Etiquette WAS Re: polite Dumbledore?

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 142663

I wrote: <snipped argument pro-Dumbledore's manners at the Durselys in
Chapter 3 HBP>
 
Lealess replied:
> The reason this argument doesn't hold water for me is that the
> correspondence is all one-sided.  It isn't as if the Dursleys were
> asking for Dumbledore's interference or his blessings.  They didn't
> want to be part of the wizarding world, full stop.  They weren't
> writing to him.  In fact, he seemed to know that they wouldn't 
> really welcome his visit.  He could have just picked Harry up and   
> gone. But he had to do more.
> 
> You see, I had someone stalking me once, <snip> This person's 
> respectful forebearance in not
> turning a threat into reality -- I am not grateful for that.
> 
> I am not saying that Dumbledore is a stalker or malicious per se
> (though I am wondering what he is forebearing on -- his judgment or
> wrath? his wizarding prowess?). 

Valky:
Answering your last question first, when I say that Dumbledore
exercised forbearance with the Dursleys I am saying that he did it in
not calling on them for genial visits that were clearly not wanted, or
writing them with a bunch of unnecessary cordialities throughout the
time that they took care of Harry. I guess you could say he refrained
from stalking, as it were. However, Harry clearly needed Dumbledore in
his life, there is nothing untoward about that, except that the
Dursleys do not approve of Wizardkind (or Harry), if it was otherwise
untoward, then sure the Dursleys could and would exercise their polite
refusal of his advance into their lives, and would not be remiss in
doing so. 

But Dumbledore's intrusion was two important things 1. It was a
*necessary* part of their (informal?) contractual relationship (ie
Dumbledore had come to tell them it would shortly end). 2. It was
*one* small ask in 15 years of a 'seemingly' understood mutual
acquaintance. 

As of OOtP I am under the impression that Dumbledore didn't like the
arrangement any more than the Dursleys did, but he says himself,
Petunia was the only best hope for the world. In the context of the
story, I think Dumbledore has to be admitted to have done OK with the
lot that was his responsibility, of course he couldn't be perfect, but
I don't envy him the opportunity to prove how perfectly such a huge
responsibility can be dealt with. What I am saying is that
Dumbledore's respect for the Dursleys was sincere, it must have been,
Petunia is just short of a WW hero for having done so unwittingly what
she has done in keeping Harry alive and in her home, by keeping her
secrets. As awful as she is, she's extremely important, and she may
have just *saved* the Wizard World. I can't imagine Dumbledore not
having genuine and sincere respect for that fact. I am positive that a
character like Dumbledore would have held the slim hope for all those
fifteen years that the Dursleys would eventually come to a day when
they could accept the thanks of the wizard kind for their contribution
and know how they had saved their own world. 

If they only realised. O_o

I personally won't compare Dumbledore to any kind of stalker. We
simply do know he was not malicious for a start, his intentions were
entirely above board. I honestly think the Dursleys knew that as well
as we do. He didn't interfere half as much as some would have. 


Lealess:
> But he is someone who feels his
> concerns override everyone else's and his decisions are the only 
> ones that matter.  

Valky:
But I think in this case I think he was right, don't you? 
He couldn't exactly bring an ownerless Kreacher to an unprotected
street corner could he? It was important business needing to be
addressed without delay. Neither could he, as Secret Keeper for the
Order, discuss the location of the Order Headquarters in a place that
could be infiltrated, unfortunately for the Dursleys Harry's business
was best conducted in Harry's home. For the safety of everyone.
Dumbledore also had business with the Dursley's, so they were not
merely convenient, it involved them to know the details of the
arrangement that Petunia had agreed to. Dumbledore couldn't send this
in an Owl to them in the current circumstances of War, and a Patrons
wouldn't do Vernon a whole lot of good. With all this necessity upon
them to meet and have this discussion, it remains my opinion that for
Dumbledore to come bearing so much diplomacy and sensitivity to custom
as well is beyond the call. 
 



Lealess:
> I do think he knew he wasn't really welcome, so he
> coated his presence in pretend pleasantries and mead.  

Valky:
I understand what you're saying here, but it goes to exactly what I am
saying, the coating of pleasantry *is* custom. It is the proper
etiquette of white collar brits *to* coat with pleasantries. You will
see at the beginning of POA, this *is Vernon's* way. 
I am saying Dumbledore didn't do it because he knew he wasn't welcome,
but that he did it in good faith that proper manners were the
expectation of the Dursley's. Proper announcement, punctual arrival,
correct introduction of adults, appropriate small talk, acknowledge
and address the head of the house-hold etc. That Dumbledore assumes
the social graces of Vernon Dursley is a compliment the Dursley's
*want* to be a part of the pomp and ceremony of formal civility
Dumbledore is giving them that for that reason.



