Harry and starvation

[Janet Anderson]

No: HPFGUIDX 123275

Betsy said:

>I have problems with the word "starved" too.  Harry was not overfed,
>that is true.  And I think he wasn't allowed seconds, because they
>were given to Dudley (though I don't think that was any kind of favor
>to Dudley in the end).  But I don't recall him actually being faint
>from hunger, and his growth rate hasn't been stunted. I'm not trying
>to say the Dursley's were perfectly wonderful, but I think they trod
>a very fine line without tipping into actual, actionable (and I mean
>legally) abuse.  After all, what would the neighbors think?

I wonder if there is an echo here of the protagonist in C. S. Lewis's book 
*The Horse and his Boy.*  The character is an orphan, treated like a slave 
by his foster father, and it's plain from clues dropped in the text that he 
does not get enough to eat. (For example, the talking horse suggests that he 
eat grass; he says he can't; the horse says "How do you know; did you ever 
try?" and the boy replies that yes, he has tried, and he couldn't ... as far 
as I know, Harry was never hungry enough to try to eat grass; he even shared 
the vegetables in his soup with Hedwig.)

The fact that the character's foster father doesn't treat him as he should 
is not glossed over. BUT the fact that the character is tough, wiry, and 
able to endure hardships does help him in his adventures.  The bad 
intentions of the callous foster father don't invalidate the long-run 
benefits the character received.


Janet Anderson
(who thinks that Dumbledore's first and foremost priority was to kee Harry 
*alive* and safe from Voldemort and his minions)