The Dursley's - Blood Protection (was Re: Occlumency ... LONG)

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 191740



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" <dumbledore11214 at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> > Steve:
> > 
> > Actually, the books explain very very well precisely why Dumbledore left Harry at the Dursleys.
> > 
> > When Voldemort shed Lily's blood as she defended Harry, that left a degree of magical protection within Harry....
> > 
> > Dumbledore expanded on 'the Blood Protection' by further enhancing it with additional spells. While Harry can call home, the place where his mother's blood dwells, he can not be harmed there. ...
> ><SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I just want to clarify in case somebody may think that I forgot about the protection -...I did not think that the whole theme of blood protection was done convincingly and credibly for me.
> 
> ... I think that a lot of things that Dumbledore did are not because he is that evil ..., or at least I did not think that JKR wanted to paint him that way. I get that Harry needed to grew up with Dursleys to love WW so much in comparison because JKR needed him to, ... which make sense to me from within the story is that Dumbledore indeed an evil, horrible manipulator, who had no business being nowhere near Harry.
> 
> I am unable to suspend disbelief as to how he acted or not acted otherwise.
>

Steve:

You are confusing, or seeming to confuse, the motivations of the author with the motivations of Dumbledore himself. What JKR needed to happen does not influence the character motivations. They have their own internal reasons for acting as they do. 

Now I think that one could fairly argue that Dumbledore preferred Harry to grow up at the Dursleys so he would appreciate the wizard world even more. The canon is thin for that, but it could be a fair interpretation, and while I don't subscribe to it, I can't go so far as to say it is totally wrong. 

But JKR already explained a part of this. That is, how Harry could be so very different from Tom Riddle, even though their circumstances were similar. Both Tom Riddle and Harry Potter lead very deprived lives; they were not really loved or nurtured. 

But there is one big difference, Harry had about a year and a half of loving bonding with his mother and father, and perhaps even family friends. Tom Riddle grew from birth in a cold sterile orphanage, and did not get that bonding, and THAT has made all the difference in the world.

Harry, while he generally keeps to himself, can relate to people. Their actions do affect him. There are those he respects, and those he despises. But to Tom Riddle, all his actions and seeming friendships are cold and calculated. Every action and interaction simply serves him in some way. 

>From the Author's point of view, it was necessary for Harry to live a somewhat Cinderella existance. Life had to be hard for a variety of authorial reasons. But just because JKR needed Harry's life to be hard, that doesn't mean Dumbledore specifically and willfully needed Harry's life to be hard. 

There are plenty of reasons for the author to need this, but few reason for the characters in the books to also need it. In the books, it just happened. Dumbledore expected more from the Dursley's and was disappointed to learn how poorly Harry was treated. He didn't expect much, but he did expect more than he got. Yet, he accepted it because it was a necessary evil. But a necessary evil is not necessarily an evil of his willful planning or intended. 


No back to the central topic of Harry at the Dursley's and Dumbledore placing him there. 

The Dursleys were Harry only living relatives, even with the existance of a Godfather, who just happened to be in prison, Petunia being Lily's sister has some legal standing in both the muggle and wizard world. 

Second, you can not deny the Protection because we see it working. It would have been very easy for the DE's to attack Harry at Privet Drive, where he has no wizards or witches to protect him. If the protection was not there, a wizard could have entered by stealth one night and easily killed them all. 

The incentive was low while Voldemort was gone, but once Voldemort returned and commanded his forces, without the protection, that could have easily been accomplished. But then ... no story.

We further see the Protection in action the night Harry leaves for good. The DE's were there in the skies above Privet Drive, they obviously knew that Harry live there, or at least that he lived in Little Whinging, though perhaps not the precise location. They could have attacked Harry before the Order arrived. They could have attacked Harry the day before. But they didn't because they couldn't.

Harry only became vulnerable once he was outside the bubble of protection, and under the circumstance, once he left the bubble, the protection actually broke. Number 4 Privet Drive was no longer a safe place for either Harry or the Dursleys. Only while he he could call the place where his mother's blood dwelled HOME would he be safe there. When he no longer called it home, the place was no longer protected. 

So, clearly the Protection is there and it is working, and it is doing precisely what Dumbledore planned for it to do; it protects Harry. 

It is hard to deny the existance of the Protection or the effectiveness of it, when we can see it working in the story. 

As to the level of the Durley's mistreatment, while it was not pleasant or fair, I don't think it quite crossed the line into criminal or Social Services, or Child Protective Services would have come to call. The neighbors can see Harry, they can see he is shabby, skinny, and occasionally bruised, but not sufficiently so to warrant a call to Social Services. Neither to our knowledge did any teach call Protective Services. 

Yes, it was a deprived existance, but Harry survived and within limits thrived. Again, he was not so deprived as to become ill. He was thin but not starving. He got bullied, but apparently not sufficiently so to warrant intervention, or trips to the hospital or doctor to treat injuries. 

Yes, it was unpleasant, unkind, and unfair, but let's not let our perspective run away with us here. 

Steve/bluewizard