traitor Most Accursed", his sole purpose as a Death Eater was to turn over the Potters.

As to Dumbledore, I think it likely that Peter could have been a skilled Occlumens, and/or there was another person who was the *actual* spy.

Dumbledore falls victim to what I think of as the Yoda Problem - smart and talented as anyone, undeniably great, but blind as well, unable to see the evil right in front of him.

[aubrem.livejournal.com]

Dumbledore has always felt rather godlike or parentlike to me as a character. That is, he doesn't actually do much - he just sets everyone in place and gives them opportunities to act - and so exercise their free will toward good or bad, good decisions or bad decisions.

It might be convenient for plot, but I always felt JKR writes Dumbledore like this because these are children's books and there is something traditional and comforting about stories where the children are given room to explore and grow but there is still an all-knowing person watching and gently prodding them into situations where they will either make the right decision or fail. (Aslan in Narnia might be another example).

I suppose this was blown all to hell in OotP as Dumbledore screwed up badly there but I wonder if he really did. Somehow it all works out and in the end Harry will kill Voldemort.

Er, re Peter - I think it's quite possible that Dumbledore knew Peter might betray his friends but felt he had to give him the opportunity to choose not to. Perhaps not literal knowledge, maybe more of a matter of Dumbledore's choosing to not look too closely so that Peter would have the opportunity to do the right thing in the end.

This is more "the means is more important than the end" sort of morality - but it's a common thing in children's books.

[lizardlaugh.livejournal.com]

Wow! Thanks for the summary! This is related to one of the big questions about K2K we get quite often (why doesn't Ron change things). I've argued all along that in the case of Peter, Dumbledore had to know, regardless of whether or not he is Ron.

[wicked-dragon-x.livejournal.com]

It's fascinating, intelligent discussions like this that make me want to read Harry Potter. I've only read the first three books, and that was close to three years ago, but I'm still getting caught up in this.

Yet another theory...

[(Anonymous)]

Hi, found this interesting discussion through daily_snitch. Have been reading through those other posts, and I think perhaps I can offer yet another view. :-)

I think Dumbledore knew that Pettigrew was a spy. Not perhaps through legilimency, but from one of his "number of useful spies" (PoA, uk pb p222), at the very least he suspected him.

DD has a long track record now of wanting to give people second chances and/or enough rope to hang themselves with... He clearly suspected fake!Moody, eg, but he let him discriminate himself before taking action against him. He disagrees with Fudge, but does not break with him until absolutely necessary. He knows Lockhart is a fraud, but allows him to to bumble through until he destroys himself. At Harry's trial he directs rather than states what *he* think is the truth. I think being somewhat evasive is part of his personality, he want other people to think for themselves (but will sneakily influence them).

I think DD would suspect Peter, and pay attention, but I don't think he would tell anybody else unless he had proof he was willing to use (and I don't think he would expose one of his own spies). Knowing Peter to be the spy (or at least *a* spy), he would make sure Peter knew what DD wanted Voldie to know.

But why then, didn't DD defend Sirius, if he knew him to be innocent? Well, my answer to that is, *innocent of what?* " A street full of eyewitnesses swore they saw Sirus murder Pettigrew." (p422). Nobody has reason to doubt the muggles, and even though DD might wonder about the Potters, there was proof (false, in hindsight) that Sirius killed thirteen people (in front of muggles, too), how does that make him innocent in anybody's eyes? As long as DD has no reason to doubt that Sirius killed those people he would probably think Sirius ought to be punished. And Sirius has a history of being rash with violent outcomes, DD must have remembered the Shrieking Shack history and how Sirius almost killed Snape for following them. What would he do if somebody *betrayed* him and the people he love? How about: kill them...

I think DD had a spy who was present when Peter came to tell Voldie, though, and I think that later, *Snape* tells Dumbledore that Peter and Sirius changed places, and DD thinks he finally understands WHY Sirius killed Peter and the muggles, but I don't think DD thought Peter capable of such a fantastic bluff or that he is alive. When Snape splutters and shouts about how Black is a murderer I think he genuinely believe that Black killed thirteen people after almost killing him, too. He does not claim that Pettigrew was innocent, the way Fudge, MaG and Hagrid do, he just shouts about Black.

This theory does not, however, explain what Snape thinks Black wants to acchieve in Hogwarts. He might think Black mad and dellusional, or even that Black has come back to irk him, but I realise these are weak points.


Oh, another thing. Sirius says in GoF that he was sent straight to Azkaban without trial. He was captured on the same day Dumbledore is organizing Harry's stay with the Dursleys. Unless Dumbledore had already been at the Ministry and made his statement about Sirius beeing Secret-Keeper it is unlikely he knew about this until after Sirius was sent away and the "proof" overwhelming.

ooops...

[(Anonymous)]

... pressed the wrong button, meant to preview and spell-check that. And add that I think Peter was *the* spy, all along. Mainly because he's actually a real, marked Death Eater.
And I meant to sign... sorry.

- Clara