Dumbledore and the Dursleys

[Alex boyd]

No: HPFGUIDX 123143


I have (what I think is) a new side to the "why didn't Dumbledore *do* 
something about the Dursleys?" question:

He didn't know quite how bad they were, because he wasn't paying attention.  
he wasn't paying attention not because he's negligent, but because there are 
a *lot* of orphans in the wizarding world, and the Headmaster of the (best 
or only, take your pick) wizarding school in Britain doesn't have the time 
to make sure that they are all sleeping in proper bedrooms and getting as 
many birthday presents as their foster siblings.  We know that loads of 
people died in Voldemort's first uprising, and plenty of them probably had 
just enough time to have kids before they did.  All of those orphans had to 
have places to live.  Harry probably isn't the only one to end up living 
with Muggle relatives.  I don't think is particularly realistic to expect 
Dumbledore to watch over all of them, and why should Harry be special?  
(Because he defeated Voldemort, of course, but that particular situation is 
taken care of by the blood magic protection thingy.)

To extend the arguement that Harry ought to have been removed from the home 
because he was emotionally neglected and treated in an unfair manner, are we 
then going to say that Dumbledore ought to have done something about 
Neville's grandmother undermining his confidence and convincing him he'd 
never be a good enough wizard to go to Hogwarts?  Should he have done 
something about Draco Malfoy being raised by two Dark wizards who turned him 
into a spoiled brat?  What about Ron Weasley--should Dumbledore have been 
monitoring that situation to make sure that his parents could afford to 
provide everything he needed?

Of course not, because it's not Dumbledore's job to make sure that all 
wizarding children everywhere are recieving appropriate nurturance.

"But!"  I hear you saying.  "Dumbledore left him at the Dursley's house.  
Doesn't that make him responsible?"  Maybe, but I sort of think that that 
scene was motivated more by economy than a sense that Dumbledore ought to 
have a continuing responsibility to Harry during his childhood--JKR probably 
didn't want to invent a Wizarding Department of Social Welfare just for that 
one scene.  Or, to Watson it, if I offered to drive a friend's orphaned 
child to his new guardians (maybe I'm close friends with this theoretic 
deceased person, maybe I just happened to be going that way, I don't know),  
I wouldn't feel that that gave me the right to meddle in the new family's 
business for the next eleven years.

Alex