Threatening the Dursleys at the station (was Re: Why not BRIBE ...)

[kmcbears1]

No: HPFGUIDX 123118


> >Lupinlore: 
> >  If it's OK to threaten the
> > Dursleys NOW in order to get better treatment for Harry, why on 
> Earth
> > wasn't it OK before now?  In other words, if it is OK for the 
> Dursleys
> > to be threatened at the end of OOTP, why didn't Dumbledore do this
> > long ago?
> > 
> Renee:
> The cynical answer: It has come to JKR's attention that the 
> Wizarding World in general and Dumbledore in particular have been 
> criticized for leaving Harry with the Dursleys without ensuring he 
> was treated well. Now she's trying to remedy this for the sake of 
> greater realism.
> 
> The non-cynical answer: For the first time in the series Harry has 
> suffered defeat despite his heroic attempt to rescue a loved one. 
> For the first time he has consciously suffered a personal loss. 
> Never before has he been in such need for support. That's why this 
> is the moment he gets it.

kmc adds:
At the end of book 1 Hagrid gave Harry an equalizer with the Dursleys 
with the statement about the Dursleys not knowing Harry could not do 
magic.  

The beginning of book 2 Harry is imprisoned by the Dursleys and needs 
rescuing.  This act puts the Dursleys on notice that Harry is not 
alone.

In books 3, 4 and beginning of 5, Harry has had the threat of his 
godfather to hold over the Dursely's.  

The "reminder" at the end of OotP is just that.  A reminder to both 
Harry and the Dursleys that even though Sirius is dead.  Harry is not 
alone.

Just my knut on the subject,
KMc