Respecting the Dursleys( was:Re: Hi everyone -- banning the books)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 159754

montims wrote:
> see, I don't really understand this problem with the Dursleys at
all.  Until Harry is thrown into the mix, they are a family whose
members are happy and secure with each other, and "normal, thank you
very much".  If Harry had never arrived, they woiuld have continued,
content in their lifestyle -Petunia happy at home raising Dudley and
entertaining for Vernon's business - Vernon doing well at work, and
pleasing the clients enough to get a holiday home in Majorca, as well
as other perks.  So they're not great parents?  At least they all love
each other.  It was throwing Harry in the mix that upset things.  And
if he had been chubby, and instinctively went along with their
mindset, and if his hair had conformed, and he hadn't shown any
magical ability, they might still have rubbed along fine together. 
But he was the grain of sand in their oyster shell...

Carol responds:

The Dursleys a normal, happy family? McGonagall may be judging them
prematurely as "the worst sort of Muggles," but her judgment is based
on sixteen-month-old Dudley kicking his mother and demanding sweets.
He's also just learned a new word, "won't," and he hasn't even reached
the "terrible two's." Clearly, he's already indulged, if not spoiled,
and he's less than a year and a half old. And Mr. Dursley apparently
abuses his underlings at work, yelling at five different people on the
second page of SS/PS. Granted, Petunia and Vernon love each other in
their way, and they love Dudley (as shown by their reaction to the
on-tongue toffee incident), but they're afraid of their own child,
catering to his every whim for fear that he'll throw a tantrum. Or
rather, Petunia is afraid of him and Vernon encourages bullying and
tantrums as foreshadowing what he considers manly behavior ("Little
tyke!").

The first sentence of SS/PS reminds me of the first sentence of "Pride
and Prejudice" in its comic/ironic presentation of a point of view
that is not the author's own judgment. Just as Austen didn't really
believe that "a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in
want of a wife" (that "truth universally acknowledged" is really the
opinion of Mrs. Bennett and some of the other female characters in
P&P), JKR doesn't really believe that "Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, of number
four, Privet Drive" were "perfectly normal, thank you very much." As
the wording of the sentence ("were proud to say") indicates, this
normality is the Dursleys' view of themselves. "You" (the reader)
wouldn't expect them to be "involved in anything strange and
mysterious" because "they didn't hold with such nonsense"--an odd
attitude for a couple who know that magic exists because the wife's
sister is a witch. From the opening sentences of the first two books,
it's clear that the Dursleys, especially Vernon, are deluding
themselves. (It's interesting that the first part of this chapter is
told from Vernon's pov and none of it directly from Petunia's--a hint
that JKR is keeping what Petunia thinks and knows from the reader,
and, IMO, from Vernon.)

I do think that if Harry had been Marge's son or if Lily and her
husband had been "normal" (nonmagical), the Dursleys would have
attempted to treat him better (by their definition of that term)--more
like they treat Dudley, if not quite so indulgently--rather than
attempting to squash the magic out of him (trying to force him to be
"normal"). Yes, he's the sand in their oyster shell, a shameful secret
that they can't admit to the neighbors (and really, what *would* the
neighbors think if Harry turned Dudley into a toad and the Dursleys
tried to explain their son's disappearance by telling the truth?), but
they were already a dysfunctional family and, IMO, Dudley never had a
chance of being a genuinely normal boy with or without Harry.

Carol, regretfully reaching her limit of posts without having caught
up on reading the list!