(no subject)

Date: 2005-04-13 02:28 pm (UTC)
and most of the fans are wondering why if Dumbledore knew the Dursley's would not love him he was left with them. I wonder too.

I think I'm a broken record here, but I honestly think the explanation that is being plugged in the books and in comments is "rock and hard place, no matter what you do something will suck" on Dumbledore's part. He sends Harry off there because he believes the child must be kept safe above all other things (which is partly selfish in the sense of 'we need him to defeat Voldemort eventually', but I'm less inclined to consider that 'selfish' when you think of all the people Voldemort has fucked up--think of Harry thinking about Neville's parents) and there is jackity jack in canon to propose a better and safer way than that. Sure, fandom can second-guess and throw out proposals to send him to Australia all they want, but sometimes reading fiction you just have to accept some things in the world as given.

I suspect Dumbledore knew it wouldn't be a cakewalk. The question of intervention vs. non-intervention is a messy one, but we also don't know the mechanics of how and why the protection works. But 'way to ensure Harry was ready to latch onto the good side and be dependent on them'? JKR probably ain't gonna write that, as she's already written something else.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

rhiannonmr

August 2014

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
101112 13141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags