varying views of characters

[huntergreen3 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 191161



Alla: 
> > But regardless, the reason that he could not afford to let anybody know is not enough for me to let Harry be abused. The damn protection is already in place and not going to break if Dumbledore is going to check on him 
 
Pippin:
> You've made it plain there is *no* reason that is enough to let Harry be abused, even if it's a choice between that and death <snip>

> But as for Dumbledore, I see him as trying not to repeat the mistake he made with Arianna. The thought of her  in an institution, lonely and unloved, was so painful that he refused to see how much danger she was in at home,  much less along with him on his adventures. 
> 
> To deprive Harry of his best chance of life itself because it will break Dumbledore's heart to think of him suffering  -- do you not see how self-indulgent that would be? 

Rebecca:
I don't see how it was a choice between "leave Harry alone at the Dursley's and ignore him until he's eleven" and "find somewhere else for Harry". Why exactly would Dumbledore coming to check on Harry ruin the protection? We are not given a reason why he could not come to check on him, the Dursley's certaintly wanted to raise Harry without telling him that he was a wizard, but no one knew that. Hagrid is very surprised to find out that Harry is completely in the dark about all that, wouldn't Dumbledore have mentioned that if he knew? I don't see a reason mentioned in the text why Dumbledore or someone else couldn't have gone to see Harry, even once a year (if only to give him a birthday present). I see it as Dumbledore not being all that interested in Harry's well-being, that he saw him as a weapon, not a person.

Also, there are ways to die other than at the hands of dark wizards. Children die every day from neglect and abuse. The small incidents we have seen from Vernon and Petunia don't put an accidental death that far out of the question. Its been mentioned that Mrs. Figg was in charge of keeping an eye on Harry, but IMO she does a rather poor job of it. She only intereacts with Harry once a year, and in the months before he turned 11, she wasn't available at all. In CoS she must have seen Vernon putting bars on Harry's window, and then Harry was nowhere to be seen for several days and there's no indication that she alerted anyone (Ron showed up, as I recall, because Harry hadn't written to him all summer). What if Harry got heatstroke left alone all day in the summer in the unairconditioned second-floor bedroom? (unlikely, but not impossible) I just would find this all more palatable if Dumbledore had left Harry alone because he was worried they'd turn him out if he interfered, was completely surprised by their poor treatment, and afterwards removed Harry from their home as soon as he could each summer (I think only in Half-Blood Prince and Deathly Hallows he leaves before his birthday).

The nature of the protection itself is a little murky too. From the beginning of Order of the Phoenix, it appears he has to be inside the house for it to work (the dementers have no problems attacking him). But would it stop someone "dark" from entering the house then? Also in Order of the Phoenix a bunch of wizards enter the house, without Harry welcoming them or opening the door for them or anything. Mr. Weasley even has the house added to the floo netork in GoF, the twins jump through the window easily in CoS, and a whole host of wizards come in  in Deathly Hallows. Does it have some "intention check"? What exactly would it do to Bellatrix if she showed up? Or does it stop people who have the dark mark? Also the fact that it only works *inside the house* greatly diminishes the spell, IMO. Harry attended school, so he's out of the house every weekday from the age of five/six on. Why couldn't someone attack him at school? Dumbledore takes a long time to explain the blood protection to him as well, so older Harry has no idea he should stay inside the house to keep himself safe (whether or not he'd actually do so). The protection is so weak that had Sirius actually been hunting down Harry to kill him, he would have suceeded (Padfoot is watching Harry in the bushes before the Knight Bus shows up). 

I understand why, for the story purpose, Harry lives with relatives who are mean to him (and its one of the aspects that pulled me into the story when I first read it), but like Alla, I find it hard to accept Dumbledore's reasoning that there was nothing else he could do. It was an easy solution for him. I really can't see how he could easily toss Harry aside if he really cared deeply about him, and I really don't think it broke his heart at all. Honestly, I don't think he even thought about him again until his eleventh birthday.

-Rebecca (apologies for responding to a 12-day-old post)