Re: Pearlette to Duj
(Anonymous)
Duj- As a parent, he lets a one-year-old ride a broomstick without removing hazards or the pet,
Pearlette- I can't believe you're serious about this. Harry is a magical child with magical abilities ... comparing this to a RL situation is, I'm sorry, hilarious. You might as well complain that CS Lewis was irresponsible for allowing his pre-pubescent schoolchildren to fight real battles in Narnia!
I think Duj's concern here is that even though magical children are shown to be more resilient than muggle children, there is no evidence whatsoever that they are invincible. In fact, there's a great deal of evidence to the contrary, given that Harry at 12 was able to break his arm from a simple fall (from a great height, yes, but there was no magic inflicting the actual injury and his own magic did not prevent it). Falling in general is treated is a major concern when it comes to brooms, and is why Hogwarts students (who are at least 11) are only supposed to do it while supervised. Given these facts, allowing a one year old to careen around the house uncontrollably does seem grossly negligent.
The only possible countervailing evidence might be Neville's bouncing after being dropped out a window. However, this doesn't actually hold up under scrutiny. Neville's uncle was trying to *scare* the magic out of him, and only let go on accident. It was the *emotional response* that mattered in triggering a child's magic, not the actual danger.
So, if we apply that to little Harry having a great time riding his little broom, accidentally hitting a stand hard enough to tip over a heavy vase directly onto his head, without him ever noticing the vase was there... can we really be sure his magic would have saved him?
As regards your C.S. Lewis reference, the situations were entirely different. The Pevensies were only in Narnia because of a prophecy, and no one *forced* them to fight - they chose to do so because it was the right thing to do. There were no such circumstances here- the prophecy regarding Voldemort and 'the chosen one' hadn't been set in motion, and would never have been set in motion if Voldie hadn't attacked Harry in the first place. Further, Harry was in no way capable to make decisions about what was safe and what wasn't - that's a parent's responsibility, and one that James apparently did not work diligently to fulfill.
annoni-no
Pearlette- I can't believe you're serious about this. Harry is a magical child with magical abilities ... comparing this to a RL situation is, I'm sorry, hilarious. You might as well complain that CS Lewis was irresponsible for allowing his pre-pubescent schoolchildren to fight real battles in Narnia!
I think Duj's concern here is that even though magical children are shown to be more resilient than muggle children, there is no evidence whatsoever that they are invincible. In fact, there's a great deal of evidence to the contrary, given that Harry at 12 was able to break his arm from a simple fall (from a great height, yes, but there was no magic inflicting the actual injury and his own magic did not prevent it). Falling in general is treated is a major concern when it comes to brooms, and is why Hogwarts students (who are at least 11) are only supposed to do it while supervised. Given these facts, allowing a one year old to careen around the house uncontrollably does seem grossly negligent.
The only possible countervailing evidence might be Neville's bouncing after being dropped out a window. However, this doesn't actually hold up under scrutiny. Neville's uncle was trying to *scare* the magic out of him, and only let go on accident. It was the *emotional response* that mattered in triggering a child's magic, not the actual danger.
So, if we apply that to little Harry having a great time riding his little broom, accidentally hitting a stand hard enough to tip over a heavy vase directly onto his head, without him ever noticing the vase was there... can we really be sure his magic would have saved him?
As regards your C.S. Lewis reference, the situations were entirely different. The Pevensies were only in Narnia because of a prophecy, and no one *forced* them to fight - they chose to do so because it was the right thing to do. There were no such circumstances here- the prophecy regarding Voldemort and 'the chosen one' hadn't been set in motion, and would never have been set in motion if Voldie hadn't attacked Harry in the first place. Further, Harry was in no way capable to make decisions about what was safe and what wasn't - that's a parent's responsibility, and one that James apparently did not work diligently to fulfill.
annoni-no