Harry at the Dursleys

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 118489


Carol wrote:
> > 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 asI could have hoped 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....
 
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.


SSSusan:
While I agree w/ this assessment of what DD was likely thinking 
regarding the "pampered little prince" & placing Harry w/ the 
Dursleys...and have, in fact quite recently, defended that action... 
I must confess that something just struck me.  Perhaps it was Tammy's 
mentioning "like Draco".  

Tammy argued that DD was thinking about the prophecy when he decided 
Harry should be kept out of the WW because he was thinking about 
Harry's having to kill Voldy someday, and he wanted a child who would 
be most able to do that, hence, *not* a spoiled, pampered, 
egotistical, puffed up brat.  I've thought this was part of it, too--
along w/ DD's believing that the only truly *safe* place for Harry 
was w/ his blood relative.  [Alas, not totally safe, as it turns out, 
but safe from Voldy & his henchmen.]

But what struck me just now was that by leaving Harry in the Muggle 
World, with no indication that he's magical, while this likely 
ensures the no pampered prince part of the equation, DD's also 
ensuring that young Harry will *not* be doing what Draco [and other 
WW kids such as the Weasleys] are likely doing--learning magic!  If 
Harry's going to have to be skilled enough to defeat Voldy at some 
undetermined date in the future, it's an interesting call to *remove* 
Harry from any opportunity to learn any kind of magic at all until 
age 11.  

Was that an awfully big gamble that it would take Voldy at least that 
long to return?

Was it more important that Harry not be a pampered little prince than 
that he get the chance to learn some magic?

Or does this simply point to the notion that the *main* reason for 
placing Harry w/ the Dursleys was his protection?


Siriusly Snapey Susan, who's fully aware that some people would add 
the question "Or does this mean DD's ESE?" but I won't go there. :-)