Lealess:
> I do think the
> Dursleys might see him as dangerous and malicious.  He is basically 
> a stranger who has given them "gifts" and notes, things they don't 
> want, with a threat behind them, because there is something he wants 
> from them.  

Valky:
I agree that they see wizarding in general as dangerous, they say so
themselves. But I am quite sure they don't consider DD personally
dangerous to them, and that he has never given them reason to fear
him. Vernon seems to have plenty of pluck, at least, he is not under
any impression of threat directly from Dumbledore. Petunia neither
seems frightened of Dumbeldore himself, she in fact seems to be far
more terrified of Harry. Dudley is scared of wizards and, as I said
before, he has good reason, after Hagrid and then Fred and George both
gave him a serving. 


Lealess:
> If Petunia had the temerity to write to him and say, you're not
> welcome, I bet he would have come anyway.  He felt he had the right 
> to interfere with their lives.

Valky:
Well no, I am not 100% sure of that. I am under the impression that
had Petunia refused with absolute certainty other arrangements would
be made for Harry. If that were to happen though it would be highly
dangerous for everyone so I assume a lot of Dumbeldore's forebearance
was because he didn't want to force that upon them.

Lealess:
> If they asked for his protection, that's one thing.  We don't know
> that they did. 

Valky:
Just to be clear, when I said Dumbledore was protecting everyone I
meant specifically when he stepped inside the house and closed the
door, making sure to say that everyone would be safer to continue the
conversation behind the closed door. In the midst of war, which the
Dursleys are aware is in progress, it is a fair thing to do. 

After introducing himself Dumbledore pauses and waits for the Dursleys
to say their piece. They can make their excuses here, but Dumbledore
knows he has pressed his advantage on their hospitality now to the
point where they wouldn't feel it was acceptable to make excuses. Yes,
it's not a gesture brimming with kindness, but it's acceptable
etiquette, really it is. 

Lealess:
> They had this child thrust upon them, along with the
> protection, because it suited Dumbledore.  

Valky:
I think that's really a harsh call, I could never understand why
anyone would imply Dumbledore gave Harry to the Dursleys for selfish
reasons. The Potterverse called upon Petunia to help and she answered
the call, in doing so she knowingly accepted an association with the
Wizard World. The whole thing hints to me that it suited Petunia no
less, but I could be wrong.

Lealess;
> Did Dumbledore give them a pause to make their excuses?  On the
> contrary, he was waiting for them to invite him in.  When they 
> didn't, he strode in and took over.  He didn't ask permission.  He 
> put the words in their mouths.  He wouldn't brook excuses.

Valky:
I actually think that Dumbledore knew not to expect excuses. We have
any number of examples of Dumbledore's artfulness to back that up. We
are lead to believe that Dumbledore knows well who he is dealing with
throughout the books. Even shortly after in the next chapter we are
reminded of Dumbledore's ability to know what a person will respond to
and how by taking Harry to persuade Slughorn. 



> Lealess:
> You asked for my excuse at that moment. I think it is in the last
> quote above.  But in truth, I don't open doors without knowing who 
> is on the other side, so the interaction wouldn't have reached the 
> point the Dursleys' did, unless Dumbledore decided to break in 
> through the fireplace.  But wizards don't do that, do they?

Valky:
LOL Dumbledore doesn't. :) 
My main point is that Dumbledore is aware of which buttons to push
with the Dursleys, he is aware of his advantage. Uppercrust British
custom explains a lot of why Dumbledore got away with what he did at
the Dursley's, regardless that it would not have worked on some of us. 
Besides Dumbledore only tried it on the Dursleys to get something done
that most of us would probably have been amenable to without any need
for pressed advantage anyway.


> Lealess:
> The rules of etiquette you describe seem to be from a different
> century altogether.  I doubt the Muggles of the 1990s adhered to 
> them, if they were even aware of them.  

Valky:
[laughing very hard now} Oh Lealess, you would be so surprised! I am
in Australia now and we have this reality TV show called Australian
Princess, I am giggling just thinking about it.. Honestly Lealess the
white-collar mob still maintain their sniff these days. <bg>