Petunia;well adjusted Harry

[Hannah]

No: HPFGUIDX 114131

> > Leah wrote:
> > 
> > Judging by Petunia's treatment of Dudley, or Mummy's diddikins, 
> > Petunia may well be one of those women who love the baby stage 
but can't cope effectively with rearing children.  We also know that 
>Vernon is Managing Director of the drill firm (can't remember its 
> > name) and therefore presumably spent the early days of their 
> marriage  concentrating on climbing the slippery pole at work.  
This would give 
> > Petunia plenty of opportunities to, as you say, do her baby care 
bit with Harry (adding to Dudley's jealousy).  I suspect things got 
> worse when Harry ceased to be a cute baby and therefore attractive 
to Petunia, looked more  like James, impacted more on Vernon and of 
> > course, started showing signs of that thing they didn't talk 
about. 
> 
> Finwitch rplied:
> Let's not forget that Harry probably got lots of love from his 
> *parents* (being born on Last of July, 1980 and the Night 
happening on the last of October 1981). That's a year and a half... 
So he'd have the necessary touch-experience without Petunia.
> 
> Secondly, Petunia *screamed* when she saw Harry for the first 
time. Not exactly a reaction of someone who'd actually care for 
Harry!
> 
> Harry's magic could have cleaned/banished the nappie instead of 
> Petunia changing him, and summoned food to Harry... (Dunno what 
> Dudley saw with the Dementor, but his food flying to Harry's mouth 
> from the spoon... I think that would upset Dudley?)

Hannah now: I agree with Leah on this one.  I'm not exactly standing 
up for Petunia - it is undeniable that the Dursleys treated Harry 
badly - but they must have provided at least some care for Harry, 
for him to have survived.  Bear in mind that Petunia is obsessed 
with appearances and what the neighbours think.  She isn't going to 
be too cruel to a baby in her care.

To answer Finwitch, I would say that I would scream if I opened my 
door in the morning and found a baby on my doorstep - from shock 
rather than from any malice towards the child.  I think most people 
would!

I doubt that Harry's magic was responsible for banishing any 
nappies, or being his only means of getting food.  
Harry's 'hysterical magic' seems to kick in when he is very 
emotional or in danger, not for routine things like needing 
changing.  And it does say in PS/SS (p92, UK paperback) that the 
Dursley's had never starved Harry.  Never let him have as much as he 
wanted, given his share of treats to Dudley, but not actually 
starved him.

I agree that Petunia took in Harry as a baby, when he was at least 
quite cute.  She probably had some sort of vicious pleasure in 
thinking that she was taking over her sister's role, and that she 
could bring the boy up, squashing the magic out of him. As he grew 
up, she realised that it wasn't going to be as easy as all that.

She's a lot like Snape, in that she seems unable to put aside her 
feelings about someone long dead (in her case Lily) and behave in an 
adult way towards that person's child.  She hasn't moved on from her 
childhood and adolescent emotions about her sister and magic. 
Whatever else we find out about Lily and James, they must have been 
very strong personalities to have such an influence on those who 
knew them.

Hannah