Blood Protection

[hickengruendler]

No: HPFGUIDX 159103

  
> a_svirn:
> I've got a counter-question: are you sure that Dementors couldn't 
have
> harmed Harry if they had been sent by Voldemort? 

Hickengruendler:

No, I'm not. That's what I meant with this quote from my previous 
post: 

>> I know that 
> > it is left open so far, and that your interpretation could just 
as well 
> > be true, but that's how I understood it. 

Sorry, rereading it, I realise how unclear I expressed myself, 
particularly because of the context from this quote. It's just the 
way how I interpreted it. I am aware that your interpretation is 
possible as well, but it's just not how *I* understood it. :-) 
  
> a_svirn:
> But I do not ignore it. I take it at face value that Harry can't be
> harmed where his mother's blood dwells. But I am saying a) that he 
can
> be harmed elsewhere and could have been even during his first years
> with the Dursleys; b) Voldemort was too preoccupied with his own
> survival at the time to cause him harm – and that's canon too! c) as
> soon, as Voldemort found himself a body, and I mean a body-carrier
> (Quirrel) he caused him harm elsewhere. 

Hickengruendler:

But I do not understand, what point c) has to do with the Dursley 
blood protection. Yes, Voldemort is able to cause Harry harm 
elsewhere. That's why Harry has to live at the Dursleys (according to 
Dumbledore). That Voldemort was able to harm Harry elsewhere, is 
rather a point in favour of Dumbledore's decision. About a): Yes, 
during his years at the Dursleys Harry could have been harmed 
elsewhere as well. That's why I prefer to understand Dumbledore's 
words, as I wrote in my previous post, that Harry is not only safe 
from Voldemort as long as he's in the house, but also as long as AUnt 
Petunia and Dudley are around. I know that this isn't the only 
possible reading of it, but it is still a possible one. There's 
nothing in Dumbledore's monologue, or anywhere else, to contradict it.

a_sbvirn:

Besides, what do you mean
> Dumbledore couldn't have anticipated that someone else would try to
> assassinate Harry? He *should* have anticipated something like this.
> As Pippin pointed out there were lots of former DE on the loose. 
> 
 
Hickengruendler:

I mean, that he couldn't have anticipated, that someone completely 
unrelated to Voldemort would try to kill Harry. Dumbledore said, that 
the Death Eaters still at large were one of the reasons, why he gave 
Harry to the Dursleys. Therefore I assume that they, being 
Voldemort's servants, wouldn't be able to harm Harry at the Dursleys 
either, even if they are not directly acting under his Orders but 
where trying to find Voldemort, like the Lestranges did. Umbridge 
however has nothing to do with Voldemort, therefore the protection 
doesn't work against the Dementors sent by her.

But I want to add, that even if my reading is wrong, and Harry is 
really only safe in the house, than it still is at least better than 
nothing. At least it makes him safe during the nights.

Hickengruendler