AD's reasoning on Nov. 1 (was Who should raise Harry)

[Kimberly]

No: HPFGUIDX 11512

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Ebony AKA AngieJ" <ebonyink at h...> wrote:
> 
> Would someone who does not subscribe to the "There's Something 
> Special About Harry" theories please explain away PS/SS Ch. 1?  
Even 
> the opening seems to foreshadow his unique status.


I don't think there's nothing special about Harry, just that he 
doesn't have superpowers beyond those of other powerful wizards, so I 
don't know for sure if I qualify, but I'll give it a shot!


> What do you think of the choice he made for Harry's upbringing?
> 
> It has been argued here that the Dursleys were abusive.  Child 
abuse 
> of any form IMO is... well, I'll keep my strong opinions on that 
> subject to myself.  

Aside from the topic at hand:
Couldn't agree with you more.  The Dursleys should be... well, they 
should either turn around completely or burn!  Sorry.  


But today I realized that it was the wise Albus 
> Dumbledore that *chose* for Harry to live with the Dursleys.  
(Quick 
> rhetorical question--does the Hogwarts Headmaster usually function 
as 
> the Department of Social Services equivalent in such cases?  Or is 
> there a Ministry agency that usually handles such cases?)


I know it was mean to be rhetorical, but that's a good question.  
Maybe it had something to do with the Fidelus thing?  Maybe not 
everyone knew where to find them even after Voldemort trashed the 
house?  Dunno - it is odd.  


> My question--did Dumbledore make the wisest choice possible?  Did 
>he make the *only* choice possible?
 

Hard to say - we haven't seen what his alternatives were.


> If there is nothing special about Harry, and if Voldemort is not 
evil 
> incarnate in this fictional universe... why did Harry grow up in 
that 
> cupboard under the stairs?  


I thought Voldemort *was* pretty close to evil incarnate, which would 
explain the need to keep Harry hidden.  As for the Dursleys, 
Dumbledore had no way of knowing they would be abusive, he only knew 
they were his family.


Wouldn't adoption by sympathetic Muggles 
> have been a plausible solution?  


If he hadn't had family to go to, yes.



> Why did Harry have to grow up with a blood relative in the first 
> place?

<I snipped somewhere in here, but I forgot exactly where>


It's traditionally what happens to orphans when there's family, 
especially if their designated guardians are in prison.


> Why was it so important that this particular child lived?


I'd like to think it's important that *all* children live.  

 
> I'm reminded of other children who were similarly protected in 
other 
> narratives.  All of those children were *different* in some way.


Harry is different.  He was the catalyst to the downfall of the most 
evil wizard ever.  I just don't think it happened because he's got 
super powers.  You mentioned that the opening seemed to foreshadow 
his status.  I think you're right, he's "The Boy Who Lived".

Kimberly