Dumbledore's Magnaminity

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 143132

Geoff provided the quotes:
> > "We swore when we took him in we'd put a stop to that rubbish.....
> > Wizard indeed!"
> > 
> > "Knew!.... Knew! Of course we knew...."
 
> Roberta replied:
> She starts by saying that she knew (i.e. figured it out) and then 
> explains how she figured it out (her dratted sister was magical and 
> it's probably hereditary).
> 
> Haven't you ever said "I knew it!" in triumphant tones?  When 
> people say that, they don't mean that they knew "it" as a fact; 
> they say this after they find out that they were right about 
> something they *guessed*. 

SSSusan:
I'm in agreement with Geoff on this one.  Look at the tense and the 
statement of timing -- "we swore *when we took him in* that we'd put 
a stop to that rubbish" [emphasis added].  Also, Petunia does not imo 
say, "I knew it!" in that "Aha! I was right!" kind of sense.  What 
she says reads to me as incredulity -- TWICE saying "Knew!" and then 
adding "*Of course* we knew!" [emphasis added].  To me, she's 
expressing incredulity that someone would even question whether they 
knew this information, NOT expressing an "Aha! See? We were right all 
along!" confirmation-of-a-supposition kind of thing.

I just don't see any reason to assume it was a triumphant after-the-
fact confirmation, rather than the true past tense sense of "we knew" 
which is implied in "when we took him in."
 

Geoff:
> > There is also evidence that Dumbledore had had to tell the 
> > Dursleys something of what had happened to Lily and James...

Roberta replied: 
> Which is exactly what I said he put in the letter ...
> Roberta wrote earlier:
> > > Well, Harry's parents have just been killed by Voldemort, who 
> > > tried to kill Harry too but got vaporized instead, and in order 
> > > to protect Harry from further attempts on his life by remaining 
> > > Death Eaters, Dumbledore would like Petunia to take him in 
> > > order to seal a charm Dumbledore has cast involving Harry's 
> > > mother's sacrifice. That all seems like reasonable background 
> > > information to put in the letter.

And Roberta also stated:
> Petunia *may* also have been given factual information (by 
> Dumbledore in the letter) to support her inference, but at this 
> point there simply isn't canon for that. 

SSSusan:
I'm getting confused here.  

It seems to me that what's being stated is that we DO know DD put 
that kind of background information into the letter [Roberta: "which 
is exactly what I said he put in the letter"] but that we CAN'T know 
DD put in the information about Harry being a wizard [Roberta: "there 
simply isn't canon"].  I don't understand that.  Aren't they both, 
especially given Petunia's reaction which has been quoted, reasonable 
assumptions?

Is the argument that the background information on what happened to 
Lily and James *is* canon, while the information about Harry as 
wizard is supposition?  If so, I disagree.  There seems to me to be 
no less evidence of the inclusion of the latter than of the former.

Siriusly Snapey Susan