Dumbledore's Magnaminity

[PJ]

No: HPFGUIDX 143068

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" <a_svirn at y...> wrote:
>
>  
> > PJ:  
> > Petunia isn't a "regular" muggle.  
> 
> a_svirn:
> Yes, she is. Until it's proven otherwise she is a regular and 
> ordinary muggle.

She's a muggle who knows quite a lot about the WW so, no, she isn't 
a "regular" muggle.  Most muggles have no idea the WW even exists 
out of fairy tales.

> a_svirn:
> They took their nephew, because his life was endangered. We don't 
> know by the way whether they knew for sure that Harry was a wizard 
> at the time. Moreover, Dumbledore suggested that they should bring 
> him up as their own. I think to them it meant as muggle. 

And they did that.  Harry truly had no idea of his magical 
background until his 11th birthday.  They most certainly *did* know 
he was a Wizard.  Petunia and Vernon admit as much in SS/PS. (Keeper 
of the Keys)
> 
> a_svirn:
> 
> I would say though that in 
> *our* world when you leave your child, or at any rate, a child you 
> are responsible for at other people's doorstep, you therefore 
> renounce any claim on him, don't you? 

First, we have no idea (yet) what was in the letter Dumbledore left 
the Dursleys tucked into Harry's blanket.  That one letter could 
clear up a lot IMO.  But, even if it isn't stated in the letter, 
Petunia, by way of her experience with Lily, knows that Harry will 
get a letter to Hogwarts on or around his 11th birthday.  So, if you 
think about it, he wasn't *abandoned* there, he was placed into 
their (foster?)care until he could take his rightful place in the 
WW.  Big difference.
> 
> PJ:
> Dumbledore didn't insist on visitation rights even 
> though as head of the Wizangamott he probably had the authority.
> 
> a_svirn:
> Had he though? I was under the impression that he took the task of 
> arranging Harry's future upon himself without consulting any 
> authorities. 

Dumbledore *is* the authorities!  He's head of the WW!  I think that 
would probably give him all he'd require, don't you? 
> 
> a_svirn:
> This is certainly true. Even though we don't know just how free 
was 
> that choice.  The long and short of it however, that they did give 
> him a houseroom and by doing so have kept him alive for nearly 
> sixteen years. The least Dumbledore could do under the 
circumstances 
> is to keep his contempt for himself.

On the night of Dumbledore's visit to the Dursleys in HBP he states 
quite clearly that they *willingly* agreed to take Harry in and 
neither Petunia nor Vernon contradict him.  I'd say that cinches it 
since neither would let that slide if they'd felt forced into it.  
And yes, they kept him alive for 16 years but we don't yet know what 
they got out of the bargain.  If it was a FC they also could've been 
protected from DEs and Voldermort by having him there.

All in all their involvement with the WW is the direct result of the 
decision they made when they took baby Harry into their home.  Now, 
like it or not, they have to live with it.

PJ