Petunia;well adjusted Harry

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 114154

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.  

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.
 
Hannah: 

> 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.
> 
> 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.  


SSSusan:
I can't imagine that Petunia loved the baby stage when it came to 
Harry.  Also, as Finwitch pointed out, Harry was 15 months old when 
he arrived.  This is hardly an infant; he was likely already toddling 
around.  And, frankly, not all 15-month-olds are cute!  Of course, 
*mine* were ;-) but that's a mother talking!  Most parents think 
their own kids are precious, but if the care of a child you DO NOT 
WANT is thrust upon you, then I'd wager that cuteness doesn't factor 
in one whit.  

I'm not sure I agree with Hannah about comparing Snape to Petunia.  
For one, Snape *isn't* always successful at setting aside his 
feelings.  He is on occasion [witness the Quidditch save of Harry], 
but not on others [evidence:  DD's remarks about Snape teaching 
Occlumency].  If Petunia was motivated by anything to treat Harry 
decently, I would have guessed Hannah's first point would be it--how 
the neighbors would react if she didn't at least keep up the 
appearance of his care.  

OTOH, given that Harry lived in the cupboard under the stairs for 
many years, and he *could* have "outed" the Dursleys for that little 
gem of "parenting," Petunia must not have been quite so worried that 
she let all her decisions be swayed by neighbor reaction.  Also 
consider the clothes she put Harry in.  I wonder how many sizes too 
big they were and how ridiculous he looked in them?  Yet Miss "What 
Will The Neighbors Say" Petunia still allowed him to wear them in 
public.  

My guess is that Petunia gave Harry the absolute minimal amount of 
care to keep him alive, and that's about it.  

As for the original question [I think it was in this thread!] of how 
Harry turned out so normally, we just don't know, but I doubt it was 
Petunia's doing.  I suspect those first 15 months w/ his parents were 
extremely important.  Beyond that, perhaps his natural temperament 
just makes him more resilient than most others [Tom Riddle, anyone?].

Siriusly Snapey Susan