Sirius Black Sheep

[sistermagpie]

Happy birthday millefiori!!

I was reading a thread on HP4GU today--naturally a long-running thread that I think started with the question of Dumbledore's placing Harry with the Dursleys and it echoed Sirius' life in a weird way for me, in a Meta-way. It started as a conversation about just what business it was of Dumbledore's to decide who Harry lived with. Like, if you accept that the Dursleys are just supposed to be the best choice, it still comes down to Dumbledore alone being the one to make it, as if he's got any connection to this kid at all beyond Harry's being really important to his personal plans for the future.

But it kept getting into all these criticisms of Sirius as a guardian to Harry. Criticisms that were really beside the point. The criticisms weren't particularly radical--he's immature, he's reckless--and he was always these things, it wasn't just Azkaban, because remember the Prank. But to me, actually, it seems like what was Sirius doom as a character wasn't only his own flaws but the fact that he

...just wasn't important enough to Dumbledore.

That might sound differently than the way I mean it--I don't mean to imply that it was Dumbledore's job to keep him out of trouble or anything like that. It was just strange seeing how easy it was to dismiss Sirius as a guardian for Harry when the Potters picked him. (Even to the point of questioning whether they really did that officially since we've only got Sirius' word for it, while Dumbledore's own god-like place in the kids' life is just natural.) Everything bad that happened to Sirius was a little too much his fault, imo. He went to jail because he didn't defend himself; he should have gone to Dumbledore immediately, he should have gone to Dumbledore when he broke out of jail, even. That last one's particularly ironic, imo, because how many people who have been unjustly rotting in jail for over a decade have that kind of trust in the system? Why would Sirius think Dumbledore would be so sure to understand and believe him? I asked myself. Just because so many other characters would trust Dumbledore to believe them? Isn't that because they've only really seen Dumbledore deal with people like Harry, who are important to him?

Sirius as a character is known more for being ignored by Dumbledore than anything else. We know DD didn't expel him after the Prank, but from what we've seen so far this didn't seem to be about Sirius himself. Is there a scene where Sirius and Dumbledore ever discuss it in a way that suggests Sirius got one of Dumbledore's famous second chances? Because it seems like that whole thing was more about James. Sirius doesn't seem to feel much about it. Lupin feels he owes Dumbledore for letting him into the school, Snape is bound up with Dumbledore in all sorts of ways, I wouldn't be surprised if Draco had some Dumbledore!Angst now, but Sirius doesn't seem to think about it at all. Even if Sirius himself is just supposed to be thoughtless about it I don't remember any scenes where Dumbledore seemed to feel he should feel some loyalty for him.

Then Sirius is put in jail and Dumbledore isn't there fighting for him enough to even get him a trial. He breaks out of jail and fights his way back into Harry's life, though thanks to Peter's escape he doesn't get a life out of it. (I'm not suggesting Dumbledore is responsible for that, but it's fitting, isn't it, that Peter is far more important to Dumbledore's plans than Sirius?) Then he's in hiding, the last year of which in a place that seems almost intentionally designed to make him self-destruct. So he does the one thing he's ever been able to do in the story, which is suffer and die, and then there's Dumbledore right away with one of the lamest eulogies ever. Compare Sirius to say, Hagrid. I personally can't picture any of that going down the same way. Did Dumbledore just not ever trust Sirius that much? There are times reading that speech where it almost sounds like Dumbledore naturally finds it easier to talk about Sirius' flaws than his good points because he long ago judged and dismissed him on those faults. (And is it creepy that the fact that Sirius seems so little beholden to Dumbledore ever seems like it might be a flaw in Dumbledore's eyes?)

I know I've talked before about how family is important in HP to the point where I never understood people wondering why certain characters didn't just dump their families and expect Harry & Co. to take care of them, and I've always seen Sirius as a tragic example of someone who leaves his family and finds himself abandoned. It's no wonder he's so fixated on James in his last year; James seems like the only person who was truly connected to him like family. Remus is in a similar situation, but of course Remus never expects anyone to think of him as family, so he's okay with it.

Ultimately, this all might make Sirius that much more of an interesting contrast with his brother, actually. Not just because Regulus, too, felt isolated on the side he had chosen, but also he died in a way that was remembered as pointless, the death of a loser. And also he, like his brother, may have finally found that the only acceptable sacrifice he could offer (East of Eden again) was his life.

Comments

[seductivedark.livejournal.com]

You know, I never thoguht about it, but Sirius doesn't seem to have had that infamous Second Chance. James, yes. And, James was the one to save Snape. Peter? Not too sure about him, he saw his opportunity and grabbed it running. It could very well be that Dumbledore didn't trust Sirius that much with the adult things in life. The Prank, at an age when young wizards are supposed to be settling down to be serious about life, was perhaps some indication to Dumbledore about Sirius's state at the time?

And, yes, Sirius is the one who broke away from his WW family, and is the one who suffers alone. Even Draco's got his family to lean on, as we find in HBP.

The Black brothers, pointless deaths, remembered marginally in passing as other deaths are revered. Quite a fall for the noble House of Black, and all of the stock dear Mama put into it.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I am pretty drawn to the whole House of Black in so many ways--and somehow the parallel deaths of the two sons is perfect. It's kind of twice as sad that they were so isolated from each other, but were really alike. They both had reputations that really what they were.

I don't get any particular vibe about Dumbledore feeling anything about Sirius, to be honest. I mean, it seems more like a plot thing, that Sirius just wasn't important in a way that related to Dumbledore. But you can't help but think further about that and wonder, you know?

[windrunner1981.livejournal.com]

Then he's in hiding, the last year of which in a place that seems almost intentionally designed to make him self-destruct. So he does the one thing he's ever been able to do in the story, which is suffer and die, and then there's Dumbledore right away with one of the lamest eulogies ever.

I couldn't agree more. I have to say, though, you're much kinder than I am. In my mind, it's not Dumbledore who didn't care about Sirius, but JKR.

I'm still not over his death, not really. I can't believe she wrote it that way. And I mean "not over it" in a bad way, not in that it was so moving that I still get emotional or something like that. It was completely lame for a character that had such amazing potential. And you're right - he never had that redemptive opportunity that he deserved.

Grr. Sorry, I could rant for hours on how I feel that JKR had two perfectly amazing characters in Sirius and Lupin, and really kind of squandered both of them in a way that's nearly unforgivable. And that doesn't give me much hope for Book 7, either, and Snape's resolution. She might mess that up, too.

Yes, I'm very, very bitter. But it's the truth -- I haven't been a true blue Potter fan since Sirius fell through that curtain. It wasn't fair.

