[HPforGrownups] Re: DD at the Dursleys: Better Manner to Accept.

[Marion Ros]

No: HPFGUIDX 158187

Lynda:

>>>Begging the elves permission, I'd like to personalize this a bit. Several
years ago, I was traveling down a highway. I got thirsty and pulled off at
a gas station. There was, on the other side of the chain link fence that
separated the gas station from the highway. On the other side of the fence
there was a very disshelved very sweaty from the heat bum. (this man could
not be described as anything but a bum) I went into the store, got myself a
drink and then, went and bought a coke for the man. When I walked over to
the fence and called out to him, he turned and walked back toward me. I
told him that I noticed he was hot and that I had bought a coke for him if
he wanted it. He said yes, and I handed it to him. I didn't know this
guy. But he was hot and I thought that offering a coke was a nice thing to
do. I don't even know if he drank it since I was traveling the other
direction, and some people have told me that what I did was stupid, buying
something for a total stranger, who might be a dangerous man. I knew that
when I bought him the drink, but I still decided to offer and for his part,
he accepted and neither of us came to harm. As for opening the door to a
total stranger at night, I've never faced that situation. I did however,
open the door to an enexpected guest at 10:00 the other night, invited her
in, and carried on a conversation while I changed clothing since she wanted
to go out.<<<


Marion:
Ah, but so would I. And so have I. That's just being kind to strangers, which is a virtue. It might not be a virtue that the Dursleys possess (since I never claimed they were *nice* people), but it is a whooooole different kettle of fish to *offer* hospitality to a stranger than to offer tea to somebody who barged in when you told him to get out or to cuddle to your heart a child you did not want but were forced to accept, house and feed. One *does* have the right to deny entry into one's house to those we deem undesirable. We do have a right to eject (if we can) those we deem dangerous. The Dursleys have repeatedly stated, and shown by their actions towards Harry, that they want *nothing* to do with magic people. They do *not* want them in their house. They were forced, by Dumbledore, to accept Harry as their 'guest', but although they accepted him in their home (barely) they never granted him kin-right or even guest-right (in Roman times, a foundling left on the doorstep of a free man became that man's slave. In desperate times poor men who could not feed their children left them on the step of a rich man's house. The child might lose it's freedom, but at least it would not starve to death) 
We might fault the Dursleys for not granting their nephew kin-right or guest-right. (But they did not *choose* to take in the boy. He was forced upon them like a cuckoo forces it's young on a warbler. I for one do not judge them for that. If they were consulted, had the option to say 'no', they might, just might have said yes and treated the boy better. Or not, but then we would have the freedom to judge them, because in accepting a guest of your *own free will* means you have to treat him right)
We might fault the Dursleys for being 'stupid' because they fear magic (but I would fear magic too if one sees what total unethical morons wield it. Great power brings great responsibility, yet we see little responsibilty in the WW and a whole lot of muggle-baiting and disdain for non-wizarding folk)
We might fault the Dursleys for being boors and bad parents (but how is this Dumbledore's concern?)
We might even fault the Dursleys for being not very nice people to begin with who would probably (*very* probably) never give a coca cola to a thirsty bum. (But again, is not having a virtue something Dumbledore should concern himself about?)
But for Dumbledore to enter their house against their express wishes, to browbeat them and intimidate them with his magic and then to chide them for not being hospitable to him (and by implication to Harry over the years) is the height of hypocrisy.
It was Dumbledore's decision that put Harry there. It was Dumbledore who intimidated and possibly threatened them if they refused to take the child ("Remember my last, Petunia!")  To scold them for not being kind enough to the child they were browbeaten reluctantly into accepting into their home (if not their hearts) is just.... words fail me.

Oh, I agree, the Dursleys are awful people. But Dumbledore is a bully and a hypocrite, and I know which I think is worse.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]