Etiquette WAS Re: polite Dumbledore?

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 142920

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > But here's the crux, IMO.  I don't think Dumbledore *wanted* to 
> > be polite. 

> >>Valky:
> You're right, that is the crux of this, because I most definitely
> think that he was trying to be polite. If nothing else the        
> dandiness of his letter to Harry and small talk with Vernon brims 
> with his efforts to be thoughtfully polite.

Betsy Hp:
I don't think we can connect Dumbledore's letter to Harry with his 
behavior with Vernon.  In fact, his letter to Harry was rude to 
Vernon, not matter how polite it was to Harry.  Dumbledore undercut 
Vernon's (and Petunia's) role as head of household by by-passing him 
and going straight to Harry.  [Point of clarity: I'm not arguing 
that Dumbledore was *wrong* to by-pass Vernon, or at least, he was 
only wrong according to rules of etiquette.]

[Aside to Geoff from message #142772: If the Weasley's had taken 
Harry without the Dursleys' permission in GoF, they would have also 
broken the rules of etiquette.  And again, I'm not saying that this 
would have been a wrong action, just not a polite one.] 

And again, his polite small-talk was an illusion.  He wasn't trying 
to put Vernon at ease or find a point of connection, as Arthur 
Weasley did in GoF.  Dumbledore was establishing his dominance, 
which is really not proper house-guest behavior <g>. He uses a  
veneer of politeness to cause the Dursleys to cower and submit.

He mentions the flowers have grown from his last visit.  So he's 
reminding Vernon that he was the one to dump Harry on them and 
change their lives for the worst.  Not a very polite reminder there. 
He brings up his correspondence to Petunia.  A howler.  That 
chastised her.  Again, not harkening back to pleasant things.  And 
he calls Dudley by name, without waiting for an introduction (unlike 
Arthur in GoF).  Which strikes me as a threat.  "I know who your 
child is, so it's best not to anger me."

And then he takes over.  Resorting to physical force to get the 
Dursleys to sit (not comfortably, I'm sure - all three squeezed onto 
one couch), he sets a bit of magic loose on them and then ignores 
them to talk to Harry.

> >>Valky:
> OTOH I don't think that the canon really supports that Dumbledore
> intended to beat the Durselys over te head with glasses of mead.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Doesn't excuse anything, to my mind.  It'd be like someone's dog 
jumping all over someone trying to lick them.  It's not that the 
owner *intended* the dog to act this way, but it's their dog and 
they are responsible for what the dog is doing.  It's Dumbledore's 
glasses.  That they automatically assult folks who ignore them 
(which I actually buy as very WW <g>) doesn't give Dumbledore a 
pass.  He should have controlled them.

> >>Debbie (message #142776)
> <snip>
> One of the narrative functions served by the Dursleys is to serve
> as the butt of humor. It takes many forms, and it usually works   
> very well.
> Often, they provide laughs through their own words; they victimise
> themselves (just reread the first chapter of PS/SS).
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I think you've really hit the nail here, Debbie.  Because that's the 
difference between the visit by Arthur Weasly in GoF and the visit 
by Dumbledore in HBP, IMO.  In GoF the Dursleys did it to 
themselves.  Arthur behaved as he should have, and in comparison the 
Dursleys looked like buffoons.  Especially when Arthur was shocked 
that they didn't respond to Harry's goodbye.  It really brought home 
the Dursley's pettiness for me.

> >>Debbie:
> However, the particular form of humor JKR is employing here,       
> comeuppance humor, is not universally appreciated. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I've never been a big fan.  Especially when there's such a huge 
power differential in play.  Dumbledore could do anything he pleased 
to the Dursleys and they couldn't do a thing to stop him.

Take the movie, "A Christmas Story".  In the movie, the young 
protagonist, Ralphie, has to deal with a bully who beats him up just 
about every day after school.  I believe the bully is a bit older 
than Ralphie; he's definitely bigger and stronger.  One day 
Ralphie's had enough and he jumps the bully and actually beats him 
in a fist fight.  That scene works for me.  I don't feel too much 
sympathy for the bully.  But if Ralphie's *father* had decided to 
beat up the bully I'd have hated it, because a grown man beating up 
a twelve year old kid is disturbing.

For the same reason the most powerful wizard in the WW intimidating 
a Muggle family and physically accosting them with magic is 
disturbing to me, even if they were bullies.

Betsy Hp