Rule-breaking/Father-figures

[marinafrants]

No: HPFGUIDX 38130

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "finwitch" <finwitch at y...> wrote:

> > McGonagall (and Dumbledore, on whose authority she's
> > acting) is more than qualified to set and enforce the rules for
what
> > the students in her house get to do, and to decide what needs to
be
> > done to protect a 13-year-old boy who's in her care.
> >  It *is* about
> > Harry being exempt for his safety -- and not just his own safety,
> > either; as far as the adults knew, he was being targeted by a 
> powerful
> > Dark Wizard who has already demonstrated a willingness to kill
large
> > numbers of innocent bystanders.
> 
> Why didn't McGonagall tell Harry that? Harry was protesting against 
> rule - tried to explain about Dursleys neglect of him (denying him 
> things every child is entitled to, like understanding) but he was 
> ignored.

McGonagall had valid safety reasons for ignoring Harry's request. 
Yes, she should've addressed this issue properly with Harry, and she
didn't.  It was wrong of her not to explain exactly why she was
enforcing the rule.  That doesn't mean it was wrong of her to enforce
it in the first place.


> >  Yes, the situation was painful and
> > unfair for Harry.
> 
> "What isn't fair and just can not be law" - from instructions to 
> judges in a Finnish Law-book. If we're judging Harry's behaviour, 
> I'll take *that* on account.

"What isn't fair and just" is a question that needs to be determined
by more than one teenage boy's emotional reaction.  The situation was
not simplistic.  There is nothing inherently unfair about a rule that
requires children to get a guardian's permission to go on an outing. 
In Harry's case, the rule did put him at an unfair disadvantage -- but
I have no doubt that if Black hadn't been on the loose, McGonagall
and/or Dumbledore would've given him permission to go.  Since Black
*was* on the loose, it was fair of them to make him stay -- but unfair
to fail to properly explain their reasons.  This combination of pros
and cons means that this is not a situation where Harry was justified
in just arbitrarily tossing the rule book out the window.

Marina
rusalka at ix.netcom.com