[dartmouthtongue.livejournal.com]

It wasn't fair.

-Snort-

That's why I like her books, they are so full of injustice. It's kind of really fucken marvelous the way she expresses that childhood feeling of how unfair things are, which belongs to anyone who is entirely dependant on the will of others (the oppressed, the poor, the disenfranchised).

[static-pixie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, actually, I'm with you on JKR not giving enough attention to characters who do seem like they could have a lot of potential. Lupin for sure, Neville (who's around, but not really), Tonks definitely. Blaise right now. It's so annoying the way that her books have to focus so exclusively on the Trio, because to me, Hermione isn't one of the best characters JKR has, nor is she the most interesting. I'd cut so many of her 'anvil' scenes with Ron for some more of any character listed above.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I remember reading OotP that was one of the frustrating things for me, that I was very interested in Sirius and kept waiting for some development and instead he just, well, showed up and died. Not that things like that don't happen, as is said below, and she was having the character die in ways connected to his personality. But still, not a particularly interesting part of his personality. There is a bit of recklessness in him, but that wasn't half as interesting than his reaction to being in that house, and his thoughts about his family--and the guy's got the whole Count of Monte Cristo thing going on as well, and that means somebody very patient and focused.

[dartmouthtongue.livejournal.com]

Gigi doesn't have the same relationship with me that she has with my best friend Kade, and though I and Gigi run around the same circles and she's a nice chick, we're meh about each other. I'm kind of indifferent to her, though I don't dislike her. I don't see why I have to care and love everyone I meet or am acquainted with.

WTF does that have to do with anything?

Why should Albus and Sirius like each other? And what could Dumbledore have done differently in your opinion, even if he had?

Before Pettigrew was found out, Dumbledore believed Sirius guilty I suppose. Why should he fight for a trial? After that, Sirius had to be kept hidden, and this was the most important thing.

I believe that Dumbledore gave the Sirius is full of flaws speech so that Harry can understand that every decision can make you responsible and that people's choices and flaws have their consequences. It's kind of existentialist and unpopular, but wtf, Dumbledore is also failing in that moment and that's fine. It's part of the teenager thing ANGST!howdarepeoplenotbeperfect shit.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Gigi doesn't have the same relationship with me that she has with my best friend Kade, and though I and Gigi run around the same circles and she's a nice chick, we're meh about each other. I'm kind of indifferent to her, though I don't dislike her. I don't see why I have to care and love everyone I meet or am acquainted with.

WTF does that have to do with anything?

Actually, not much with what I'm saying. I'm not arguing that Dumbledore *should* have cared about Sirius at all. I'm just noticing the way the character's arc works out in canon. I do think Dumbledore might have acted very differently if the character had had a different role in his own plans, as he's stepped in to act on behalf of many other characters. I'm fine that he didn't since that's the story--you can't really separate who Sirius is from the story he has in canon. But what Sirius' role is in canon seems, imo, to just be there at every step. I think the character's very much affected by his importance to the grand plan.

I believe that Dumbledore gave the Sirius is full of flaws speech so that Harry can understand that every decision can make you responsible and that people's choices and flaws have their consequences.

Well, yes, that's what he's saying flat-out. I get why the speech is there--he's also giving us the speech as exposition because that's our "Dumbledore explains it all scene." But it still reflects the character's role as a whole, imo. (I do think Dumbledore comes across really badly in the speech--not because I don't want him criticizing Sirius or because it's existentialist to point out that Sirius underestimated Kreacher.)

[static-pixie.livejournal.com]

It's funny the way that absolutely no one believed Sirius, actually. Which I think in some ways is a representation of the fact that you've really got to face who you are and where you come from, not run from it.

But, you know, I think it goes hand-in-hand with Dumbledore not doing anything but watching Riddle because he viewed him as a lost cause from the start. I mean, I was talking with a friend the other day and she pointed out that Sirius is so, so similar to Bellatrix. I mean, even before he went to jail, he thought sending Snape down to face a full-grown werewolf would be a funny prank; I'm sure Bellatrix had fun torturing the Longbottoms. They've both got that maniac appeal to them, that 'wow-what-the-hell-will-s/he-do next' thrall. They both take the joke too far where James (asshat that he was) won't because he understands how something like Snape being ripped to peices by a werewolf might not be funny. Sirius doesn't understand this even after Azkaban. And I think Dumbledore would have seen this and passed over him, possibly like he passed over the Twins, now that I think about it. Couldn't use him, you know? So why care? :P

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Did Sirius even proclaim his innocence? Part of what was interesting in the thread I was reading was that people were mentioning that Sirius acted guilty and maybe even confessed--which is possibly true, but doesn't really change the injustice of it because really he wasn't acting guilty, he was just feeling guilty over the death of his friends...something that really should have come out if someone talked to him.

And there's never any, that I remember, idea of exactly how people thought Sirius was the traitor. I mean, when we learn Peter's the traitor everyone can understand how it happened--he always went for the biggest bully, etc. Peter admits this is the case. With Sirius I'm not sure why everyone thought it was Sirius--how did they fit being a traitor into his personality? If it was just his being a Black that would be pretty interesting...

[ellecain.livejournal.com]

The relationship between Dumbledore and Sirius was a bit peculiar, wasn't it? You said that Sirius seems so little beholden to Dumbledore, but in OOTP, whenever people counsel Sirius against leaving the house, they always resort to "Dumbledore said so"; and that shuts Sirius up.
But why should it? What did Sirius owe Dumbledore? Why was he loyal to him?

Other characters like Snape, Lupin, etc were given a Second Chance. But, as seductivedark says, we never saw this with Sirius. Sure the Prank could be interpreted that way, but as you said, it never seems to register with him at all; it was all about James and Snape. So to me, it is quite unclear why Sirius obeyed the edicts handed down by Dumbledore. I never saw much warmth between them in their scenes together. (In fact, when DD and Sirius are in the same room, Sirius gets very little attention from him.)

[seductivedark.livejournal.com]

I think static_pixie had a good point, that the way Sirius saw the Prank had a lot to do with the way Dumbledore treated him from there on out. Unlike James, he was missing that little spark of something that tells him when a joke has gone too far. This can be a dangerous thing after all, and not necessarily a good thing when one is being considered to raise a child, as Sirius was considered by the Potters to be Harry's guardian: an inability to see danger, not just thriving on it or going after it for the thrill.

