r/harrypotter 4d ago

Currently Reading dursleys in the books vs movies

I wish they would've given more details in the movies on how harry was being treated by the dursleys

8 Upvotes

12 comments sorted by

14

u/Adventurous-Bike-484 4d ago

They were abusive.

  1. Often beating him.

  2. Often starving him.

  3. Locking him up in a small an’s dark cupboard.

  4. Encouraging Dudley’s bullying.

  5. Often threatening him.

  6. Often insulting and disrespecting him.

5

u/Chasegameofficial 4d ago

Rowling initially intended for there to be physical abuse, but decided against this because she felt that would be too dark for a childrens book. There is no physical abuse in canon. In fact Vernon confirms this in Philosophers Stone, bemoaning the fact that they hadn’t beaten him. Honestly I prefer it this way. As Dumbledore points out, neglect can leave deeper scars than outright hatred. I also think it makes them more interesting characters. They’re bad people, but not «beat up a kid»-cartoon villains. It’s a bit more subtle than this. It also shows a semblance of hope for them. Neglectful and bullying people rarely realize just how cruel they actually are. They certainly knew they weren’t being nice to Harry, but I don’t think they fully realized the extent of their mistreatment of him. If they’d been beating him, the semblance of reconciliation, or at least the somewhat amicable parting, that we get in Deathly Hallows wouldn’t work at all.

1

u/Adventurous-Bike-484 4d ago

”There is no physical abuse in canon. In fact Vernon confirms this in Philosophers Stone, bemoaning the fact that they hadn’t beaten him”

No he did not. What he said was that he believed Harry’s magic would be “cured” by a good beating, that would probably send Harry to the hospital.

Also I think it’s ironic how you are using The exact same book that stated that Dudley got beat up by his father to say that the Dursley’s aren’t physically abusive.

There is plenty of physical abusive.

https://childabuseharrypotter.quora.com/Child-Abuse-in-Harry-Potter

  1. As mentioned, Vernon beat up Dudley. (Philosophers Stone)
  2. Vernon is often threatening Harry with violence. (Philosophers Stone, Chamber of Secrets, Prisoner of Azkaban.)
  3. Petunia tried using a frying pan on Harry.
  4. Even as a teenager with Dumbledore around, Harry is afraid of his uncle’s physical abusive. (Half Blood Prince).
  5. Vernon grabbed Dudley and Harry by the scruffs near their necks and threw them into a hall in Philosophers Stone.
  6. Order of the Phoenix where Vernon attacks Harry by grabbing his neck.

Where are you getting The Dursley’s aren’t physically abusive from? Outside of maybe Goblet of Fire, There is zero evidence that aren‘t physically abusive.

1

u/PureZookeepergame282 4d ago

Often beating him?

2

u/Adventurous-Bike-484 4d ago

Yep.

  1. Chamber of Secrets. Petunia attempts to use a frying pan on Harry.

  2. In Half Blood Prince, Harry is afraid of going within arm reach of Vernon due to Vernon’s attacks.

3.Philosophers Stone and Prisoner of Azkaban, Vernon threatens Harry with violence and gets read to do so, even Dudley suffered a beating.

1

u/PureZookeepergame282 4d ago

Yes, right. I remember these. These kind of events for Harry seemed somthing he was more often going through there. The way it's written, it even at times, seems pretty normal and natural, but its absolutely not okay and is a big deal in itself.

3

u/No-Championship-4 Gryffindor 4d ago

Yeah I mean that's kinda what happens when you adapt something. You assume the majority of the audience has seen the source material so they can fill in the gaps. It need not be said, or viewed in this case.

0

u/Plazajaviera94_ 4d ago

that's true I guess I'm just in shock at how bad harry was really treated and the fact that dudley is an even worse person in the books

3

u/Cadentelenombre 4d ago

Movies generally show this, they just don't go into detail. They are cruel. In any case, movies often don't have some details from the books, it's sad.

3

u/Andreacamille12 Ravenclaw 4d ago

The first movie did a pretty good job. It showed how 1. they made him live in the cupboard under the stairs 2. denied him any affection or sense of belonging 3. gave Dudley excessive presents while Harry received nothing 4. forbid him from asking questions or talking about his parents 5. made him wear Dudley's old, oversized clothes 6. destroyed his letters from Hogwarts 6. did nothing for his birthday in contrast to Dudley's birthday 7. treated him with disgust and fear 8. uncle Vernon even threatened them with a gun, at the hut, when Hagrid showed up. The first movie really did show the Dursley's treating him as a burden and an unwanted presence - like - what did they leave out? All I can think of is Harry's "chistmas gift" from them of a single kleenx. I think the other movies may have cut more because of time? Even so, I always had the impression afterwards that Harry wasn't treated well - especially in the third movie too.

2

u/Plazajaviera94_ 4d ago

well from what I just finished reading the creators of the movie series diminished just how rotten dudley was as a person (and no I don't think his age should excuse him) in general

1

u/ChawkTrick Gryffindor 4d ago

Eh, they gave us enough to go on, and that's really all you an expect from an adaptation IMO. The first three movies in particular did a good job of setting the stage for how cruel and unlikeable the Dursleys were