![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
in the first book jkr intended dumbledore to come across as a benign character (i never liked him awarding the points to gryffindor, so i wasn't so fond of him even then :) later we learned that he withheld crucial information: he could have explained severus' role to harry at various stages in the books without revealing snape's infatuation with lily, but never did.
on the other hand we learned that the one character jkr wanted us to distrust/dislike was good all along and sacrificed in fact his whole life for his atonement.
(we even learned to pity voldemort: how he grew up unloved and unwanted. it's somewhat easier then to understand his actions.)
when i compared dumbledore to a general i didn't mean this as a praise. in the scene where snape mourned lily and dumbledore used snape's distraught state to bind him, then still young and vulnerable, to himself i could not help but notice that dumbledore's methods were quite ruthless.
in his eyes it could not have been beneficial if snape and harry had developed a relationship. and it easily could have happened, despite snape's antagonistic stance. maybe i'm reading too much into snape, but his attitude stemmed from him anticipating hostility: because of his past experiences he expected people to dislike/fear/hate him by default.
but if harry, as lily's child - the only reminder of lily - would have gotten past these emotional barriers (as only children might be able to) snape might have developed a paternal bond towards harry. this again would have limited dumbledore's influence on harry and snape.
i am not sure if dumbledore created the antagonism between harry and snape but he did not much to repair the relationship, when he easily could do so. although he insisted that he trusted snape he never presented any proof, which frustrated harry (and considering the responsibilities heaped upon him he was right to be angered and frustrated) and led him into doubting dumbledore's judgement.
while dumbledore might have not intended the full blown hatred between snape and harry i believe he did intend to keep them apart, at a certain distance, so he was able to exact his influence on both of them.
on the other hand we learned that the one character jkr wanted us to distrust/dislike was good all along and sacrificed in fact his whole life for his atonement.
(we even learned to pity voldemort: how he grew up unloved and unwanted. it's somewhat easier then to understand his actions.)
when i compared dumbledore to a general i didn't mean this as a praise. in the scene where snape mourned lily and dumbledore used snape's distraught state to bind him, then still young and vulnerable, to himself i could not help but notice that dumbledore's methods were quite ruthless.
in his eyes it could not have been beneficial if snape and harry had developed a relationship. and it easily could have happened, despite snape's antagonistic stance. maybe i'm reading too much into snape, but his attitude stemmed from him anticipating hostility: because of his past experiences he expected people to dislike/fear/hate him by default.
but if harry, as lily's child - the only reminder of lily - would have gotten past these emotional barriers (as only children might be able to) snape might have developed a paternal bond towards harry. this again would have limited dumbledore's influence on harry and snape.
i am not sure if dumbledore created the antagonism between harry and snape but he did not much to repair the relationship, when he easily could do so. although he insisted that he trusted snape he never presented any proof, which frustrated harry (and considering the responsibilities heaped upon him he was right to be angered and frustrated) and led him into doubting dumbledore's judgement.
while dumbledore might have not intended the full blown hatred between snape and harry i believe he did intend to keep them apart, at a certain distance, so he was able to exact his influence on both of them.