Comments | castlehogwarts: "What If?" Discussion #9

jadedquill in castlehogwarts

"What If?" Discussion #9

Oct 20, 2008 09:49

"What if Dumbledore hadn't defeated Grindelwald?" question provided by tmklineAs always, you will be awarded 10 points for your initial response to the above question. You will then be awarded an additional 3 points for every reply you make to others' opinions. If you are replying to comments people have made on your own topic, you will still earn 3 ( Read more... )

"what if?" discussions

Comments 57

cyn_ful October 20 2008, 17:35:23 UTC

What if Dumbledore hadn't defeated Grindelwald ( ... )

tari_sue October 20 2008, 18:28:48 UTC

I think Voldemort may still have grown up in an orphanage - his mother ran away as an act of rebellion and I think that would still have happened whether Grindlewald won or lost. The main difference would be that the person who came to collect him wouldn't have been Dumbledore, and therefore they may have been more sympathetic to young Tom Riddle - because let's be honest, Dumbledore handled that really badly.

cyn_ful October 20 2008, 18:36:10 UTC

You are right in that respect, that Dumbledore handled it all wrong. He just sat back and watched and let Tom develop on his own. It could be that Dumbledore secretly liked what Tom was saying, but saw the darker parts of it too late.

I would think, though, since Wizards are supreme, that they would have their own orphanage for wizards. Their names are written into the Hogwarts book from birth. It was never quite explained how that happened, or I don't remember if it was. I'm sure they would have had a way to find him as a child or maybe routinely do searches of the Muggle orphanages for the magical children.

j_belletto October 20 2008, 20:53:26 UTC

I agree, Dumbledore made a huge mistake in the way he handled Tom.

But I guess with as much power as Dumbledore had he was going to make great advances for the good and when he made mistakes they would be great for the evil.

Thread 16

tari_sue October 20 2008, 18:24:32 UTC

If Dumbledore hadn't defeated Grindlewald then I think Voldemort would have been fighting on the other side. Voldemort's mother (who's name completely escapes me at the mo) would still have fallen in love with Tom Riddle Snr, so Tom Riddle Jnr would still have been a half blood but in a much less tolerant society, therefore his rebellious streak and his desire to take over the world would have manifested in fighting for muggle rights rather than pureblood rights. He would have been Severus Snape only more handsome and less nice - scary. He also would have probably ended up teaching DADA at Hogwarts, so there wouldn't have been the string of one-year teachers. I think ultimately Voldemort would always have tried to take charge, he was never going to sit back and not be brilliant ( ... )

cyn_ful October 20 2008, 18:55:39 UTC

First I must insert that you just painted a lovely picture of Tom. I think that would be an awesome fic/drawing. I must now get my hormones under control.

Now onto the meat of the subject. You may be right. Tom would have fought for the other side and worked on conquering the world. Do you think that he would have succeeded that time or do you think that Harry would still have been the one to defeat him?

Cyn ~ Slyth Prefect

tari_sue October 21 2008, 08:46:27 UTC

I think that in that senario, Harry would have been his right-hand man, afterall, Harry is quite dogged in his beliefs so I don't think they'd have been any different, therefore he'd have found himself on the same side as Tom.

Sue ~ Ravenclaw

cyn_ful October 21 2008, 18:36:08 UTC

That was, going on this scenario, if Harry were actually born. Which brings into question, if he were born and brought up by James and Lily - how would he be different? He would have been loved and not abused. How different would he have been, how reckless? Maybe he wouldn't have fought beside Tom after all - he wouldn't have had Tom trying to kill him.

Cyn ~ Slytherin Prefect

Thread 7

(The comment has been removed)

cyn_ful October 20 2008, 21:56:09 UTC

I had thought about going into the debate that both Voldemort and Harry would not have been born, but there will always be those that fight the rulers - whether good or bad.

Tom would still have been born. He graduated from Hogwarts the year that Grindelwald fell. (I've been surfing the lexicon since I desperately want my book right now.) Tom may have rallied to Grindelwald's side during the final battle with Dumbledore and wormed his way in closer to the leader ( ... )

tari_sue October 21 2008, 09:00:19 UTC

You have a good point, Harry may not have been born because Lily might not have been allowed to attend Hogwarts.

Sue ~ Ravenclaw Prefect

(The comment has been removed)

Thread 25

j_belletto October 20 2008, 20:47:23 UTC

I wonder if Grindelwald would have killed Dumbledore... We know that Dunbledore killed Grindelwald, but would it have gone the other way? Would Grindelwald have just disabled Dumbledore, they were very close growing up? I was always surprised that Dumbledore handled it the way he did...

That aside, someone else would have been the one to get Tom from the orphange. I think that would have been better. I think that Tom Riddle needed a stronger hand. Dumbledore is the type of person that lets people learn for themselves. That in my opinion was not good for Tom. He had a bad childhood and so I think that the base for him learning as he went would be scewed. So Dunbledore took a child that was mentally unstable and allowed the child to learn on his own without fixing the problems. If the foundation of a house is not right would you continue to build the house or fix the problem? Your house might fall!

James ~ Gryffindor ~ DADA ~ HoH ~ Keeper

cyn_ful October 20 2008, 21:10:07 UTC

There is one small problem. Voldemort killed Grindelwald. Did you read DH or shall I close my mouth now so as to spoil the book? (Honest question, so I don't give away any true spoilers.) Dumbledore, always believing in the good of people probably just believed that he needed to lock his true love away forever instead of actually killing him.

Tom did need a strong hand. Once Dumbledore realized what Tom was capable of at the orphanage, he should have had him removed. But for the lessons that Tom could learn by staying, he was left - left to torture and grow into the Dark Wizard that he was. Dumbledore had quite a few faults.

Going on the knowledge that Dumbledore and Grindelwald were lovers at one time, he probably could not kill him - yet Grindelwald would not have thought twice of it in his quest for the Greater Good.

~ cyn - Slyth Prefect

j_belletto October 20 2008, 22:21:46 UTC

I did read the book, but only once... My mistake...

I feel really sorry for Dumbledore... He had all this power and responsiblity placed on his shoulders and it made his chooses that much harder to make. And he was left with out Grindelwald.

cyn_ful October 20 2008, 22:29:47 UTC

*grins* I went and doublechecked the lexicon just to make sure. I have read it twice and I know there is still so much that I have missed in it.

Depending on my mood (I'm really a Slytherpuff - but shhh, it will have to be our secret), I actually like the side of good and just. Dumbledore had a hard life and had many hard choices placed on his shoulders.

Ooops, my husband just pulled up so I have to cut it short...*runs out of the office* but I will have to finish my thought later!

Cyn ~ Slyth prefect

Thread 24