Harry at the Dursleys

[Tammy]

No: HPFGUIDX 118484


> Carol wrote:
> 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. This attitude goes
> goes along with his remarks in SS/PS chapter 1 to McGonagall about
> raising him among Muggles so he won't know his own history before he's
> ready to handle it.
> 


Tammy responds:

I too see Dumbledore's comments as him being glad he's not a pampered
little prince. Actually I think "pampered little prince" can actually
be translated from Dumbledore's nice version to the not so nice
"spoiled little brat", which is what I think Dumbledore meant, but is
way too nice to use. 

The way I see it, Dumbledore was afraid that Harry would come out
ending up like Lockhart or Draco, who are both spoiled and pampered
brats. 

If Harry had been raised in a wizarding home, where the fame could
change his personality and make him spoiled and pampered, would he
then still be able to be the one to go out and kill LV as the prophecy
seems to indicate? If you consider that Dumbledore knew the prophecy
and probably read it as "Harry has to kill LV," then Dumbledore
probably feared Harry going to a wizarding home where he would end up
being spoiled and pampered, and not learning the harsh lessons he
needed to learn.

-Tammy