GOF Chapter 4: Back to the Burrow
Jan. 23rd, 2011 10:05 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
oryx_leucoryx posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslockThis is the start of the 'Harry with the Weasley family' section of the book. Since this is a longer book, in this one this section takes about 7 chapters, the longest in the series. I am not thrilled. Of course this section in each book shows how the Weasleys are the bestest family ever, and completely different from the Dursleys.
In Harry's praise, he cleaned his hiding place of all food. He did not, however sort out the contents of his trunk, as we shall see in DH.
Vernon is concerned about wizards showing up dressed in robes, thus giving away the secret that he is harboring not an insane boy but a magical one. I can't decide which option is scarier. Where do the Weasleys get Muggle clothing for their kids? Does this mean Muggle fashion has made it into the Wizarding World, but so far only for the younger generation?
Dudley got his pig's tail on Harry's 11th birthday, July 31st. It was removed surgically on September 1st. I'm not at all surprised he was traumatized. (And to remind you, the tail was in reaction to Vernon(!) being disrespectful to the mention of Dumbledore.)
The Weasleys are late. Well, they always manage to make it to the train the very last minute.
Yes Arhur, the Dursleys have an electric fire, with a plug! And his first idea of how to get out is by property destruction. Why not send the boys back home and Apparate to the Dursleys living room (or better yet, to outside their front door)? Even if for some reason Side-Along Apparition wasn't legal then or had yet to be invented, surely he could work a solution from Harry's end - either get the Dursleys' permission for the fireplace hook-up from their end or take Harry on the Knight Bus? In part it's because Rowling decided Harry had to leave 4PD by a different manner each book so the Knight Bus is out, but reworking the fireplace was still an option and it would have shown Arthur in better light. Though it would have saved Dudley the near-death experience - how could Harry enjoy his life without it?
Arthur is tall and thin, how could I forget? More support for the Dumbledore-Weasley family connection? Then shouldn't the fact that he is balding connect him to Slughorn?
Arthur broke the law to connect 4PD to the floo network. After writing a law with a loophole allowing him to enchant the car I'm not surprised. He also has a 'useful contact' at the Floo Regulation Panel. This contact is male so he can't be Madam Edgecombe. Arthur seems to have a contact in every department - and once you have contacts you don't need special treatment (or at least, you don't need to think of the exchange of favors as such).
Harry thinks the Dursleys didn't understand what Arthur was saying. Doesn't he realize Petunia should know at least some of it from hearsay?
No Harry, Fred's wink wasn't because he was hoping to get a glimpse of Dudley. He was going to kill him with candy.
It's touching how Vernon is shielding Petunia from wizard-attack. Not the first time - we saw him doing just that when Hagrid arrived at the Hut on the Rock too. Just like James facing Voldemort wandlessly. Except James could have had a wand had he been more alert, while Vernon had no better option. But James' stand is considered brave while Vernon is cowardly and ridiculous.
I suppose Dudley is ridiculous for not recognizing Arthur as the caring Muggle-lover? You know, the one who just blasted his way into the living room of Dudley's home?
So, do you think Fred's candy bag spilled completely accidentally or was it a planned move? It reads like his "Oh no - hang on -" came before the spill to me.
If Arthur is amazed at the way the Dursleys do not respond to Harry's farewell then I don't think he figured out yet the nature of the relationship between them and Harry. So I take my words from my review of the previous chapter back: The Weasley adults were plotting to kidnap Harry from his Muggle guardians despite not knowing (or not believing) that they had mistreated him. Now Vernon is forced to say good-bye at (unintended?) wandpoint.
Dudley nearly suffocates to death on twin-candy. Had he taken the candy after Arthur left I doubt he would have survived. What would have Twinkly done to make them take Harry in again the following summer? (And would Arthur have felt any remorse about his role in Dudley's death? What about the twins?)
Dudley's enlarged tongue protruding from his mouth, lolling around like a great slimy python - a foreshadowing of the Dark Mark?
Harry is reluctant to leave because he was enjoying the sight of his cousin in mortal danger and cousin's parents getting hysterical with fear. Full of love, this boy.
So Arthur, the champion of Muggle rights, is willing to kidnap the wizard ward of a Muggle family, invades a Muggle home without permission, blasts the living room upon running into trouble and corrects their manners toward their wizard ward. He is also surprised that the adult Muggles show fear when magic nearly kills their son. Right. This is the good, Muggle-loving guy, remember?
