I don't have a problem with the Dursley's portrayal since that's such a commonplace in British children's literature. Without horribly abusive adults there'd hardly be any kids stories in England.

Also, real people generally try to pretend they are standing up for traditional values, or trying to teach Harry values/protect him from his magical nature when they mistreat their kids. At the very least, as the understanding of other things in the books evolves, the Dursleys ought to be less of a set of cartoon villains, cause isn't that what happens when we grow up?

Exactly, erika! Nobody uses "But what will the neighbors thing?" as their sole justification for bad behavior. (Even if it really is, that's not how we justify it to ourselves.)

Incidentally, P-Cow I saw your picture in a magazine the other day. 7x7 San Francisco, the current June issue with the Best of San Francisco. They have a piece on the cheater's spelling bee and show your team.

Whaaaat. Where can I find this? I must see it.

Except they're just so ridiculous in their antipathy, it's not really dangerous, not evocative of current cultural problems, it's just out of a fairy-tale. The annual Christmas gifts, for instance: why send anything at all?

Right? And, for that matter, why keep Harry at all? They hate him SO MUCH. You'd think they would be GLAD to get rid of him for the summer, send him away to the Weasleys or something, ship him off to Hogwarts. What is so awful about magic, really? It's like they want to imprison him just for the sake of having control over a small boy.

Additionally, the bigotry against muggles by wizards is seen as a real threat to the long-term stability of the wizarding world, because they do draw members from muggle families, and they are grossly outnumbered by muggles: if they get too obvious, they will be overwhelmed by the response.

I'm finding the Muggle bigotry really annoying too. Maybe because I'm a Muggle myself, but, geez, wizards are like, "Oh God, not a MUGGLE." Like it's the worst thing in the world.

Whereas the bigotry of muggles against wizards, as shown by the Dursleys, is toxic to those individuals subject to it (Harry and Tom Riddle), but it seems to pose no risk to muggle-dom itself.

Exactly! I DON'T GET IT.

And yeah, Slughorn is weak, but not evil.

That's his name! Yeah, he was okay.

The problem I have with the Slytherins is that all of the Slytherin kids leave Hogwarts before the battle in HP7.

And, of course, many people have pointed out the ridiculousness of keeping around a house from which ALL EVIL WIZARDS HAVE SPRUNG. I mean, come on, guys. Maaaaaybe you should just let them have their Evil Hogwarts or something? You know, like Pigfarts.

Maaaaaybe you should just let them have their Evil Hogwarts or something? You know, like Pigfarts.

A theory I have heard propounded lately may explain this a little bit, actually: it's that the Slytherins are (almost explicitly) the aristocracy of the Wizarding world. They are the oldest families, with most of the money and a great deal of power, even if they aren't apparently involved in government as such.

So Hogwarts is dependent on Slytherin support because that's where a chunk of their funding is coming from. If Dumbledore tries to chuck out Slytherin entirely, he starts a class war.

Nobility as a necessary evil: it's a thought. And then, cast that way, you see that Hogwarts is probably the most democratic institution in the wizarding world...

I can totally understand the anti-wizard bigotry--in reality, if people started showing up with strange freaky powers, while a lot of people would just be jealous, others would be bitter and rageful and fearful that they would become obsolete, etc etc, try to teach their wizardy children not to use the powers, blah blah morality-cakes. But I really would expect the Dursleys and their issues to be more fleshed out as the series got older and more shades-of-grey, rather than stay caricatures.

Ooh, that's a sound theory. I do wonder about the other wizarding schools, though. We don't really have any idea what they're like and how they're run and whether they're busy producing evil wizards, do we? Besides the visitors at the Triwizard Tournament, we don't see much of other schools at all.

They probably do care about that, as well as the long arm of the law, but most people probably have to believe they are doing the right thing somehow or other. Because their parents did it and They Grew Up Fine(the "damn it," is mostly implied) Or if they're too permissive, he'll be spoiled. Take your pick, even down to "Magic freaky." And, love him or not, they did get him through that baby stage...there was never a moment of fondness, or anything? I suppose it says more about me than the Dursleys that I don't really believe that would be true. Maybe almost...maybe Harry believes that, but it's dumb to hem and haw about Snape and leave that to stand.

they did get him through that baby stage...there was never a moment of fondness, or anything? I suppose it says more about me than the Dursleys that I don't really believe that would be true.

Yeah. I mean, there's never a moment of kindness, in ten years? Really? Dudley and Harry never team up against the adults? And if they're that abusive, they're surprisingly calculating in the way that the abuse never quite becomes actionable under the law. (Well, it is actionable, really, but no one ever notices.)

In reality, any child treated like Harry would have grown up with a serious case of attachment disorder (that's what it's called, right?), and probably would never be able to create or maintain a normal human relationship--at least not without serious therapy.

The annual Christmas gifts, for instance: why send anything at all?

Right? And, for that matter, why keep Harry at all?

I don't have any problems with either of these. The Dursley's are very much concerned with appearances and making sure they are doing what society dictates. Harry is a violation of social norms and thus they keep him locked up and hidden away. But, he is also their orphaned nephew and society says they must care for him. They can hide how WELL they care for him, but they have provided him a bed and food (barely). And social norms dictate sending a gift without specifying how nice it needs to be.