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

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 151041

> Alla:
>
> No, I don't think that his living with Dursleys shaped him to
> become a better saviour of the WW, I really don't. I think that the
> third option is that is who Harry is, the essential part of his
> character.
>
> How he developed his qualities? I suspect that first year and a half
> of being LOVED by his parents played a significant role. Is it
> possible in JKR's world that Harry was born with such qualities? I
> think it is possible.
>
> I think that JKR's world is largely essential in nature. Just look
> at the Dudley,which Minerva describes and Dudley is what couple
> months older than Harry?
>
> "And they've got his son- I saw him kicking his mother all the way
> up the street, screaming for sweets." - SS/PS, p.13.
>
> Dudleys is what? year and half here? A bit older? Not sure, but we
> already see the developing bully, IMO.
>
> And we of course remember Tom Riddle bullying habits of early age.
>
> I think young Harry already had in himself a lot of his heroic
> nature. His sufferings at Dursleys could have strengthen those or
> not, or make Harry like Tom Riddle, we don't know.
>
> So, to answer your question, no, I don't think Harry NEEDED to live
> with Dursleys to develop his nature. It is essential of course to
> make the hero suffer in literature, but besides blood protection, I
> don't see any GOOD things Harry acquired in Dursleys and moreover,
> even if we knew that Harry needed it to become a saviour of WW, I
> think that he should not have be nade to go through that, because
> that was not Dumbledore's decision to make, if he had some shred of
> decency in him and I think Albus IS a decent guy.
>
> Having said all that, of course I think that  the fact that JKR did
> away with fairy tale "orphan" so to speak significantly influences
> my thinking.
>
> I don't see Harry as Cinderella by book 4 probably. He became way
> too "real" and "complicated" character for me to say that Dursleys'
> abuse is what he needed to become a saviour.


Magpie:
I sometimes think that one of the problematic things about Dumbledore is 
when we start out with this fairy tale situation Dumbledore is put in the 
odd role of being both fairy godmother and the sort of Merlin-like character 
who places Harry far from his kingdom.

Only in those kinds of stories, like with King Arthur, the idea is usually 
that the hero is raised in the country on a farm.  Even if he's treated as a 
sort of servant or his greatness isn't recognized, he's not abused like 
Cinderella is and like Harry is.  So it's just very hard to reconcile the 
two. When Harry gets to Hogwarts we get that we're supposed to see 
Dumbledore as this wonderful protector and a wise man, but if you think 
about it you can't not ask, "Hey, Mr. Really Nice and Wise Guy...could you 
not have done something about the years of abuse there?"  For me it really 
seems like you just have to let it go or not, because you can't really 
reconcile it.  The blood protection is the best thing we've got, I think, 
because it suggests that Dumbledore did have to give Harry to this family 
(though still only interfering only when his plan is threatened, not Harry's 
well-being).

-m