In Harry's praise, he cleaned his hiding place of all food. He did not, however sort out the contents of his trunk, as we shall see in DH.
Vernon is concerned about wizards showing up dressed in robes, thus giving away the secret that he is harboring not an insane boy but a magical one. I can't decide which option is scarier. Where do the Weasleys get Muggle clothing for their kids? Does this mean Muggle fashion has made it into the Wizarding World, but so far only for the younger generation?
Dudley got his pig's tail on Harry's 11th birthday, July 31st. It was removed surgically on September 1st. I'm not at all surprised he was traumatized. (And to remind you, the tail was in reaction to Vernon(!) being disrespectful to the mention of Dumbledore.)
The Weasleys are late. Well, they always manage to make it to the train the very last minute.
Yes Arhur, the Dursleys have an electric fire, with a plug! And his first idea of how to get out is by property destruction. Why not send the boys back home and Apparate to the Dursleys living room (or better yet, to outside their front door)? Even if for some reason Side-Along Apparition wasn't legal then or had yet to be invented, surely he could work a solution from Harry's end - either get the Dursleys' permission for the fireplace hook-up from their end or take Harry on the Knight Bus? In part it's because Rowling decided Harry had to leave 4PD by a different manner each book so the Knight Bus is out, but reworking the fireplace was still an option and it would have shown Arthur in better light. Though it would have saved Dudley the near-death experience - how could Harry enjoy his life without it?
Arthur is tall and thin, how could I forget? More support for the Dumbledore-Weasley family connection? Then shouldn't the fact that he is balding connect him to Slughorn?
Arthur broke the law to connect 4PD to the floo network. After writing a law with a loophole allowing him to enchant the car I'm not surprised. He also has a 'useful contact' at the Floo Regulation Panel. This contact is male so he can't be Madam Edgecombe. Arthur seems to have a contact in every department - and once you have contacts you don't need special treatment (or at least, you don't need to think of the exchange of favors as such).
Harry thinks the Dursleys didn't understand what Arthur was saying. Doesn't he realize Petunia should know at least some of it from hearsay?
No Harry, Fred's wink wasn't because he was hoping to get a glimpse of Dudley. He was going to kill him with candy.
It's touching how Vernon is shielding Petunia from wizard-attack. Not the first time - we saw him doing just that when Hagrid arrived at the Hut on the Rock too. Just like James facing Voldemort wandlessly. Except James could have had a wand had he been more alert, while Vernon had no better option. But James' stand is considered brave while Vernon is cowardly and ridiculous.
I suppose Dudley is ridiculous for not recognizing Arthur as the caring Muggle-lover? You know, the one who just blasted his way into the living room of Dudley's home?
So, do you think Fred's candy bag spilled completely accidentally or was it a planned move? It reads like his "Oh no - hang on -" came before the spill to me.
If Arthur is amazed at the way the Dursleys do not respond to Harry's farewell then I don't think he figured out yet the nature of the relationship between them and Harry. So I take my words from my review of the previous chapter back: The Weasley adults were plotting to kidnap Harry from his Muggle guardians despite not knowing (or not believing) that they had mistreated him. Now Vernon is forced to say good-bye at (unintended?) wandpoint.
Dudley nearly suffocates to death on twin-candy. Had he taken the candy after Arthur left I doubt he would have survived. What would have Twinkly done to make them take Harry in again the following summer? (And would Arthur have felt any remorse about his role in Dudley's death? What about the twins?)
Dudley's enlarged tongue protruding from his mouth, lolling around like a great slimy python - a foreshadowing of the Dark Mark?
Harry is reluctant to leave because he was enjoying the sight of his cousin in mortal danger and cousin's parents getting hysterical with fear. Full of love, this boy.
So Arthur, the champion of Muggle rights, is willing to kidnap the wizard ward of a Muggle family, invades a Muggle home without permission, blasts the living room upon running into trouble and corrects their manners toward their wizard ward. He is also surprised that the adult Muggles show fear when magic nearly kills their son. Right. This is the good, Muggle-loving guy, remember?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 06:53 pm (UTC)He wants to see the thing, so the first thing he does is to destroy it.
Also, what happened to just *Vanishing* things? Maybe Harry doesn't start studying it until next year, but Neville did it by accident once in CoS, so...? And whatever kind of Vanishing Neville did, McGonagall could replace it, so that sounds like a tidy solution to me.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 07:36 pm (UTC)How do you think Arthur got his job?
Or the Quidditch World Cup Tickets for that matter?
