Another link in the "manipulative Dumbledore" theory just popped into my mind. We've all heard the "wah-wah-wah Dumbles had to know, my letter went to the cupboard..." set of evidence for Dumbledore's culpability in the "abuse" of Harry Potter, but I just noticed something that pretty clearly indicates he had intimate knowledge of what was going on.

Mrs. Figg Chap 2 OoTP

Mr. Weasley, immediately after Harry states a desire to leave #4. Chap 2 OoTP

Vernon Dursley to Harry. Chap 2 OoTP

Dumbledore to Petunia Dursley Chap 2 OoTP

From Mrs. Figg we learn that Dumbledore not only knew about the "hard times" but perpetuated it. That's hardly a responsible thing to do.

The next several passages are what really peaked my interest. Moments after Harry or Vernon say something, an owl to counter it bursts onto the scene. Harry *mutters* that he needs to leave because the ministry was coming, bang Mr. Weasley tells him Dumbledore's on it. Vernon kicks Harry out, bang Dumbledore sends a howler to Petunia forcing them to keep him... Those conversations took place in two different rooms, and the letters arrived before they could leave those rooms.

That's a bit more than a guard out at the curb reporting the interesting bits when their shift is over. That indicates active monitoring of every word said in the house, since no wizard was on the property from when Dung left the first time till the letters arrived it means the charms or bugs were already in place. Why is Dumbledore not only violating Harry's privacy, but completely destroying it by allowing others (Arthur and friends) to listen in as well? The only thing worse than such thorough monitoring would be video cameras as well.

Dumbledore and the Order knew.

 

I used to like the whole "manipulative Dumbledore" thing...now it just annoys me. My reply now is...Would you walk into another mans house and tell him how to run his household?

 

It's not that big a deal, we already know he does. He admits it in HBP. Anyways, how is that manipulative? It was all in his best interest (Harry), otherwise, he would have been in Ministry control and used.

Dumbledore is manipulative, but no matter what, he is a good human being who wanted Harry to be content. It's not his fault the place he would be safest, happens to be the place he is abused.

 

Pretty good observation, I haven't seen someone to use that angle before.

 

I dislike how the same excuses are used over and over to make Harry rebel and find "the books of ultimate power" down in Knockturn. An epiphany that the "kindly old man who only wants the best for you" allowed you to be neglected and abused does not convey super powers. It lets you see that he may not have your best interests at heart after all, the rest still needs to be explained logically.

 

Actually Mrs. Figg is saying that Dumbledore gave her orders to keep an eye on Harry and not to tell him she is a squib. She then says that she had to make Harry's stay miserable so she can keep an eye on him. Meaning, she independently decided to do so in order to keep an eye on Harry as Dumbledore wanted but making him miserable was not one of Dumbledore's orders.

As for the monitoring, it could be a sophisticated monitor of the wards. Like the Weasley's family clock telling the location/state of the family members. The ward monitor could tell if he is at the house, planning on leaving, about to be kicked out and so on. Still intrusive but not to the point where the old man is fondling himself over hearing Harry and Dudley fondling themselves.

However, whether Dumbledore is actually listening in on the conversations or not is irrevelant if Harry thinks he does. A nice twist to the cliche is that Harry believes Dumbledore is overly manipulative when he is actually not.

 

I don't see what is so bad about what Dumbledore did. If there was no will which we have no evidence there was the the Dursleys have every right to take Harry. Dumbledore did the RIGHT thing by putting him with his next of kin. As for other options... Sirius is in Azkaban, Remus isn't allowed and I'm not sure I would put Harry with him anyway. He is just a close friend of his perents, not something to take a child for. A random family would have spoilt him rotten and he would have been a Malfoy probably. It wasnt great but it all worked out in the end,

Remember a lot of the worst stuff we hear about the Dursleys is Fanon not Canon. They are utter bastards for sure but before the age of ten Harry got by ok and a hell of a lot better than others have it.