Living In A Cupboard

[blackroses77]

The 4th book clearly states that he had a box of sugar free snacks from Hermione, inedible rockcakes from Hagrid, fruit cake and meat pies from Mrs. Weasley and 4 birthday cakes. With the exception of the meat pies which only counts as 1 meal a day everything else is SWEETS. They do not count as food stuffs against starvation. And it was only mentioned in this book. There was no mention by JKR that they sent him anything the next summer or summer after that. And according to you since JKR didn't say they sent him anything that means they didn't. And again the Dursley's set out to starve him which is abuse just because he managed to get a little food from somewhere else doesn't mean the DURSLEY's didn't starve him. If anyone here was in this situation your parents/gaurdians would still be charged with abuse regardless of whether or not you had managed to sneak some food from somewhere.

[physicssquid]

You all seem to forget that HP is a fictional series, which means that none of this is real, and just the product of someone's imagination. Therefore you do not need to get so worked up about it. IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, IT'S NOT REAL LIFE!!!!!!!

[werewulfking]

Of course anything counts as Food if we talk about starvation. And the only thing that was ever described during his fourth year was the one breakfast. We don't know how the dinner or lunch was and I like to think the meals were kind of like my mums vegetarian meals which are low on fat but still give enough energy. And in the next two summers there isn't a mention of a very rigid diet probably because Dudley had taken up exercise in his fourth year.

[brokenquill92]

Jun 30, 2012 16:11:21 GMT -5 physicssquid said:

Jun 30, 2012 15:18:49 GMT -5 Kaiserin said:

Vernon is a load man would easily shouts and losses his temper. these are warning signs. coupled with his throwing harry bodily from a room choking him, threatening to flay him within an inch of his life. Harry also thinks they would kill him in the dobby fiasco.

This is true, to a certain extent. All those incidents seem to be isolated incidents, and when Harry is with his friends, he shows no signs of being uncomfortable with hugs from Molly, Hermione or Ginny. Hell, wouldn't a victim of abuse shy away from any physical contact with anyone, and yet Harry was the one to initiate the kiss with Ginny after the Quidditch final in book 6.

Not so there's mention of him being uncomfortable and embarassed when hugged by anyone and him initiating the kiss with Ginny was perhaps him finally breaking out of his shell remember in his first kiss with Cho he seemed extremely uncomfortable up until the fifth book he seems not to care for physical contact with anyone but Hedwig he always seems surprised when anyone touches him in an affectionate manner

[werewulfking]

Well but Harry is just a shy guy. I think I would have reacted somewhat the same when I was his age. Well of course not my family but Harry doesn't exactly have those.

[physicssquid]

And in book 5, the only time he was locked in his room was when the Dursleys went to the false lawn competition, so he would probably have been eating with them, he just didn't want to. The book does say that he kept dreaming about the graveyard, and then thinking about it during the daytime, which to me, says he was depressed, and therefore probably didn't WANT to eat anything much at all.
Book 6, well, he stayed in his room, brooding over Sirius' death, so there is no way to tell what the Dursleys were like with him, and in book 7, they all left, with Dudley seemingly improved slightly. Again, there were no real mentions of what the Dursleys were like with him, though he did argue with Vernon a lot about them going into hiding with Dedalus and Hestia.

[werewulfking]

I agree with physicssquid what she said are exactly my sentiments about the Dursley time of books 5 to 7.

[sherza]

It is specifically mentioned that Harry, who is already skinny, is being given less food than Dudley, who is being put on a diet designed to make him lose weight. Dudley gets a quarter of a grapefruit for breakfast, and Harry gets less than that, and this is consistent for as long as Dudley is on that diet and Harry is in that house.

And I sincerely doubt that Petunia or Vernon gave a shit as to whether or not Harry got a balanced meal at any time, if they thought bread and cheese qualified as a meal at one point, so there is zero guarantee that Harry was getting a properly balanced, sufficient meal.

As for getting upset about it? Some people find it offensive in the extreme that something as horrifying as abuse is treated so lightly and casually in a book aimed at children. The series gives this message to kids:

'no matter what your parents/guardians do to you, no one will care, no one will help ... and it's not abuse anyway, so don't bother. Just suck it up and deal, because you're on your own, kiddo. Better hope they don't do any permanent damage'.

THAT is why we get upset, and get pissed about the whole thing.

Harry is consistently, constantly, and systematically brutalized from the moment he's introduced in the series. Dumbledore BREAKS LAWS by putting him on that goddamn doorstep, and it just gets worse from there.

Harry is constantly attacked verbally, mentally, and emotionally. He is constantly neglected. He is physically brutalized by his cousin (who is said to punch him on the nose frequently, and Harry Hunt, among other things). He is physically attacked by Vernon and Petunia on a regular enough basis that he's STOPPED FLINCHING AWAY FROM IT AND DOES NOT ACT SURPRISED AT THE ATTACKS. Worse, despite being small and thin, clad in third-hand, WAY too big clothes, and sporting constant bruises from one source or another, NO ONE NOTICES, and nothing is done, not even in the 'Muggle' world.

