Question: Why did Dumbledore have to die?


I have not read the books, so forgive my ignorance :-).

As far as I can see the movies told us that Dumbledore decided to be killed in order for Snape to gain trust. That whole thing with his Wand etc. seemed like a coincidence ending up helping Harry to fool Voldemord.

But what was the point of Snape gaining more trust? He already was at the inner circle and as far as I can see he did not really do anything once there?

I am guessing I missed something. So, my question is really; why did Dumbledore die and what was his plan involving his own death?


___________
** I am normally not a praying man, but if you are up there, please save me Superman **

reply

In Half Blood Prince we learn that killing someone splits your soul, and we see Dumbledore's hand is very dead looking. In Deathly Hallows 2, we learn that Dumbledore got cursed by the ring that was a Horcrux from HBP and Snape was able to contain the curse to Dumbledore's hand, which was why it was dead looking. Snape also tells him that he has about a year left to live.

We also find out that Dumbledore knew of Voldermort's plan to have Draco kill him (Dumbledore).

So basically Dumbledore was dying anyway, and asked Snape to do it instead of Draco, in order to try and save Draco's soul.

More than anything, Dumbledore wanted Snape to kill him because he was dying anyway, and it was going to be a painful death when the time came. He wanted Snape to do it instead of Draco, because he felt Draco could be redeemed at that point in time; not so much if he (Draco) were to kill Dumbledore.

The part about gaining Voldermort's trust was more of an added bonus. Snape has been working for Dumbledore since just before Voldermort's original fall (when he tried to kill baby Harry). Some deatheaters (especially Bellatrix) questioned his loyalty, and it was always a possibility that Voldermort himself questioned as well; there was no way of knowing for sure.

Should Snape kill Dumbledore, there would be no way for anyone to question his loyalty after that.

There's a lot more to it, a lot more in the books, but that is at least a basic gist.

reply

Interesting. Thank you. Makes more sense now.



___________
** I am normally not a praying man, but if you are up there, please save me Superman **

reply

Because in The Hero's Journey, the source of sources for all stories, the father/mentor/wizard/teacher always has to die or leave the tale - so the hero can be free to make his own decisions and deal with the crisis on his own.

It's a Fantasy genre cliché, but has rarely been so well done as in "The Deathly Hallows". Instead of the hero believing everything the teacher/wizard/father figure says, and trustingly using his teachings as a guide, Harry Potter finds out about all his mentor's flaws and vulnerabilities and compares them to those of his antagonist... and THEN has to decide which side he's on and what to do about his decision. I've been critical of the things Rowling got wrong, but this is one thing she got very right - showing that Dumbledore the mentor wizard was just a man, and a man who had got some things very wrong. Dumbledore is not Gandalf.




“Seventy-seven courses and a regicide, never a wedding like it!

reply

If this is the case then the movie did not do a good job in telling this part.... at least not to an untrained eye like mine. That Dumbledore was less of a mentor passed my view. True, this spin makes the story all the more interesting.



___________
** I am normally not a praying man, but if you are up there, please save me Superman **

reply

No, the movie didn't do a particularly good job of telling this part. If fans tell you that the books are better than the films, this is one of the reasons why. The film did give some of the information about Dumbledore's past that turned out to be important, but it didn't really convey the depth of Harry's grief and disillusionment, when he realized that his mentor was human, and a man he barely knew.

I hope the movie did convey that when the crisis came, Harry had to make his own decisions, and not just blindly obey Dumbldore.



“Seventy-seven courses and a regicide, never a wedding like it!

reply

Question: Why did Dumbledore have to die?

It was a movie based decision.

Rowling saw what a terrible job Michael Gambon was doing as he played Dumbledore. Getting angry and emotional. Shouting and shaking Harry like rag doll and pretentiously putting his beard into a ring and stuff like that.

She couldn't get rid of the actor so she decided to write him out of the books to give us a bit of relief from his atrocious portrayal on screen.

I guess Gambon learned his lesson from that, because in his final scene, in King's Cross Station, he finally played Dumbledore the way he was meant to be played- kindly and wise and soft-spoken. Notice he isn't wearing that pompous beard ring in King's Cross either.

reply

Like another poster said it was mainly because Malfoy was ordered to kill Dumbledore, and he was going to die anyways. Snape killing him spared Malfoy's soul, kept Snape's cover, and gave Dumbledore a quick, painless death.

But it also does firmly cement Snape as Voldemort's right hand man. Snape was in the inner circle already, but this truly made him Voldemort's favorite. Which meant he could know more that was going on. It also is a big reason he was made Headmaster of Hogwarts in my opinion, which was extremely important as it allowed Snape to prevent the Carrows from hurting the students too much. If they were in charge they'd kill and torture kids left and right. Snape could hold them back some and give out punishments that weren't even punishments. Like when Ginny and the others broke into his office. If the Carrows were in charge, they'd torture them to death. Snape had them do work with Hagrid, which is nothing.

reply