I think Sirius obeyed Dumbledore because he was really trying to be a part of the Order, and his staying at Headquarters was deemed to be the best thing. He does seem to have a problem in knowing when something is too dangerous. Maybe he was becoming mature enough, after being out of Azkaban for a while, to realize that he needed to follow rules like kids recite multiplication tables by rote, in order to learn safer behavior. Just speculating there.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I know some people have floated the theory that Dumbledore really wanted Sirius out of the way because he was a threat. I might not go that far, but I can see where they get that thought because the plot just creates an interesting tension around this character. He begins the series put away, comes back with a bang, and then is sort of hanging around with no clear direction and really needing to act. And maybe because of his backstory he just is always a wild card--not to mention JKR's always going on about how his main character trait is that he's a rebel. He's got his own priorities and loyalties that really aren't Dumbledore, even though he does defer to him when it's important.

And I would definitely agree that Snape is more important to Dumbledore it seems--and if he felt pushed aside in the Prank it honestly seems like it was James he felt pushed aside for. It's funny because one of the good things about the good side is supposed to be that it isn't this cult of personality where people squabble with each other to be the Dark Lord's favorite, and yet the fact is there is a lot of that on the other side as well around Dumbledore.

[violaswamp.livejournal.com]

Great post. I think the problem was that Sirius was too damn independent-minded for Dumbledore.

The one really amazing thing that stands out about Sirius, for all his major flaws, is his tough-mindedness. First, he rejects his family's ideology. It could be easy to dismiss this as stemming from personal grudges and emotional traumas, except that he then follows it up with an even more stunning act of mental resilience: keeping his sanity (mostly) through more than a decade in Azkaban.

This is NOT a man who would be looking for a father figure or who would be susceptible to cults of personality like Dumbledore's. And Dumbledore's all about loyalty to HIM. Like in CoS, he talks about how Lucius will never win so long as there are people in the school who are loyal to HIM--not people who are doing the right thing, but people who are loyal to Dumbledore. Which is just weird--why the hell should students have "loyalty" to their schoolteachers? Please. This, in a more careful writer than JKR, would be a portent (as it is, I don't think it means anything) that maybe Dumbledore has a sinister (not just "fallible," but sinister) side. Regardless, I think it's textually clear that Dumbledore prioritizes personal loyalty above almost all else. He is generous to people like Lupin and Snape in part as a way to create feelings of debt, he keeps them around because of their personal loyalty to him (despite the dangers) and he expects others to trust them because he does. Sirius doesn't fit into this framework.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yes, like I said above, despite the fact that it's supposed to be the bad side that's characterized by squabbling around the leader, you find it on the good side too. It's a natural by-product of the kind of "trust Dumbledore" feeling everyone has--and yes, that thing about being loyal to Dumbledore in CoS is a true WTF moment that only gets more obvious when you realize just how much Dumbledore is surrounded by people beholden to him or loyal to him. Sirius, by JKR's words, is primarily a rebel. He's probably most alive when setting himself against something, which is probably how he managed in Azkaban. He's not as motivated by the sort of paternal thing Dumbledore's going on. Interestingly, he's also very loyal to James the person instead of just James as Harry's father or James the victim, you know? And that's very much what he represents in the story. He's Harry's family because it's really he who sees him primarily that way rather than the Chosen One. (Something Dumbledore claims he does in OotP.)

[neville81.livejournal.com]

Do we know that Dumbledore didn't even try to get Sirius a trial? Maybe he did and just failed. It's not that he has that much influence over the ministry. And then, there were plenty of supposed Death Eaters (maybe more innocent ones) going to Azkaban without a trial, so theoretically Dumbledore had to fight for trials for any of them and maybe Crouch refused. I mean, from our point of view Sirius was a special case, particularly because of his innocence, but from Dumbledore's he was probably just one out of many. I think the difference with Snape was, that Snape came to him. I do agree, that someone needed to have talked to Sirius, but IMO that someone ought to have been Lupin, since it was him, who was personally close to Sirius.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think the thing with Sirius' trial is it's important to the plot that he didn't have one, obviously, so that the real story never came out. That means you do have to also accept that Dumbledore didn't fight for it since he never tells us he did--plus if Dumbledore was fighting for a trial there'd be more danger he would have learned the truth about Peter himself. So Dumbledore has to just be going along with the rest in thinking it's fine that Sirius doesn't get a trial. We know that Dumbledore did have a lot of influence if he put his mind to it--he's not omnipotent but limits to his father often have to be specifically described. He did get Snape off, and he was a real DE. Did he owe that sort of thing to Sirius? I think that brings up an interesting question about the WW. Because Sirius was in the Order, and he had left his family so had no other people to fight for him, and in the WW the justice system seems to often depend on who you know. It's like...if you've got everyone saying that they should just trust Dumbledore (even Sirius himself) it does seem to imply to me that Dumbledore has more responsibility to act on their behalf, if that makes sense.

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

I have suspected for some time now that Albus Dumbledore heartily despised Sirius Black, and wasn't one of James Potter's fanboys either.

In fact the whole widely accepted premise that Dumbledore favors Gryffindor's simply because they are Gryffindors seems to hinge entirely upon the fact that the Marauders — or at least Sirius himself — didn't get (deservedly) expelled because of the Prank.

Well, duh! He couldn't expell them over that. They had him over a barrel, I very much doubt that he ran his plan to educate a young werewolf alongside their own children past the Board of Governors.

I don't think that anyone has really stopped and asked what is says about the relationship between them that James Potter would not accept Dumbledore as his Secret Keeper. There seems to have been a profound degree of lack of trust on display here and I am not convinced that it does not cut both ways. Dumbledore knew his Order had a spy, and for months he knew that the spy was one of the Potters' associates, thather than associate of one of the older Order members.

Plus, Sirius seems to make a positive habit of jeapordizing, or outright wrecking Albus's plans.

Albus went to a considerable amount of trouble to see to it that Remus Lupin should fulfill his potential as a wizard. That (and Albus's Headmastership, perhaps?) nearly went south due to Sirius Black. And you will notice that the experiment has not been repeated. Remus tells up outright that he is the only juvenile lycanthrope to have ever been educated as a wizard. Can you really say there haven't *been* others — given Greyback's stated preferences and opinions of how werewolves ought to be created and raised?

And then Albus tried to keep the Potters out of harm's way for as long as possible. And whose bright idea brought that tumbling down like a house of cards?

And can you say *for sure* that the locket we saw at #12 is irrelevant to the story arc? Or that Albus didn't know it was there? Well, it isn't there *now*, and whose doing was that?

