DD and Delores (Was: Bad Writing?).

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 163159

>  "dumbledore11214" <dumbledore11214@> wrote:
> 
> > all that it took to prevent Dursleys from
> > throwing Harry out was .... indeed threat
> > from Dumbledore "Remember my last". 

Eggplant: 
> It had an effect on half of the Dursleys, Vernon didn't seen to 
give a
> damn, and it did not improve Harry's living conditions.

Alla:

It had an effect on half of the Dursleys that apparently wears pants 
in the family, no? Vernon obeyed Petunia and did not throw Harry 
out. Isn't that what DD needed in this situation? The purpose in 
that situation was not to improve living conditions, just to let 
Harry stay, no?

Alla 
> > So after seeing that gentle reminder working 
> > perfectly, I am having a hard time figuring 
> > out why Dumbledore could not send something 
> > similar, I don't know - at least ten years 
> > earlier than that.

Eggplant: 
> Let's suppose Dumbledore had done that, what would have changed? 
Would
> the Dursleys love Harry then? I don't think so, and that's what 
Harry
> would need for his home life to improve. If Dumbledore had 
frightened
> them they'd probably hate Harry even more.

Alla:

I disagree that if Dumbledore threatened them, nothing would 
have changed. Yes, ideally love is necessary for Harry feel better 
and that DD cannot accomplish, 
but I would go for the basics for starters, since I think DD should 
have done it much much earlier.

I think that it is quite possible that after threat Harry would have 
been moved to the bedroom much earlier, maybe threats would make 
Vernon stop mandhandling Harry, maybe stop him from putting bars on 
Harry's window and starving him. Staff like that, you know.

And yes, I do hold DD responsible for not doing that. Sorry! Does 
not mean that I think of him as villain though.

 
> Alla:
> 
> > Believe me,I would not have criticised him, at all. 

Eggplant: 
> Maybe you wouldn't protest, but plenty more would if Dumbledore 
took
> off the kid gloves with the Dursleys. There is absolutely no doubt 
of
> that because revisionism has run wild, not just here but in 
literary
> criticism in general.
> 
> In book 5 after being tortured and saving the world Harry is 
treated
> like dirt for his efforts and so quite naturally he becomes a 
little
> bit grumpy.  Potter fans acted like he was a Nazi war criminal. 
Snape
> murders Dumbledore so of course Snape is a hero. Hermione finds a
> treacherous traitor in their resistance organization but it is
> Hermione not the turncoat who did wrong. Harry defends himself 
against
> Draco's unprovoked attack so Harry is evil. I can just hear the 
howls
> of protest if the Dursleys woke up to find a horse's head in their 
bed. 


Alla:

Revisionism of what though? JKR's intent? But we cannot always be 
sure what she intends, no? And it is possible sometimes that what 
she wrote comes out as not what she intended IMO.

But in any event what does it have to do with my argument? I mean, 
yes, I read all the arguments you just described and disagreed with 
them at some point, so how is it relevant?

As I said in another post I **loved** CAPSLOCK Harry of OOP, I 
thought that his rage was long overdue and my only dissappointment 
was that he dissappeared in HBP completely and all was fine and 
dandy with Dumbledore again.

As my friend said - it is as if Harry regressed from rebelious 
independent teenager to obedient child. :(

I certainly do not call Snape a hero, as I am sure you know :) I 
call him a stinking murderer, no matter what his motivations are and 
hoping that he is a stinking traitor as well.

I do not, do not begrudge Hermione from protecting DA from the 
traitor, at all. Marietta's actions remind me too much of Peter 
Pettigrew for my comfort.

I mean, I do not think Hermione executed it perfectly, but she gets 
in my book A for effort, that's for sure and probably B for 
execution.

As to Harry being evil for defending himself - well, I do not 
remember reading that, except in one post, so I suppose if we take 
the posts as more or less sampling of large audience, I guess some 
people do think that, but again I do not remember reading it here.

I remember criticising Harry a plenty for using Sectusemptra, yes, 
but isn't it far from calling him evil?

But again, I do not even do that, I wish he never thought of this 
curse, but when he is defending himself, to me it is the most 
obvious choice to use the curse marked **for enemies**, since the 
person who uses unforgivable in my book is your enemy at that moment.

I do disagree that JKR will show much glorification of the killing, 
that is why I believe she made Harry think of it, but I definitely 
do not think that she meant for Harry to feel remorse and guilt for 
defending himself, just a little of it for being stupid IMO.

So, yeah, I rambled on, I am just confused what all of this has to 
do with me :)


Back to Dumbledore and Dursleys - certainly do not suggest he kill 
them or something, just threatened to do some magic.


Alla,

who thinks that being sick on Christmas day is annoying