Harry at the Dursleys

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 118472


Carol earlier: <snipped by Alla>
> I think that's a misreading. What Dumbledore actually says, after
> explainig why he placed Harry with his aunt instead of a Wizarding 
> family that "would have been *honored* and delighted to raise [him] 
> as a son" (OoP Am. ed. 835) (his priority, as you say, was to keep 
> Harry alive,835), is 
> "Five years ago, then, you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor 
> as well-nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and
> healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy 
> as I could have haoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my plan
was working well" (837).
> As I see it, he's *glad* that Harry is not a pampered little prince, 
> a condition he *contrasts* with Harry's normalcy. 
> 
> 
> Alla responded:
> 
> It is not a misreading, Carol, it is how I read this quote. It is 
> one of the possible readings. As Lupinlore said earlier, we are 
> missing the tone of Dumbledore's voice.
> 
> I read "but as normal boy as I could have hoped under 
> circumstances " as Dumbledore's regret about the fact that under 
> those circimstances Harry could not have grown up as normal boy, who 
> could be a little bit spoiled and loved.

Carol:
Sigh. You're right. We're missing the tone of voice and it's possible
to read it your way, but given the context that you snipped, I read it
differently. for one thing, I don't think spoiled (or pampered) is the
same thing as loved. Look at Dudley, for example.

Carol, hoping that *someone* will go upthread and respond to the idea
that Dumbledore was right about not raising Harry as a "pampered
little prince"