the Dursleys- it's the "buts" (long)

[quigonginger]

No: HPFGUIDX 118498


I have been watching the Dursley abuse thread(s) with interest.  
Insert here the usual disclaimer that this is only my opinion and 
that all others are completely free to agree, disagree, be confused 
or any combination thereof.

You know what bugs me about the Dursleys?  It's the "buts".  
Everything that I can think of that they have done to Harry would be 
acceptable in other circumstances, "but" they weren't in those 
circumstances, and they did what they did out of a spirit of 
meanness.  Some examples (as they pop into my head, but trying to go 
in order):

The cupboard.  It's not a bad thing for a child to have a cramped 
room even if it has spiders.  When I was young, I had a rollaway in 
my dad's office.  Then I moved into an unfinished, unheated basement 
(in North Dakota!) where there were plenty of spiders (I tried to 
keep them as pets-didn't work) using old bedsheets hung from the 
floor joists as walls.  Abusive?  Nope.  My 78-year-old Grandma had 
moved in and there was no room for me.  Being able to spend that time 
with her and get to know her before she died was worth it.

BUT!  The Dursleys didn't send Harry to the closet because there was 
no room.  They had a spare room and a guest room, and in a pinch, he 
could have shared with Dudley.  They didn't do it out of necessity, 
it was out of meanness.


The day the Masons came.  Harry put in a full days' labour.  Then he 
was given 2 slices of bread and a lump of cheese.  Now having a kid 
work around the house to get ready for company isn't a bad thing.  
Neither is having what amounts to a cheese sandwich for supper.  

BUT!  Harry did all the work as Dudley sat around eating ice cream.  
Couldn't Dudley have gotten some chores too?  Dudley got a nice 
supper with the guests.  Couldn't Harry have gotten a bit to take up 
to his room?    Nope, they worked him full out and gave him a paltry 
(by comparison) supper out of meanness.  


Harry never got a card of present for his birthday.  There are some 
who, for religious reasons, don't celebrate birthdays.  In some parts 
of the world whole cultures don't celebrate them.  In some families 
they are just not a big deal.  Not getting a card or present isn't 
the end of the world.

BUT!  Dudley had darn near 40 presents plus a trip to the zoo for his 
11th birthday.  'Nuff said.  Pure, spiteful meanness.


After the Masons' visit.  (I'll admit this is an extreme one.)  The 
catflap and the bars on his windows may have been acceptable for 
someone who was dangerous.  I have worked with people who can't 
always control their actions.  I learned what they call "theraputic 
intervension" which means keeping them from knocking your block off 
without hurting them.  *Never*, even in the most severe cases, did we 
confine anyone to a room and bar the windows.   There have been cases 
where this was necessary, but (in the US anyway) you have to have a 
court order.  And even then, you heat the darn soup!  Did the 
Dursleys see Harry as dangerous?  Sure, because of magic.  Did he 
ever do any uncontrolled magic?  (Remember, this is before the Large 
Marge fiasco.)  Well, there was the snake at the zoo, and there may 
have been other things when he was little.  I also have to wonder 
about Petunia's comment about coming back and finding the house blown 
up when Harry suggested they leave him when they went to the zoo.  So 
they thought he was dangerous.

BUT!  Did they think he was *all of a sudden* going to turn *that* 
dangerous?  If they had thought he was *that* dangerous all along, 
those windows would have had bars long before.  No, they weren't just 
imprisioning him, they were punishing him, and they did it in a very 
mean way.  

  
St. Brutus' Secure Centre for Incurably Criminal Boys.  You gotta 
admit, they had to think of something.  I'm sure Hermione's parents 
had to think of something too.  All the Muggleborn kids had to.  I 
would bet that Hermione's parents said it was an exclusive school for 
gifted children.

BUT!  The name says it all.  Have to explain his absence?  Make it as 
mean as you can get. 

I could go on, but I think you have caught where I'm coming from (if 
you've read this far).  It wasn't the things they did per se, it was 
the reason they had for doing it.  That's where my goat gets gotten.  
They could have done better.  Far better.  I wouldn't have expected 
them to treat him like Dudley, but for as much as they spoiled 
Dudley, they could have showed a bit of decency to Harry and their 
favouritism would have still shown through loud and clear.  They had 
to twist the knife, so to speak.  

I know there's a fine line where abuse is concerned, and whether or 
not what they did constitutes abuse depends on your definition, but 
to me one thing is clear:  They had abusive intentions.  And that's 
bad enough in my eyes.

Ginger, who will give them points for creativity on the St. Brutus 
thing.  

Wishing everyone who is celebrating Thanksgiving a happy one.  Safe 
travels if you are going anywhere.  I'll be back Friday!  Bye!