[HPforGrownups] Re: Clue for the "ancient protection?"

[Kelly Grosskreutz]

No: HPFGUIDX 57666


> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kelly Grosskreutz"  >
>
>
> >>> I did wonder about how well Harry would've been protected had he
> been being watched by Marge or Yvonne.  If Petunia knew they would
> be incapable of protecting him, I find it interesting that she would
> not just say so to Vernon.  If she isn't saying so to Vernon, then
> there is at least one thing she is keeping from him.  I'd love to
> know what else she knows but hasn't told anyone, even her husband.
> Because for some reason, I find it hard to believe that the
> protection would extend so far as to one of Petunia's Muggle
> friends, even if Petunia did entrust Harry to her care.<<<
>
Ali:

> I agree with you that Petunia does know more than she's letting on,
> and I also like to imagine that Petunia is being this horrible and
> abusive to Harry because it is for his own good. However, the
> evidence is that she didn't like him and what he stood for even
> before she met him, and her future behaviour is in line with that
> feeling. It certainly seems plausible that the hate surrounding
> Harry contributes to his protection, just as Lily's love did.
>
Kelly (me):

No argument here.  Petunia does not like Harry.  One line you said did stand
out to me:  "Petunia is being this horrible and abusive to Harry because it
is for his own good."  Sounds like arguments I've seen before for Snape's
behavior.  Snape also hates Harry.  Doesn't mean he won't protect him with
his life.  Perhaps Petunia is much the same way.  I'm not even going to
speculate on hatred being a part of the protection, because I have no idea.

Ali:

> Harry has been allowed to be by himself - after the London Zoo
> incident when he's finally allowed out of his cupboard, he walks
> round outside, by himself to escape Dudley and his gang. I think
> that Harry does still have residual protection when he is away from
> his family, but it reduces over time.

Kelly (me):

How far away from home does Harry go, though?  We never hear about him going
clear to the other end of town, for instance.  I'm sure DD took into account
that Harry might go outside to play sometimes when preparing the protection
for Harry.  That's not the same as leaving him home by himself for a couple
of hours while the Dursleys go to the zoo, which could be quite a ways away,
much farther away than Harry wanders when outside.

Ali:
>
> The key thing about Dudley's birthday is that, it is illegal for
> kids to be left home alone under the age of 12 - and Harry was only
> 10. The Dursleys are keen to be seen to law-abiding. From the
> Dursleys viewpoint Harry is a danger. A house has been blown up
> around him, he dyes his teacher's wig blue and he regrows his own
> hair. He is a danger in himself and a magnet for trouble. He must
> not be left alone in anything the Dursleys value. He can though, go
> outside by himself.

Kelly (me):

Good point, and this could be another factor in their decision.  But I still
think Petunia's word choice should not be ignored. She specifically mentions
coming back and finding the house in ruins.  She does not say, "And come
back and find out you've blown up the house?"  The first statement just
gives a potential state for the house, but does not say that Harry will be
the one to destroy the house.  If she had said the latter, then it would
have shown she was afraid Harry's powers might escape him and he might blow
up the house for some reason.  I think her word choice in that section was
key.

Kelly Grosskreutz
http://www.idcnet.com/~ivanova