On consideration, I'm not surprised that Albus seems to have believed that putting Sirius Black under house arrest was a desirable means of damage control.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Dumbledore is really very careful about people that get into his circle, and they usually are people he can count on to--paraphrasing him here--do what he says no matter what. That's what he demands of Harry when they go to get the Horcrux, and Harry's feelings of hatred and disgust seem to be mirrored in Snape in the Tower. He tells Snape that he's promised to do something and will. Hagrid is dog-like in his loyalty to Dumbledore--he might make other mistakes but his loyalty is to Dumbledore (isn't that one of the first things Hagrid shows in PS/SS, that he gets angry when Vernon speaks about him with disrespect?). Remus may feel somewhat indebted to him but also seems a bit of an outsider--and I do always feel that seems to somehow reflect his keeping secrets and choosing his own priorities over Dumbledore. Harry is Dumbledore's Man through and through.

I think his whole dance with Draco throughout HBP fits in there too. Draco doesn't have any loyalty to him, but it seems like he's being groomed as a potential, especially with Snape as a go-between. The protection that Dumbledore offers the Malfoys in the end to me seems like more than just a political offer. It made me think that Snape may have had a similar conversation with Dumbledore himself as a young man--not exactly the same because he was a different kid in different circumstances, but one that's really about who Snape is going to be. It sort of reminds me of things I've read about spies being recruited, where people's identities can be broken down and then the new spying identity is offered. Not that I mean he wanted to Draco to be a spy, but I think he may have seen him as a potential valuable person to have, something he might have become more sure of as he watched him struggle with the realization he wasn't a DE.

The Marauders are very different in that sense. Their very name implies doing their own thing, going off in search of their own plunder. And their biggest ties seemed to be with each other.

[glassflower.livejournal.com]

I couldn't agree more...I've always felt drawn to Sirius, so the way his character went downwards from OotP on after three years of being considered one of the badasses was a huge impact. Now I understand that we saw him through Harry's eyes, and in retrospect it seems quite obvious that he was already forgotten by anyone but the Trio. The half-hearted attempts to bring back the subject of his escape from Azkaban and the panic it caused in PoA seem rather pathetic, really.

There are times reading that speech where it almost sounds like Dumbledore naturally finds it easier to talk about Sirius' flaws than his good points because he long ago judged and dismissed him on those faults.

My intense dislike for Dumbledore was awaken specifically on that scene by the end of OotP. I just couldn't believe it (and Harry couldn't too, but from what I remember Dumbledore humoured him a little). At times, it seems to me like he was talking about Sirius only because it seemed to have upset Harry so much...like he couldn't particularly comprehend why he would be so upset about someone unimportant like that, but was willing to condescendingly say a few words to try and make him feel better regardless.

It's no wonder he's so fixated on James

It always seemed to me as though Sirius was enormously attached to James, particularly emotionally (and, according to McGonagall, physically too, at least at some point).

(It's one of the reasons why I've always thought writing Sirius/James (particularly one-sided and maybe subconscious, both on Sirius's part) would come a lot closer to canon than Sirius/Remus ever could - these two could never overcome their loneliness. Remus's naturally developed loner nature and the total abandonment Sirius suffered always seemed to be a huge void between them, even in terms of friendship. But I don't mean to steer this to some sort of ship debate, particularly when discussing Sirius's character is so much more fun to me.)

I adore the relation you draw to Regulus's own character. Granted, we don't officially know a lot about him, but from what we can gather it definitely seems (to me, at least) as though JKR might be trying to draw some parallels between the two (and therefore she does pay some minimal attention to Sirius! Shocking). If so...unless Regulus becomes huge after the next book (and I mean his popularity in the fandom, much like Snape's did since HBP), it looks to me as though these two brothers and their tragically dismissable existences might become some sort of cult :P I know I'm still one of the seemingly few people who are still touched by the Sirius's death scene (since 'touched' is a severe understatement to describe the first time I read it), and I still love and am fascinated by him more than any other character - even Snape. Oh well.

Oops. Sorry for the long rant. Oh, and am adding to my memories :)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I love long rants!:-)

I wrote about Dumbledore's speech in more detail once before, trying to get a handle on it because it's natural that a lot of people would have said, "Wait, this guy just died and your explaining how it was his fault? WTF?" And like I said I get that it's exposition--actually a lot of Dumbledore's disinterest is important to the plot. If he took the least bit interest in Sirius' case the surprise ending of PoA would be gone. But that still brings up some questions.

When I read the scene I feel like Dumbledore is dealing with the crisis in his own way that makes him feel like he's got more of a handle on it. And for him that seems to be going over all the mistakes he made so that they seem managable. One of those mistakes was Sirius, apparently, since it's got Harry so upset etc., but he's still very clearly about just how much blame he's going to take. Which is kind of interesting too because of course he's right that nobody forced Sirius to leave the house--a better way to have presented that to Harry, actually, would probably have been to simply talk about how much he would have wanted to be there fighting for Harry. Where he seems to need to cover is the Kreacher angle, the way that he put Sirius in the house with an enemy on the lookout for weaknesses. And for that he comes up with that "If Sirius had been nicer to him..." speech but that, imo, is just silly. Sirius could have served Kreacher breakfast in bed every day and Kreacher would still have been loyal to the "true" Blacks. So Dumbledore neatly avoids talking about his real mistake in the scene, which is apparently that he underestimated Kreacher's loyalty and cunning. The only mistake with Kreacher Sirius really made was giving him an order that was badly worded. He wasn't even at fault for giving Kreacher the information of how much he loved Harry--that was there for Kreacher to see when Dumbledore put him in the Order house.

Basically, it was the same kind of mistake Dumbledore makes a lot where he thinks he can predict the moves people will make and underestimates them. It's just that he tells it it's always that the problem is that he thinks they'll overcome a flaw and they don't!

I agree about Sirius/James btw.:-)

And I do hope JKR is drawing a parallel between the two Black boys. They also probably dismissed each other, which makes it even more tragic. Like when Sirius goes through his family's house and has only bad things to say about everyone I didn't believe that either. I thought he just needed to cast everyone in the worst light possible. I felt like he definitely loved his brother more than he was letting on by calling him an idiot, and I wondered if Regulus would have felt the same way about him. I hope they'd both of been really really happy to find out the kind of stuff both of them actually did under pressure, and that ultimately they were both on the same side.

[seaislewitch.livejournal.com]

Like you said, sistermagpie, Sirius is not a solider, and Dumbledore knew that. Sirius would have interfered with Harry staying with the Dursleys for the blood protection. Sirius would have influenced how Harry handled his quest for the Horcruxes. Sirius needed to be contained -- in Azkaban, fleeing to a far away land (after POA), at Grimmauld Place or behind drapery. (I'm not saying Dumbledore wanted him dead, just out of the way.)

Sirius didn't know about the Horcruxes, even though he was in the best position to help when he found the locket. I think Snape knows, though. Dumbledore thought Snape could help Harry more (under D's orders), even if Harry never trusted Snape. Harry trusted Sirius.