JKR can hem and haw and try to qualify what Harry went through, both in the books themselves (Harry's comment about 'maybe the cupboard was why he was so skinny, maybe not ... and the whole 'he was never *exactly* starved, but never allowed to eat as much as he liked' comments), and in interviews, but the brutal truth is, going by WHAT SHE WROTE IN THE DAMN BOOKS, Harry was horrifyingly abused, DUMBLEDORE KNEW ABOUT IT and DID NOTHING.

[lucyolsen]

OK, fine, you win. He wasn't starved by dictionary definition of the word. However, he also was not fed enough, can you at least agree to that?

Regardless of the fact that he was able to get his hands on food other than what the Dursleys gave him, it should not have been his responsibility, and it was damaging, if not physically, that he was in a situation where he was forced to do so, when he knew perfectly well that his relatives were able to feed him. That they didn't give him enough just means that most decent people would have taken better care of a random strange child than these people did their own nephew.

[werewulfking]

Congratulations lucyolsen that is a statement I can easily agree with. We all know that the Dursleys were horrible people but some always go over the top like sherza above you. Reading her post makes me wonder why she would even consider reading and even writing and or discussing about Harry Potter when it is such a brutal book.

[blackroses77]

Actually the dictionary definition of starvation according to webster is a) to suffer extreme hunger b) to deprive of nourishment.

Case closed Harry was starved.

And if you had bothered to read any of sherza's other posts you would know this is an issue close to her heart.

[physicssquid]

Jul 1, 2012 17:14:52 GMT -5 werewulfking said:

Congratulations lucyolsen that is a statement I can easily agree with. We all know that the Dursleys were horrible people but some always go over the top like sherza above you. Reading her post makes me wonder why she would even consider reading and even writing and or discussing about Harry Potter when it is such a brutal book.

So agree. Are we the only sane people who remember that the series is fictional, and because it's a fantasy series where the laws of physics don't seem to apply, i.e brooms and people being able to turn into animals smaller than them, the story doesn't have to be realistic, because I don't think it can be realistic?

[blackroses77]

JKR certainly wanted all the other moral issues she put in the book to be taken seriously. And that is what is being discussed here, the moral issues not the fantasy of the book.

[werewulfking]

I admit that I only thought about the first part of the definition and I don't doubt that the issue is close to sherzas heart. But if an issue that I feel strongly about is handled like this in a book than I wouldn't read it nor would I want to talk about it as it is fiction and not a real problem that doesn't go away by not talking about it.

[lucyolsen]

OK, well, yes we agree that they did not beat him bloody on a regular basis, and did feed him enough keep him alive and whine about the fact that they did not feed him enough. No one is claiming that they did do these things, other than fanfics which escalate the violence (even there, the authors know that it deviates from canon).

Sometimes I think, that what they did do was even more damaging than if they had done those things, because he internalized all their criticisms, and treated him just well enough that he believed that they actually were treating him well enough.

Had any intelligent person in the muggle world been aware of what went on in that house, he would have been removed (never mind interference from Dumbledore). So just because he was not starved and was not beaten bloody, it still can be called abuse (and should be).

And if Harry had been anybody else, he probably would have murdered his relatives. It only proves that not only are they horrible people, but they are also horrible idiots.

[AllyJackson]

Siriusly.

[sherza]

Yeah ... the abuse thing is a bit of a trigger for me, as I'm an abuse survivor. So I get frothy about it. And refuse to apologize for it, because honestly, Harry's put through hell. If a real, live kid were put in that situation, the Dursleys and Dumbledore would be spending HUGE amounts of time behind bars, alongside every teacher Harry had, for not reporting Harry's situation.

And I got introduced to the series via the movies, which skate over the worst of the abuse, implying only that he was locked in the cupboard and his room ... you don't see anything else, in the movies. The cupboard was bad, and pissed me off, but ... well, it's not made clear in the movies that anyone knew the situation Harry was in, other than the twins and Ron, and even THEY don't know more than his window was barred. It wasn't until I read the books and actually sat down and thought about the implications that I went through the roof.

And promptly started writing fics to fix it. *snerk*.

[werewulfking]

Yes but we don't disagree on the moral aspect but on how we interpret what Rowling has written in her book. I always see the loophole how it could have been much better and others don't. But while I always keep in mind that it isn't real and I don't have to get worked up others again don't.

[physicssquid]

Morally, it is wrong, but I also try to remember that it is fiction, and therefore I don't have to get upset by what's written on the page.
Again, there are many things that could have been done to make everything different, but you have to remember, many of those possible solutions could have made it worse instead of better.

[lucyolsen]

I have always believed that the issues have actually stemmed from the fact that the first book was aimed at children. Therefore, the actions of the Dursleys are so ridiculous that they are the actions of two-dimensional cartoon villains. I never did take it all too seriously, because you can't take cartoon villains all that seriously.

However, that does not negate the fact what Rowling described in the book, did in fact happen. Had this been real life, he would have been removed from their care and it would have been called abuse, so therefore it should be called abuse within a fictional world also.

