Harry Potter/Headscratchers/Other: Difference between revisions

** Alternate theory: In the first book, they talk about "squashing it out of him." Perhaps they ''don't'' hate Harry as much as it seems, and they are trying to give him what they honestly see as the better life. Maybe if his eleventh birthday had passed without event, they would have eased up and things could have been salvaged a little, but when it didn't, they got desperate and started trying harder despite knowing they were bound to/had already failed, and it was a convenient way to vent whatever frustration they had in their lives that they were already used to. Love will make you do much worse things than hate, and it gives the Dursleys and the series another dimension. I will grant that the Dursleys kind of have to be hateful, bitter, narrow people anyway, but someone can be hateful and bitter and narrow without being cartoon evil. I will also grant that there's no canon evidence for this, but I'll chalk that up to a) it's a children's series, and thus I don't expect moral ambiguity, and b) JK seriously sucks at writing believable villains (seriously, ask any fanfic writer/roleplayer who tries to write from the villain standpoint. It's nearly impossible to do without just giving up and doing it [[For the Evulz]]).

*** Another theory: Dumbledore, through Harry's life, ''has'' been intervening and keeping hidden from Harry. The Dursleys slip some abuse beneath the radar, though: Dumbledore's not omniscient.

* What's up with the 'wizards are born not made business'? It sounds something a racial eugenics doctor came up with!

** And the problem is? The way JKR defined her 'world', the ability to control magic is based on a genetical trait, like e.g. hair color. If it were just a matter of learning, it would be a wholly different world: no [[Masquerade]], no [[Fantastic Racism]]... Overall, the whole plot of the series would not make sense any more, as the main reason for the war is said racism.