I sometimes think there may have been a prophecy about the Black family or about Sirius and Regulus. Maybe they fulfilled it with their sad deaths.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Ooh, that's kind of interesting, the idea of a Black prophecy. One of the things I find so cool about the family is how they seem to exist in a grey area where you never know which way they'll fall--you've got people like Sirius on DD's side, people like Bellatrix on Voldemort's side, and the ones who try one thing and then discover it's not for them like Regulus and Draco. But it's those ones in the middle--where I might include Sirius as well because he was convicted as a DE and because his family were Voldemort supporters--that seem to have the power to do the most good. If it weren't for Sirius' break out of Azkaban Ron would still be sleeping with a Death Eater. (Granted that might also have meant Voldemort didn't come back fourth year, but I think of that as something inevitable that needed to happen at some point to defeat him anyway.)

[zevazo.livejournal.com]

I've always felt that Sirius's life ended with Azkaban in canon (which is why I do Peter-drowned-at-birth AUs). He was supposed to lose his powers, but he came back for a brief time to complete his unfinished business, then was laid to rest again through a ceremonial opening to the underworld. Hmm.

Also, I don't believe for a minute that Regulus was the perfect Black son some sketch him to be. Regulus? The heart of the Lion?

And as the child of generations of educators, I would like to submit my opinion that Dumbledore is absolutely CRIMINAL. Witness:

(1) Frequent unannounced absences from the school. My high-school principal would have been sacked. Contract be damned.
(2) May have allowed James Potter to have an invisibility cloak at school.
(3) Allows Sluggy to have large open cauldrons of illegal potions on his first day of classes.
(4) Fails to investigate detention methods (call the Ministry what you will, but I think even they would object to forcing students to write lines in their own blood if someone were watching).
(5) Apparently, only one teacher supervises the dormitories of a rough quarter of the students. If we assume Harry's year to be average, that's one staff member to fifty-seventy students.
(6) "Here, why don't we have a man who hates you and brews untraceable poisons provide your medicine? How could that be a problem?"
(7) Provides no scope for school curriculum. "Hippogriffs? Sure! Theory only? Sure! Felix Felicis? Why the hell not!" Does he really expect anyone to be educated under these standards?
(8) Hired a man who "collects" children and has "private suppers" with them. 'Nuff said.
(9) Apparently has no rules whatsoever for professional behavior toward students -- teacher and student alone in an office with the door closed late at night? I don't *think* so.
(10) No dormitory checks. None.
(11) Failure to notice that his students are becoming Animagi/mapping a supposedly Unplottable school/killing people/going insane.
(12) Never once offers actual counseling for students like Tom Riddle who obviously needs it. Never. Once. Just expects them to go on with their cute little lives and make do for themselves.
(13) Failed to notice the presence of Voldemort in his school. I realize that a giant purple turban is very subtle, but that is not on.
(14) Never, ever, ever checks in on the little boy who's living in a cupboard. Or else, judging from the Dursleys' reaction, he would have had a bedroom.
(15) Talks up house unity, and then segregates the houses every chance he gets, from meals to sports to academics.

Are these the actions of a responsible educator?

No, I don't think so either.

Which explains, but does not excuse, his criminal neglect of Sirius Black. I would list the mistakes he makes with Sirius but that would take much too much space.

Loved that list!

[myfatbudgie.livejournal.com]

If you write "Peter was drowned at birth" AUs, I shall have to read your stories ASAP.

Re: 13. ROFLMAO!

I agree with them all.

When you consider how much influence for good the brilliant, rich, talented, handsome scion of Blacks would have been if only he'd had counseling it's astounding that Dumbledore didn't bother. The kid obviously wanted to go against his crazy family's ethics, but as a child/teen wouldn't have had the first clue how to do it. AD left him to James and Remus to raise. (Remus had no backbone and huge problems of his own that AD left for James and Sirius to solve. When they became animagi, they did better by him for the most part than Dumbledore as far as making his condition bearable. Why couldn't McGonnagall and Dumbledore kept him company?) James was basically a good kid, but out of control himself. If he didn't have time to deal with him, Dumbledore needed to bring in someone who DID. Sirius was potentially too important. He could have helped him get relief from his family, but stay until he inherited, then used his power to change things from within the system. Failing getting him to do that, he could have done anything being as brilliant as he was.

Tom Riddle's case was just criminal. Dumbledore knew for a fact that Tom was angry, very cruel, friendless, vengeful, meglomaniacal, and utterly adrift. Tom was also very, very talented magically from the start. What part of that doesn't spell: "DANGER, DANGER, DANGER! Have everyone watch this kid like a hawk, and provide a mentor for him."

[fazkleto.livejournal.com]

All I can say is that I don't think Dumbledore liked Sirius very much. It would be a very human trait for Dumbledore the omniscient to have. I think he saw some of the things Sirius did over the years, all the unthinking actions, particularly the prank, and gave up on him. He indifferently allowed Sirius to stay in the school following the prank, possibly because Sirius had nowhere else to go, but I don't think he did anything else for Sirius.

On the other hand, Sirius was the sort of person who didn't like to ask for help. He liked to take action for himself, and he didn't stop to think about it. It's demonstrated all through the books. He didn't tell anyone that Peter had betrayed the Potters - instead he headed out to get Peter himself (twice). He decided to deal with Snape himself by sending him off to the Shrieking Shack. He possibly spent his time between PoA and OotP on the run because a) he liked it (even when starving), b) he didn't take charity or help from others well and c) he didn't like to have someone else telling him what to do.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

How DD felt about Sirius is getting more and more fascinating for me. Plotwise, he can't care about him too much. Sirius has to be in jail unfairly in PoA, and no one can suspect he's really innocent or the plot's ruined. That means Dumbledore can't have taken the slightest interest in him or have any qualms about him being there. Even having wistfully say that he tried to get him a trial would send up red flags and suggest he would have wanted to find out what really happened, which would have led to the truth.

Since there's nothing keeping Dumbledore from caring about this matter at all, you pretty much have to just assume it wasn't important, even though it's this huge injustice. Imagine if it were, like, Ron in this situation. Sirius was in the Order, after all. But you're also right Sirius did seem to like to act on his own--actually, he was a rebel and that was his natural way of reacting to things--not that it would have been helped by an unjust stay in prison, of course!

[shaggydogstail.livejournal.com]

Here via the Snitch. This is a wonderful essay--I've long thought that Dumbledore has a lot to answer for in his treatment of Sirius.

We know DD didn't expel him after the Prank, but from what we've seen so far this didn't seem to be about Sirius himself.

