Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP)

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 118158


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" 
<bob.oliver at c...> wrote:

> The question is about why didn't interfere with the Dursleys' 
abuse.   I, like you, can't buy the whole "life's lessons" argument.  
Nor can  I believe that Dumbledore is restrained by his 
"goodness."  It's hard  to argue under any reasonable definition 
of goodness that Dumbledore  would somehow be less noble 
for restraining the Dursleys than for  letting them "make their own 
choices."  <

> 
> The only definitions of goodness that could apply here are 1)he 
> genuinely fears that if he intervenes it would lead to Harry's 
death, 
> or 2) he feels if he intervenes it would be bad for the wizarding 
> world. 

Pippin:
But what about 3) if he intervenes it will just make things worse 
for Harry?

It would be nice if somebody from the WW could gently counsel 
the Dursleys, but they're far too terrified of wizards for that--and 
the wizards are just too culturally different to know how to be 
anything but terrifying to Muggles. 
 
 We saw what happened when the WW intervened to see that 
Harry got his letters. The Dursleys went nuts. Vernon was ready 
to kill somebody, and if Hagrid hadn't broken the gun, it might 
well have been Petunia -- and where would Harry have been 
then?

Pippin