Dumbledore on the Dursleys in OotP (was:Re: Old, old problem.)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 151035

> Betsy Hp:
> I guess I wasn't able to pick out the rationalization level at 
all.  
> I thought Dumbledore was very upfront about the fact that living 
at 
> the Dursleys sucked, but it was better than being dead.  And he 
> seemed to be saying that that was the choice he felt he had.

Alla:

I agree with a lot of what Ceridwen said and I snipped, but to me 
the most upsetting thing which I picked up from Dumbledore's speech 
was his dismissiveness ( what I felt of course) of Harry's 
sufferings. I just did not think that he acknowledged Harry's 
sufferings enough. As I said many times, I often react on emotional 
level in addition to intellectual level to characters behaviour ( to 
me the books who make me react on emotional level are the best ones) 
and the moment when Harry says " she never loved me" and Dumbledore 
cuts him and does not let him finish was my "want to slap Dumbledore 
many times" moments.

I get that DD had a horrible choice to make and as I said earlier I 
do think he tried, but even though I in general refrain from 
criticising JKR's writing,because I think it is very good, about 
this speech I completely agree with Lupinlore - I think this speech 
was badly written, I really do.

Why? Because again as I said earlier I don't think JKR meant to show 
Puppetmaster!Dumbledore AT ALL and the fact that after said speech 
so many people DID think that DD comes off as Puppetmaster shows 
that JKR did not wrote what she wanted her audience to get from it.

Now, I can be completely wrong of course about what JKR meant, but 
this is just how I feel.


> Betsy Hp:
> I agree.  It would have taken especially strong guardians to head 
> that sort of rot (good word!) off.  Which is why I think 
Dumbledore 
> did want Harry raised outside the WW.  However, I don't think that 
> was why he chose the Dursleys.  As you said in the part I snipped, 
> it's all about the blood protection.

Alla:

Yes, I agree it IS all about blood protection, but then again, I 
don't think that it was all that clear in OOP that it was all about 
blood protection.

I was just talking with somebody off list and I was thinking out 
loud that it is awfully tempting to tell the writer how to write 
better, etc, so I am trying not to, but on the other hand, I also 
think that it is my right as a reader to say if I am not happy with 
something in the books. I was NOT happy with Dumbledore's speech in 
OOP, not at all, but on the other hand, I do applaud JKR for 
rehabilitating Dumbledore in HBP. I guess besides me wanting more 
humbleness in OOP Dumbledore for what Harry went through, I also 
wanted more clear wording that DD did not approve of what Dursleys 
did to Harry, because I was getting the feeling that Dumbledore 
despite acknowledging what Harry suffered was not acknowledging 
enough.

It is what Ceridwen said - the general feel of the speech. Come to 
think of it, I would also not minded to hear Dumbledore apologising 
to Harry, just apology. Something like I did it to save your life, 
but I am sorry that to save your life was possible only by making 
you suffer.

Again, I am not telling JKR how to write the books. I think it is 
very telling that OOP is the ONLY book, parts of which I disliked. 
Any other book I cannot find much to criticise at all, but yes, I 
was very angry with Dumbledore after his speech. I hope I answered 
why.

> > >>Ceridwen:
> > Anyway, I hoped I answered for me.  The speech, no matter what 
its 
> > intent, did have the potential for leaving the door open to 
> > speculation which I think unfairly categorized Dumbledore as a 
> > manipulative puppetmaster.
> > <snip>

Alla:

Yes, dear me too. :) That is the  MAIN reason why I am criticising 
the writing of this speech. It is not how it is written per se, it 
is just I feel that JKR did not adequately reflected what she wanted 
to reflect here, although maybe I am wrong. :)

JMO,

Alla