A lot of people have suggested that it was to protect Remus' secret, but it also prevented DD's own criminally irresponsible behaviour. His method of shielding children from a transformed werewolf was a long tunnel and a violent tree that can be stopped by poking it with a stick? Not nearly good enough. Remus says that Snape saw Madam Pomfrey leading him across the grounds--there was every chance that Snape could have worked it out for himself. And it's pure luck that Remus' twelve-year-old housemates found out some other way, rather than following him to find out what was happening. 'The Prank' was an accident waiting to happen. (None of which excuses Sirius' actions, but if DD had been more responsible he wouldn't have been able to put Snape's life at risk like that.)

it still comes down to Dumbledore alone being the one to make it, as if he's got any connection to this kid at all beyond Harry's being really important to his personal plans for the future.

I'm so glad you mentioned this, because I seldom see it brought up. Exactly what right did DD have to decide who Harry was going to live with, a decision he made even before Sirius was arrested? Lily and James could have asked DD to look out for Harry in the even of their deaths, but they didn't. The fact that Harry's parents chose Sirius doesn't seem to matter to DD, and that bothers me a lot.

I think DD did owe a duty of care to Sirius. He's in charge of the secret organisation that Sirius was part of, he's Head of the Wizengamot, and a politically influential figure. If he could talk Snape out of Azkaban, he could at least have gone to talk to Sirius. I doubt Sirius was an Occlumens, so it would have been easy for DD to find out what really happened. But he didn't bother.

It's the little things as well--DD suggested that Sirius stay in the cave in Hogsmeade, but did nothing to make his life there bearable. Would it have killed him to send a house elf over with some food and a change of clothing? I wouldn't leave my worst enemy in the conditions DD left Sirius in.

I'm not a fan of evil!Dumbledore theories and, on the whole, I think Dumbledore is a good person trying to do the right thing. But he shows a pattern of neglect and disinterest too often for my liking. There is virtually no pastoral care at Hogwarts, even when Harry witnesses murders DD does next to nothing to support him. I was furious when he sent Sirius away at the end of GoF--rounding up old Order members was a ridiculous task to give Sirius, and Harry needed him. DD never was much good at the emotional stuff, and I think he didn't realise that just because Sirius didn't matter to him, it didn't mean Sirius wasn't important to anyone else.

Also, he could have organised a damn funeral.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think DD did owe a duty of care to Sirius. He's in charge of the secret organisation that Sirius was part of, he's Head of the Wizengamot, and a politically influential figure. If he could talk Snape out of Azkaban, he could at least have gone to talk to Sirius. I doubt Sirius was an Occlumens, so it would have been easy for DD to find out what really happened. But he didn't bother.

Yes, I think any way you look at it, these things are true. Plotwise DD can't do any of these things because it would have taken so little for him to find out the truth. And if he's supposed to be the epitome of goodness, you'd expect him to act on that. Even if Sirius isn't a particular favorite--as I said above, what if it were Ron who fell into this kind of trouble when Neville was the real traitor? We'd hope Ron would get a fair trial and that people would want to find out the truth.

It really is kind of weird the way Dumbledore just assumes control of Harry. I accept that again for plot reasons we're supposed to think Dumbledore made the right choice, but still it doesn't seem like he's hiding the fact that he's placing Harry where he wants him because he wants him to destroy the Dark Lord and not because he's got any attachment to him as a person. While I don't think he had any evil designs on Sirius it does kind of seem like Sirius was a threat or an obstacle for Dumbledore because his own pov about Harry is so completely different. He sees him as *James'* son, not TBWL or the Chosen One. He really does seem to feel he's got more claim over him than DD and in many ways he's frankly right. He's family, independent of Dumbledore. This gets a bit weirder when Dumbledore starts talking about caring for Harry himself, being surprised by loving him and all that. In a weird way it suggests one more reason he wouldn't have use for Sirius!

[millefiori.livejournal.com]

Thank you for the birthday wishes!

LJ has eaten two replies now--I hope this one goes through. :(

I think you hit the nail on the head with this: And is it creepy that the fact that Sirius seems so little beholden to Dumbledore ever seems like it might be a flaw in Dumbledore's eyes?

I've always thought it was creepy the way everyone unquestioningly defers to Dumbledore (absolute power corrupts absolutely), and it infantilizes the adults around him. I think the prejudice is unconsious on Dumbledore's part, but in his world there are people who are beholden to him, people who defer to him and enemies. Sirius doesn't quite fit into any of the boxes and I think that makes Dumbledore uncomfortable.

Sirius has more reason than most to distrust authority figures (starting with his own parents and going forward from there). He does not unquestioningly defer--he's suspicious and reserves judgment until he knows how a given authority figure will (ab)use his power. Of all the adults in Harry's life, Sirius is the most clear-eyed about who/what Dumbledore really is, and I think that--and his influence over Harry--also makes Dumbledore very uncomfortable. And because his discomfort is subconscious, he doesn't ever examine it to see if it's valid (a problem with Sirius) or something within himself that he needs to address, or if it's both, what his own part might be. (Which is a problem shared by 95% of the population if you ask me!)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Ooh--that's a good way of looking at it. When you wrote "Of all the adults in Harry's life, Sirius is the most clear-eyed..." my first thought was that it's Sirius who tells Harry that the world is not made up of good guys and Death Eaters and in retrospect it's really fitting that that line was Sirius'. For all the talk about his never growing up or being mature--which is often accurate in context, Sirius was in some ways the only real adult that Harry knew if only because he was somebody who'd learned from experience and was still living independently with the "just listen to Dumbledore!" mentality. Obviously he often did listen to Dumbledore, but he didn't seem to define himself as Dumbledore's Man. It's great to go back to GoF and see how Sirius is independently thinking about what could be going on with the Goblet. His conclusions are intelligent as well, if wrong since he's not taking into account that the plan won't be logical at all.:-)

Hope your birthday was a good one!

[eir-de-scania.livejournal.com]

You were either with DD or kept your head well down, methinks. JKR says DDs problem was he had no equal, no confident to discuss with, which was part of the problem. True enough. But that had to be one hell of a witch/wizard. DD would NOT be twinkly if someone questioned him, his wisdom, his motives, his actions, his... I could go on.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Too true!

