I don't understand how people can suggest that Harry wasn't abused by the Dursleys. If it wasn't outright physical abuse, then it was definitely emotional abuse since he was treated as a freak. Remember Aunt Marge telling him that his parents were worthless and so was he, while the Dursleys silently agreed with her? It's definitely implied that Aunt Marge was always like this. Imagine being a child and being told that you're a useless good for nothing. That's emotional abuse! Also, the Dursleys straight up allowed Dudley to bully Harry and even encouraged him. How is that not abusive?

Really some people are too soft on the Dursleys. Sure they didn't physically abuse him or rape him, but they definitely emotionally abused him.

 

Nobody is disagreeing that the Dursleys are colossal dickheads. I think the issue people take is either the exaggeration of the abuse, or the exaggeration of its effects. When you say "Imagine being a child and being told that you're a useless good for nothing", the suggestion is that it would have had a significant effect on the self worth of that child. Harry does not act like the stereotype of a broken needy child, and too often he is written that way.

 

Completely agree that the pattern of behaviour we see would in reality have left far more of a mark on Harry than he ever displays. To the extent that a story about wizards needs an explanation for why childhood mental trauma doesn't affect him I'd go with some combination of carrying vestige of his mother's love/wizards resilient to mental harm just as they are to physical harm/Tom riddle fragment let's him know subconsciously he's a wizarding ubermensch and they are totes jealous

 

I'm not entirely sure I'd say he's totally normal or that he doesn't have issue with authority figures. Running straight for the philosopher's stone at 11, going to the chamber of secrets, etc. He's far more willing to throw himself into dangerous situations at certain ages than most of that age are willing (generally, voluntarily performing crazy death defying stunts happen at 15-17, not 11-15). From books 1-5 (excluding the Goblet) he pretty much voluntarily throws himself into very dangerous situations.

Granted, he's right to have no respect for the Ministry and most authority figures he hates, but he definitely has a low opinion of them and most authority figures in his society aside from Dumbledore and McGonagall. Now, he should have a lot more than just constantly being told he has to say "Professor Snape", but there are some signs there.

 

Does that mean I'm 31 again? Thank God!

Basically, while Harry would have first arrived at Hogwarts with his bones mostly intact, he should have been a complete headcase. Hashtag LoveShieldExMachina.

 

Yeah, it's pretty clear that Rowling wanted to portray Harry as largely normal and undamaged by how the Dursleys treated him. Which might not be realistic, but is probably the smart decision from the perspective of writing an enjoyable children's book. Harry having a ton of issues and some very unhealthy defense/survival mechanisms would make for a much less fun story, and one that I doubt children would enjoy reading.

 

Didn't Aunt Pentunia basically try to murder Harry with a frying pan?

If that blow had connected Harry would have died. Frying pans are very dangerous and a direct hit could have caused anything from a concussion to brain haemorrhage.

Aside from that there is Vernon choking Harry:

In fact I remember Vernon hitting his own son, Dudley around the head .Would it really be a stretch to consider that he beats Harry especially since he talks about beating him up a couple of times?

What reason could Harry have for hiding from his uncle other than the fact that he is probably physically abused by him?
--- Post automerged ---

Wtf I am 7 now

 

Harry wouldn't have died, bludgers hit just as hard as a person can swing and Quidditch players almost shrug them off on occasion

 

In the universe of Harry Potter, Petunia swinging a frying pan at Harry's head was not attempted murder, just her being a bit of a jerk.

In the real world, if you hit a twelve year old in the head with a heavy metal object you're fairly likely to kill them or at lost cause severe bodily harm.

 

I advise people to visit the book club, rereading book 1 destroy lots of fanon notions.
I also want to echo @Sorrows Book 1 was written for children and pre teens if i'm guessing correctly.
You can't include much heavy stuff in it.
When JKR tried to do it in later books it didn't come out good as she thought.

Which is why fanfiction exists, to explore various paths the author didn't take.
A good fic that explore Harry more sneaky/cunning/street smart skills is in the library,
Where he and Ron wreak havoc.


There was also one fic that included abused Harry until he killed Vernon at age 8.
few fics bother to explore Harry past and ramifications (even without exaggerating ) of Harry growing up. they just do it poorly with tons of cliche.
Worst of them is Snape metor/father/adopt Harry or evil Dumbledore outsmart by 11 years old child.

remember, stupid villians make your fic stupid as well.

 

Well, did Ron really lead him to "underachievement"? (if that's what you're implying) Harry was probably the best boy in Gryffindor of his year seeing that he should have been made a prefect and he did pretty well in his OWLs despite having a tough year. What else do you want him to do? I don't know why people speak as if Harry was some horrible student, when he was obviously not. Just because he wasn't the ridiculous genius we see in fanfics that masters 7th year spells on his first week at Hogwarts, it doesn't mean that he was a bad student.

 

Alternatively Rowling is a genetic determinist, leaning towards the harder end of the spectrum. In such a view it's not the abuse that results in fucked up people but because the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Children that are abused via the witholding of love and isolation can't/ have extreme difficulty forming relationships not because of psychological damage but because their descended from the kinds of parents who have such difficulty forming normal relationships that they withhold love and isolate their children. So therefore as Harry's parents were by all accounts much liked and swell people and the worst of the abuse was initiated by Vernon it's no surprise that Harry turns out to be by all accounts a swell and well adjusted lad.

 

Fits well with her Toryish instincts.

 

"It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities."

Substitute abilities for genetics or inheritance of whatever. I've got to go with Sorrows on this one. Harry Potter, despite all the characters that stayed true to type, has always been about those special folk who choose a better path than the one they were assigned. Choosing virtuous actions is kinda the underpinning moral theme of the series, to my mind.

 

You realise she's an out and out Labour supporter and has been for decades. She's just not a fan of Corbyn's Labour.

 

I also people accusing her of being a TERF, as well as her tendency to ret-con wokeness (tlike he whole "Hermione could be black thing).

Calling Rowling a Tory is a new one, for me at least.