[werewulfking]

Of course it should be called abuse, but as I said in my first post in this forum sadly the taking away doesn't always happen. Because even in real life teachers, doctors and government officals can make mistakes or just don't want to face the truth.

[sherza]

Jul 1, 2012 17:36:58 GMT -5 physicssquid said:

Morally, it is wrong, but I also try to remember that it is fiction, and therefore I don't have to get upset by what's written on the page.
Again, there are many things that could have been done to make everything different, but you have to remember, many of those possible solutions could have made it worse instead of better.

Yeah ... magically forcing the Dursleys to treat Harry decently (by whatever magical means), or placing Harry with the Tonks, or raising him at Hogwarts would CLEARLY make matters worse.

By the way ... that was sarcasm.

[werewulfking]

As I tried to point out many times before all those suggestions could easily have made matters worse (again in the logic of Rowlings Universe) and could have ended in Harry's Death.

The two options I see are that Dumbledore should have had Harry supervised 24/7 by fully trained Wizards or he could have raised Harry somewhere else with him as the guardian and protector. But that would have to be isolated from the Hogwarts School.

and just a reminder of the whole "forcing against their will by magical means thing". That was what Merope did to Tom Riddle Sr. and that brought the wizarding world voldemort. So clearly there are bad side effects.

[lucyolsen]

We can argue all we want about the moral implications of leaving Harry in the situation.

I can agree that he should have been removed and raised by someone else, while also having the belief that it would not have been a very good book had someone done so. I can be happy that he was raised the way he was, because I was happy with the character archetype that he represented. It builds character. And I know that I sound like Dumbledore here (or at least some fanfic version of him), but I literally mean that it builds character, because he is a character in a book. Who would have been interested in a hero without adversity?

[physicssquid]

Certainly not me. That would just be boring.

[sherza]

Yeah, not so much (regarding Merope and Tom)

Tom was more a product of generations of horrifying levels of inbreeding. Morfin, Marvolo, and Merope were all *clearly* completely barking mad, not to mention suffering from the physical consequences of that amount of inbreeding. Tom was just the pinnacle of fucked-upness of that family.

And even if Tom *was* a result of Merope monkeying around, it was because he was CONCEIVED under the influence of Amortentia.

Since Harry is not going to be conceived under the auspices of that love potion, there's really no problem with magically forcing the Dursleys to treat him decently. If it's possible to be done with Muggles, Dumbledore could have placed them under an Unbreakable Vow or some such.

And I'd like to know how being raised by someone common sensible, who doesn't abuse Harry, under a Fidelius held by Dumbledore (and don't pull that 'Lucius could have forced it out of him' BS. Lucius knew better than to touch Dumbledore directly like that. Best he could ever do was indirectly drive Dumbledore out of Hogwarts temporarily, and that only after Harry started Hogwarts. Lucius HAD to have known that Dumbledore knew where Harry was living prior to that, so if he was going to try to force the info out of Dumbles, he would have before the books started) could be bad for Harry or end up with him dead.

[sherza]

Also ... adversity can come from sources OTHER THAN BEING ABUSED, YOU IDIOTS.

For god's sake. Harry had a maniacal, seventy-year-old-plus Dark Lord bastard out for his blood. There are SO many ways that could have produced *plenty* of adversity without Dumbledore manufacturing shit for Harry to go through (like the abuse, or those *stupid* traps first year).

Voldemort all on his little lonesome could have caused Harry all sorts of grief and havoc. No abuse required.

[werewulfking]

Yeah of course Lucius couldn't do anything but I base all my argumentations on the fact that Dumbledore thought about a future were Voldemort was back, stronger than ever and even could threaten him.
And even further to a point were everyone but a few trusted friends would be against Harry and he needed a place to survive until he was of age.
I think Dumbledore never expected Harry to reach the age of seventeen before Voldemort had managed to come back. I think that he was even relieved to have such a long period of peace. It could have been very different had all Deatheaters just banded together and searched for Voldemort. He could have returned when Harry was 5.

[werewulfking]

And on the topic of the traps. I see two different possibilities for why harry and his friends were able to get past them (other than being a trio and having extraordinary skills for first year students):
1. The only two real protections were Fluffy and the Mirror because nothing more was needed. The rest was just a test for the teachers to search for potential enemys.
2. There were spells in place on all the different Levels that Quirell and Voldemort broke through before the trio arrived e.g.:

Fluffy could easily have like magic "earmuffs"
The devils snare could have been protected by a combination of a dark mist (against light) and a water spell against fire
the key could have been protected by a strong disilusoment charm
and the last three are really formidable protections unless you have a genius chess player and a well genius with you and somehow manage to beat a huge troll.

[lucyolsen]

I'm just going to quote a book here, because I can't say it any better.

We never get tired of the basic plot: Jane Eyre, Harry Potter, The Ugly Duckling, and A Little Princess are all about adolescents of superior birth who suffer miserably while living with their foster families but outstrip their oppressors in the end.

The question being answered was about things that are like Cinderella, so that also goes in the list.


The book is here, and the quote is from page 408.
www.amazon.com/Spinning-Straw-into-Gold-Gould/dp/0812975456