[sunnyskywalker.livejournal.com]

It's weird. Dumbledore has plenty of reasons to pay attention to Sirius, regardless of whether he likes him or not. He's a Black who doesn't toe the party line (enough right there, you'd think - as someone said above, he could be enormously influential), James Potter's best friend, Snape's enemy, he knows Remus Lupin's secret, he supposedly turned traitor for no apparent reason, then he turns out to be innocent and knows all sorts of things about other Azkaban detainees and Peter, he's one of the only people Harry cares about and opens up to, he owns the Order's HQ... but Dumbledore never talks about Sirius the way I'd expect him to talk about someone he really tried to get on his side but couldn't. There isn't any sense of Dumbledore being disappointed in Sirius because he knew him as a person and thought he could have been more - he has this clinical detachment, like he hardly ever thought about Sirius at all. Sirius is more like an idea to him than a person, I think.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's totally it. There's just no there there when it comes to Sirius. Dumbledore doesn't seem to think about him either way. He helps him escape in PoA, but they're so removed for each other. It's like Dumbledore never quite got around to accepting that Sirius was back. In his head he's still something dealt with years ago.

Hey

[jazzypom.livejournal.com]

I must admit, I've been bitching about Dumbledore for a long time. I still haven't gotten beyond a few vicious swear words, but I'd like to think that when I get there, I would be as eloquent as you.

To be honest, I've always thought that Dumbledore had no use for Sirius Black because the latter had no loyalty to him. For all of Sirius' faults, he can be remarkably clear eyed, as evidenced in his turn of action by GoF. Notice, Sirius actually shakes Snape's hand when Dumbledore is all like, 'we have to put away petty school boy rivalries and all that', while Snape is all pulling faces.

The thing is, Sirius never really got into a position of need with Dumbledore. He was not a werewolf who risked not being educated, nor was he an ex-death eater who needed protection because he supposedly had a change of heart. Even with The Prank, if Sirius had gotten expelled, he would have had the connections to go to another school. The British Upper class purebreds always have options, in a way that the lower class and destitute of the wizarding world (re: Lupin and Snape) do not.

In a way, Dumbledore needed Sirius more than Sirius needed him. Dumbledore needed Sirius out of the way so that Harry could be raised where he was. Harry, on coming to the wizarding world would have had the same reaction to Dumbledore (greatest wizard of the age) like everyone else. Can you imagine if Sirius Black had raised Harry? Especially with the implication that James didn't really trust Dumbledore to be the secret keeper, just Sirius? I'm sure that Harry would have been a different child, trust.

Then, note when the orders needed an HQ, who does Dumbledore turn to? Sirius.

Dumbledore only uses people. He isn't as transparent as say Riddle, but his motives aren't pure either. He seems to come from the whole 'well, in order to make omelettes, we gotta break some eggs' school of thought.

If you're interested, I bitched on this a year ago. You can check out the link here.

Re: Hey

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

For all of Sirius' faults, he can be remarkably clear eyed, as evidenced in his turn of action by GoF. Notice, Sirius actually shakes Snape's hand when Dumbledore is all like, 'we have to put away petty school boy rivalries and all that', while Snape is all pulling faces.

I accidentally deleted a comment to your comment above, but I know I was basically saying this is an excellent point. Sirius is described over and over as "reckless" in OotP but he's actually not that reckless. He stays in the house like he's supposed to, only leaving that one time to save Harry. And even at his death, yes he's taunting Bellatrix, but he's understandably a bit overeager when facing one live person who represents the ghosts that have been haunting him for a year. Dumbledore's reading of Kreacher just makes no sense to me and seems insulting to Kreacher as well as Sirius. Maybe a different person would have treated Kreacher differently, but the two have a long history and it was not Sirius' rudeness that sent Kreacher to Narcissa, it was Kreacher's personal loyalty to the Blacks. Sirius did make the mistake of giving him a badly worded order, but that honestly might have happened to anyone. Lock the two of them up alone for months is it really surprising that one time Sirius slipped up there? Dumbledore knowingly put him in a headquarters with an elf who wasn't trustworthy and was connected to everything painful about the house.

In GoF Sirius is one of the most level-headed people--he seems like the only person actually interested in finding out who put Harry's name in the Goblet. His conclusions are wrong, but they're still logical. Meanwhile Dumbledore doesn't seem to be working on the question at all.

The thing with Sirius is he seems to just need to feel like there's something he can focus on, to do. (Even the trouble in the Pensieve is linked to Sirius being "bored.") He also seems galvanized by people, not causes or distant figureheads like Dumbledore. He loved James, he loves Harry. It's more in his nature to care that way--and that's not a bad thing (but it probably makes it all the more painful to be locked in a house where he feels such conflict over his connection to the people who owned it). You need a balance between those who care about the many and those who cherish the one person. Dumbledore in OotP is creepy in the way he seems to reveal he wants to be the one to do both and he can't do that. He's also just no good at the Sirius-kind of focus.

Sirius really never does get into any position of need with Dumbledore, which is a pretty mean feat on Sirius' part. He got out of jail all on his own to do and would have been fine returning to jail if he felt he'd protected Harry. It's kind of interesting, now I think about it, how Snape taunts Sirius with his powerlessness while Sirius calls Snape on being a "lapdog." He's referring to Lucius, but I think it also works as a general criticism coming from Sirius. He's got a dog's loyalty, but the kind that's freely chosen and given to the few people he feels affection for.

The Morfin Gaunt issue

[flowerkat.livejournal.com]

I find this discussion very interesting. One thing that I haven't seen anyone else mention, though, is Morfin Gaunt. Morfin had a trial, he confessed to the Riddle family murders, and he has a memory of killing the Riddles. Open and shut case, right? When Dumbledore investigates the Tom Riddle backstory, he discovers (using extremely fine-tuned Legilimency) that Tom Riddle is the one who is actually responsible. DD then attempted to use this evidence to free Morfin. Now we have Sirius Black. No trial, no confession (insane laughter is not a confession), and no attempt to find any evidence. Just thrown in jail. Dumbledore makes no attempt at further investigation. This seems very suspicious. (Did DD use up all his political capital on Morfin? He doesn't seem to do much for Hagrid or Stugis Podmore when they ended up in Azkaban)

In addition, by the beginning of HBP, it was clear that the Ministry knew Sirius Black was innocent. Just weeks after his death. What was DD doing for those 2 years after he learned the truth? He doesn't seem to have put much effort into clearing his name...perhaps because it would have interfered with his own plans.

Re: The Morfin Gaunt issue

[nemesister.livejournal.com]

In the beginning of HBP it was clear that the Ministry knew that Voldemort was back, just two weeks after Sirius' death. What has Dumbledore done in the year he already knew it? - !

But on the matter of Sirius the Ministry would have surly believed Dumbledore, right? Never mind that the only evidence for his innocence was Harry's claim that Voldemort was back.

[alkari.livejournal.com]

Great post, great discussion. I came here via a recommendation from Eir de Scania. And nice to see so many other people who have such doubts about the 'wonderful' Dumbledore and his treatement of people.

