Dumbledore & Dursleys-What DD Knew

[snow15145]

No: HPFGUIDX 123374


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" <bob.oliver at c...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> > 
> > Betsy:
> > So Dumbledore is as equally guilty as the Dursleys in Harry not 
> > getting a gameboy.  He is evil!  The biggest thing Harry had to 
> > suffer was lack of love from the Dursleys.  Can anyone force 
anyone 
> > to love?  (Though, one could argue that the Dursleys tried to 
stamp 
> > out Harry's magic because they did care for him.)  
> > 
> > And I do wonder what you think the Death Eaters would do to Harry 
if 
> > they got their hands on him.  Serve him cake?
> > 
> > Betsy
> 
> The biggest thing?  And just how big is that?  I would say 
enormous. 
> Witness Harry's documented inability to trust others, particularly
> adults.  Witness the effects on him of the summer before OOTP. 
> Witness his ensnarement at the Mirror of Erised.  And on.  And on. 
> And on.
> 
> As for being kicked out and ending up with the Deatheaters, how big 
a
> possibility was that?  Petunia put up with scolding from a Howler 
and
> being threatened by the Order without putting Harry out, which ain't
> very good evidence that she wouldn't have buckled and done as she 
was
> told had Dumbledore chosen to exert himself earlier.
> 
> So, on one side we have a couple of pathetic examples of Muggledom. 
> On the other, the Greatest Wizard in the World.  And we're seriously
> asked to believe that DD has no way of exerting pressure on the
> Dursleys at all?
> 
> Granted the Dursleys MIGHT have put Harry out.  Yet they didn't 
after
> the Howler nor after being threatened by the Order.  Strange for
> people who are so ready to kick the boy out.  No, until we are
> SPECIFICALLY told otherwise the high-hand in the situation seems to
> reside with DD, and until we are SPECIFICALLY told about why he did
> not use that hand to alleviate Harry's suffering, he remains 
complicit.
> 
> Oh, and the "Not getting a gameboy" isn't even worthy of a reply.
> 
> 
> Lupinlore

Snow:

When push came to shove, or neglect became abuse, yes Dumbledore did 
step in, didn't he? When Vernon attempted to choke Harry, the 
protection did stop him, didn't it? When the true abuse like 
attempting to throw Harry out leaving him unprotected was evident, it 
didn't happen, did it?


What do you want to see from Dumbledore, the man has already cried 
(only time) as a product of what he has been made to put Harry 
through. Dumbledore has already apologized for what he was made to 
do. Dumbledore had to use the protection Lily laid upon Harry to 
ensure his OVERALL safety. Dumbledore has acknowledged that Harry was 
neither the most nourished boy nor the happiest boy but
really BIG--
but
"was alive and healthy" and yes protected against any TRUE abuse. 
The kind that induces long lasting affects
like death.  

Yes, Harry was seen to be healthy when he first entered Hogwarts 
School of Witchcraft and Wizardly, and he was! Harry does not 
display, even now after everything he has gone through, any lasting 
affects from his so called abusive days with the Dursley's. 

Conclusion is Harry does not display any long-term affects from his 
less than adequate upbringing because he was protected given the 
entire picture. You can't just focus on the tree when the entire 
forest is burning, such is Harry, you can't just focus on one aspect 
of neglect and ignore his entire safety. What did you save him from 
if he is dead? Are you willing to risk his life over neglect or 
ensure his life only when push comes to shove and Harry is faced with 
possible extinction? 

Snow