Dumbledore & Dursleys-What DD Knew

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 123302



> SSSusan:
> The key phrase in what you say, for me, is "nothing JKR or anyone 
> else has said is good enough yet to get him off."  But I'm about 
> 100% certain that the way I'm thinking of that phrase is mightily 
> different than the way you are.
> 
> I think I *can* still see DD choosing to leave Harry there, even if 
> he knew how he was being treated, but what I'd need to know is, DID 
> he check back?  If he did and decided what was happening was still 
> preferable to the risks Harry would face in the WW, I might be able 
> to live with that.  For me, I'm more distressed by the notion that 
> he might not have checked back at all.  And *that's* the part I'd 
> really like to have JKR explain.
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan

IMO you are setting up a false set of choices, Susan.  That is, you
seem to be implying that Albus' only choices are to leave Harry at the
Dursleys and not interfere, or else remove him from the Dursleys and
place him in the WW.  I think what Alla and I and others are saying is
that even if the WW was too dangerous, WHY DIDN'T DD MAKE THE DURSLEYS
ACT BETTER?  It seems very difficult to conceive that there was no way
he could put pressure on them, UNLESS he had to enter into some kind
of binding agreement NOT to interfere.  And THAT I think is what we
want to know, WAS ALBUS PREVENTED FROM INTERVENING?  If so, then the
morals of the situation slide in one direction.  If not, he just CHOSE
not to intervene for whatever reason, then they slide radically in the
other direction.


Lupinlore