DD obviously did give Sirius a second chance of sorts, after the Prank - he was a member of the first Order, which does imply that DD trusted him. But that of course leads to the blindingly obvious question: Here was a kid who had consistently shown he rebelled against his Dark family, who had been Sorted into Gryffindor against generations of family tradition, who was a member of the Order and had spent four years actively fighting DE's and Volmdeort, who was James' most devoted friend, was Harry's godfather and guardian - and yet DD apparently just 'accepted' that this young man was the very worst sort of traitor? As others have said, Sirius could well have been a leader, or at least a brilliant and loyal second in command - yet he was tossed aside like so much rubbish. Many a young teenage rebel with a streak of recklessness and daring goes on to brilliant success later on in life; they manage to have families, to be responsible members of the community, and to live up to all their obvious potential.

DD's attitude beggars belief, and it certainly calls into question his judgment of people. He seems terribly willing to trust the 'bad' guys who might just have a chance of repenting, yet he singularly fails to trust his own loyal supporters and those who have made the "right" choice from the very beginning. His treatment of Harry after Cedric's death and then Sirius' death is absolutely criminal: for a person who professed to "love" or care deeply for Harry, he really shows no sign of caring for him at all. If he monitored Harry so closely during his childhood, what was to stop him sending a couple of Howlers to Petunia to 'remind' her about child abuse?

I have long thought that DD may have wanted Sirius out of the way, consciously or unconsciously, and hence he didn't try to find out the truth: Harry's survival meant that Harry repesented a weapon which DD could use, and Sirius was the one person who could - and certainly would - have challenged DD's right to use that weapon.

It seems to me that people have been far too willing to trust Dumbledore and not ask questions, because for one reason or another they feel they 'owe' the Headmaster. And as we find out at the end of HBP, many loyal Order members have had doubts and questions about Snape, because they "knew' what he was at school and later - yet DD has never trusted them with his reasons for trusting Snape. DD does not like being questioned, does not like his judgment being challeneged, does not like to admit he has made mistakes.

Dumbledore may represent the Good Side, but he is not an example of an inspiring or good leader - he is far too arrogant, and far too willing to assume that HE has all the answers. He has left Harry, the Order, and his loyal followers, in a terrible mess because of that arrogance.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think it's really only natural that people start to wonder if DD wanted Sirius out of the way, even if it was unconsciously. He just so obviously stands for the opposite of Dumbledore in so many important ways-not just philosophically, even, but in the way he was the person close to all the Potters as family rather than just for what they stood for.

And the thing that's really strange is as you say here, DD is willing to give a chance to actual DEs who show signs of repenting--which is fine, but so often the reason we assume or see that it's not stupid of him to do that is because he understands what they're really about. With Sirius that just becomes this big question mark--what did DD *think* was going on with him? It just isn't enough to say, "Well, somebody had to be the traitor and it looked like it was Sirius," because even if you think he's the traitor you're going to need to know the story of how he became so and why. They get that with Peter--the minute he's unmasked everyone completely understands his motives. With Sirius there's never any motive suggested ever. He's just known as this evil guy. That's so not-Dumbledore usually, but with Sirius suddenly he's fine with it.

[alkari.livejournal.com]

"Sirius actually demanded more from Dumbledore, especially in terms of trying to empower Harry through facts and choices. Sirius couldn't be used by Dumbledore, which is he was tossed aside. In an old house."

How sad - and how very true. Sirius was the one person who could, and would' have challenged Dumbledore's treatment of Harry. If Sirius had not gone after Peter, he would have had the legal right to look after Harry, because even the Wizengamot would have had to recognise his legal appointment as Guardian and godfather. And THAT would not have suited Dumbledore at all.

An independent, and independently minded, Sirius represented a threat to Dumbledore because Sirius would have asked DD to justify his actions. People criticise Sirius for being a rebel, for being reckless, etc as a teeneager - but how many teenagers are exactly that? And for all that horrible year at 12GP, what did Sirius do ... he FOLLOWED ORDERS! Despite his own wishes, his own desperate desire to help Harry and be close to him, Sirius-the-rebel was able to remain in a place he hated, for a cause he believed in. Yes, he let fly verbally at times, and yes he was grumpy - how many people who criticise him would have been sweetness and light in the same situation?

Part of Sirius' whole tragedy in OotP was that he was aboslutely 100% RIGHT - he was right to treat Harry as an adult, he was right to demand that Harry deserved to know the truth about matters, he was right in saying that ignorance never protected any one from the bad guys, he was right in telling Harry that Harry had to find a way to defy Umbridge.

Dumbledore didn't treat Harry as an adult, Dumbledore thought that Harry was best kept in ignorance, Dumbledore didn't believe that Harry should have the truth - and even in HBP he didn't trust Harry. It would be nice to think that if DD looked into his heart after OotP, he would have felt very very guilty that a man died basically because that man was right, and Dumbledore had been wrong.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yes, Sirius is a good example of the way so often in canon people believe in ideas about people that don't always match up exactly to what they do. In GoF Sirius is actually one of the most intelligent people dealing with the situation. We never hear about Dumbledore trying to figure out who put Harry's name in the Goblet. Sirius' own views are pretty logical--they're wrong as it turns out, though mostly because Sirius didn't realize Voldemort's plan could be so illogical! But they're still intelligently thought out. You know Sirius thinks this problem is important and is working on it.

And then in OotP, as you say, Sirius is correct. And he really isn't particularly reckless--he has the moment where he is disappointed that Harry isn't ready to risk danger in meeting him, but it's not like Sirius is pressuring Harry all year to do stupid things. When it counts he usually tells him to watch himself (and actually, isn't that the reason Harry doesn't want to meet Sirius himself? Not because it's a danger to him but because it's a danger to Sirius?). He sucks it up when one of the twins accuses him of just sitting in the house being protected (I think that hurt far more than Snape's accusation of such.) When he does leave the house it's to save Harry. The guy waited patiently in Azkaban for years--he's not quite the loose canon fandom would sometimes have us believe.

And yet once he's dead you'd think he just made one mistake after another according to Dumbledore. The guy who, as I said above, isn't interested in finding out the story behind Traitor!Sirius has plenty of psychological explanation for how Sirius ended up dead! He never mentions to Harry that Sirius was right, it turns out, about keeping things hidden from Harry. That contribution to Sirius' death isn't half as important as his mistreatment of Kreacher, which doesn't add up for me anyway. The mistake with Kreacher was less Sirius being rude to him (not the reason Kreacher hated him) but putting them in that house situation to begin with!