[HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore's Magnaminity

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 142996

colebiancardi:
 The terms outlined in the letter
was the request that the Dursley's take Harry in and the wish that
Harry be raised as the Dursley's own son.

Magpie:

Actually, the Dursleys have always been expected to raise Harry as James and 
Lily's son, imo, since their importance is all about being related to Lily. 
I mention this because we've repeatedly seen Wizards take authority from 
Muggles, so it's not like Petunia is ever honestly going to be given the 
kind of parental rights that Wizards get.  Petunia is an ingredient in a 
spell, and that's what she's really needed to be.

colebiancardi:
DD also explained that if
they agreed to take Harry in(and there may be more, we don't know),
Petunia sealed the agreement and Harry must be allowed to stay over
for at least one night in the Dursley's home until he is 17.

Magpie:

Maybe Im wrong, but as I understood it when Petunia took Harry in the thing 
that she sealed was Dumbledore's protection spell.  As long as Harry was 
living in her house the spell worked.  So the pact being sealed was from 
Dumbledore to Harry through Petunia.  It was not a pact between Dumbledore 
and Petunia.  I don't think she herself was necessarily agreeing to anything 
except giving her baby nephew room in her house, knowing this would also 
provide him with protection from LV. The baby was just left the doorstep 
with a note, no?  So it's not like she and Dumbledore had any sort of 
discussion about exactly what she was agreeing to beyond taking an abandoned 
nephew into her house.

When DD reminded her of this it may not have been that he was reminding her 
of some contract she entered into but simply reminding her that if Harry did 
not have a place in her house, he would not be protected.  Did she want her 
sister's child to die?  If not, he stayed.

colebiancardi:
I don't think Petunia was forced into doing this.  I never stated
that.  What I stated is that once she agreed to DD's terms in the
letter - and see above for my paragraph of the terms, plus the post
that lists the canon - she had to abid to it, otherwise, there might
be ramifications by breaking the pact.  Perhaps something out of DD's
control - perhaps LV could target the Dursley's if the pact, once
made, was broken.

Magpie:
It seems to me that the Dursleys are only under any threat from LV because 
of Harry.  Unless he thought he could hurt Harry by doing so, like he did 
with Sirius, I can't see why LV would go after them rather than go after a 
Weasley.  There have been a lot of references lately to the Dursleys knowing 
all about the war, but they honestly don't seem to know much.

colebiancardi:

It is like a job - if you only do what is required to skate on by, you
will not get a raise - matter of fact, you may be out of a job soon.
However, if you go above & beyond what is required of you, you get a
raise, you get the promotion.

Magpie:

But there's no indication the Dursleys are up for a raise or termination. 
They don't want anything to do with Dumbledore or wizards.

colebiancardi:
They didn't behave as decent human beings and
he let them know it.  In America, people like the Dursley's get thrown
in jail for the indifference and mistreatment of children.  A few
glasses of mead knocking on the Dursley's heads, pales in comparsion
what RL would have done to them.

Magpie:

Of course, those same Muggle authorities would probably not think very 
highly of Dumbledore's actions either.  But yes, the Dursleys treatment of 
Harry is horrible and in no way deserved by him, and the RW authorities 
probably would not think hitting them in the head with glasses of mead was 
an appropriate response to it.

colebiancardi:
At DD gave them a choice there too -
they didn't have to drink the mead, just acknowledge the drinks and
hold them in their hands.

Magpie:

The Dursleys don't know how enchanted glasses work.  The kind of glasses 
they are used to don't require you to refuse them. Dumbledore had a choice 
to spell them away or to the table when the Dursleys didn't take them. 
Would he have allowed the glasses to smack the Drs. Granger on the head 
until they asked him to stop them?  Or apologize and do something about them 
himself?

Bruce:

Respect is an earned quality; the Dursleys have done nothing to earn 
respect.
They are contemptible; why not treat them with contempt?

Magpie:

Certain forms of respect are earned, true, and if Dumbledore wishes to treat 
the Dursleys with respect that's his business.  I think the point here, 
though, is that he *is* treating them with contempt.  Some of the 
interpretations of this chapter seem to want it both ways, so that 
Dumbledore can both treat them with contempt and be polite and magnanimous 
at the same time.

-m