Dursleys or Death (was Re: Christian Forgiveness and Snape)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 164594


Jen R. wrote:

When explaining everything to Harry, Dumbledore talked as if he
expected *Harry* might not accept his choices.  DD said Harry would
likely be more angry than he already was, that he would 'rage' at him.
 He anticipated questions Harry didn't even ask like 'why not the nice
wizarding family'?  My guess is Dumbledore had asked *himself* those
questions and pondered his options before realizing the only way to
protect Harry was the blood charm and, therefore, the Dursleys. <snip> 
His speech indicates he wasn't completely certain what kind of person
Harry would be when he returned to the WW, that he considered the
Dursleys a risk he had to take. 
 
Carol responds:
Yes. Good deduction, Jen. A calculate risk but clearly the lesser of
two evils even if the Dursleys didn't love him. And I still think that
the Muggle world was a safer place for Harry even without the blood
protection than the WW, where he could not have been hidden from
either DEs or adoring fans.


Pippin:
<snip>
> > Dumbledore feels very strongly that pampering would be bad for
Harry, but I think it's a misunderstanding to equate pampering with
nurture and love. Doing so is so far from Dumbledore's thinking that
I'm sure he feels he doesn't need to explain the difference -- leaving
his readers just where Rowling wants them, ie thinking about it. 
> 
Jen: 
I'm assuming these comments are directed to the thread in general as
they've not come up in our particular discusssion.  My best guess for
the 'pampered prince' comment comes from something JKR said about Dudley: 
> 
> "I feel sorry for Dudley. I might joke about him, but I feel truly 
> sorry for him because I see him as just as abused as Harry. Though, 
> in possibly a less obvious way. What they are doing to him is inept, 
> really. I think children recognize that. Poor Dudley. He's not being 
> prepared for the world at all, in any reasonable or compassionate 
> way, so I feel sorry for him."  (Cinescape, Nov. 2000) 
> 
> So, whether people agree with JKR or not, Dumbledore seems to be 
> speaking for her convictions here.

Carol:
Exactly. Pampering is not love, or it's a perverted kind of love in
which the parent gives the child what he wants rather than what he
needs, which is firmness and rules as well as love, not yeilding to
his every whim for fear of temper tantrums. We see Petunia early on
allowing Baby!Dudley to kick her and scream at her because he wants
sweets. A parent or guardian who's afraid of losing a child's love by
saying "no" is not preparing the child for the world. (Note that the
Hogwarts teachers in general don't pamper the students, which would be
highly inadequate preparation for the WW. Umbridge, who comes close to
coddling the "children" [at least those who don't thwart her] is far
more dangerous than Lupin [as teacher, not werewolf] or Snape, who
expose them to dangers they will face or might face as adults in the
WW but under controlled conditions.) 

Jen:  <snip>
> Re: the prophecy, I wonder what DD would have done had there been no 
> eavesdropper?  Even he was impressed with Trelawney's 'prediction'. 

Carol:
Interesting question! I think he would have watched any wizards who
might match the Prophecy closely, any non-Muggleborn male born at the
end of July to parents who had defied Voldemort "thrice" or were in a
position to do so, particularly boys born that particular July to
Order members, which would have led him to focus on Harry and Neville.
But with no eavesdropper, Voldemort would have no way of knowing about
the Prophecy, so DD's best strategy would have been to watch and wait.
Until Voldemort actually encountered one of the boys (most likely as
an adult), he could hardly "mark him as his equal." And he couldn't
seek out "the one with the power to destroy him" if he didn't know of
that person's existence. And yet, until Voldemort created his own
nemesis, he could not be defeated and the war against the WW would
continue, with only the Order and the MoM to fight it.

He would not have had young Severus Snape as his spy (unless Snape had
some other reason to defect) and if Snape did apply for the DADA
position, no reason not to hire him (especially given his presumably
high OWL and NEWT marks in the subject and the chronic shortage of
DADA teachers), so he'd have had no Potions Master Snape to work at
his side for all those years because the DADA curse would have
revealed young Snape as a (loyal) DE and sent him to Azkaban.

Just some thoughts on might-have-beens. Fortunately for the WW, if not
for the Potters, things didn't work out that way. The eavesdropping
incident made possible Snape's defection and, more important, eleven
years of peace for the WW, with Harry as "the one with the power to
destroy the Dark Lord" somewhere along the road. Even Wormtail's
betrayal had good consequences that were no part of his intention.

Carol, wondering what the unintended consequences of Dumbledore's
murder will be