The wizard world is nothing, but a inbred pool of pureblood nepotism and corruption. Arthur may be on the bottom rung of that society, but he still very much a beneficiary.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 08:02 pm (UTC)Ah - you know, that's a clever parallel to Nazis and their Sippenhaft (punishing family members for something another family member had done)which is why Death eaters are shown to - wait.
Re the fireplace: In HBP Dumbledore tells us it is considered rude to apparate into someone's home so how is this any different (even if it had worked?) Is Arthur just impolite or is it because they are Muggles? Or didn't he think about the difference - a family that is used to people flooing in all day will certainly behave around their floo as in a semi public place, like, for example not sitting in their pyjamas in front of the fire place. A family who has never had a floo connection in their life wouldn't see any reason for not feeling completely private in their own living room.
Then shouldn't the fact that he is balding connect him to Slughorn?
No! To Draco Malfoy!!!
But James' stand is considered brave while Vernon is cowardly and ridiculous.
Well, he is the better looking one. And not fat.
And would Arthur have felt any remorse about his role in Dudley's death? What about the twins?
They would have had detention. And their sister would have told them, it was a good thing, they had something up their sleeves. Or maybe not - we are still stuck with the first version here.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 08:19 pm (UTC)To be fair, Voldemort does do this with Lucius and Draco. It's also hinted that Umbridge's regime may have some something a little like this with Marietta and her mother.
So, Voldemort, Umbridge, and Hagrid. Yup.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 08:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-24 12:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-24 03:04 pm (UTC)Gryffindor Exemption
Date: 2011-01-25 03:30 am (UTC)So Gran and Neville get off mutually escaping capture by authorial fiat, and the Weasleys and Harry are never tested.
(How DID Severus convince Tom that Harry would in reality be utterly indifferent to his first real girlfriend's torture/death? And that Harry felt no concern about the other Weasleys, or the OotP in general? And that the remains of the OotP was so ineffectual as not to be worth quashing? That's some smooth talking!) (Of course, Severus would have been helped by the fact that two of the three were demonstrably true....)
It's only people from inferior houses who deal directly with the hostage situation in DH.
The one time a Gryff was directly in that situation (in OotP), he caved instantly to the pressure. Harry agreed to give the prophecy to the DE's if Bella would stop torturing Neville. But he was rescued from the consequences of that choice by the appearance of the cavalry.
But the plot of DH required there be no cavalry, therefore no Gryff could REALLY be faced with that choice. Choosing between the slow death by torture of a loved one and one's principles/Tom's defeat...
“Lucky, lucky Gryffindor[s], to have the luxury of choices the rest of us don’t," as I seem to recall Draco emoting in a recently-posted fanfic....
Pure authorial contrivance. There's no possible choice in that situation that can appear unequivocably Brave, Noble, Loving, and Right. Either the chooser must betray a loved one to a horrific death, or betray the Cause and be responsible (perhaps) for Voldemort's triumph.
Either one would have to be hard-headed (hard-hearted) and choose Voldemort's defeat above all, whatever the cost to those one loves, or one would, like Xeno Lovegood, accept working for the Dark Lord in exchange (temporarily) for the lives and (one hopes) good treatment of loved ones.
Neither choice fits the definition of "chivalry."
Therefore no Gryff is ever put (by JKR) in position to make that choice.
As to Detritus's main point... If Tom's overt opponents are mostly Gryffs, he can't use family against them! That would violate Jo's Gryffindor Exemption.
Re: Gryffindor Exemption
Date: 2011-01-25 05:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 01:51 pm (UTC)Indeed it is. But hey, we're talking here about the same ruthless dictator who was kind enough to let the Hogwarts students go home for Christmas (the only thing dumber than that is that the kids actually returned to Hogwarts)
Again, why is this pos book praised for being really really dark and mature?
How awesome it would have been if Ginny was the one who was kidnapped and ended up saving Harry at Malfoy manor? but what can you do when her creator is bored /has a really bizarre love-hate relationship with her.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 08:28 pm (UTC)No! To Draco Malfoy!!!
Now I know: Draco is the secret love-child of Arthur and Narcissa - which at least would explain Lucius' aloofness towards his son in CoS, Draco's eager insistence on HIS father Lucius M. and Lucius' otherwise very strange behaviour towards Arthur in CoS. I mean, he may not aprove of Arthur's politics but why would an ultra rich buddy of the minister himself bother with a financial and social nobody like Arthur Weasley? Provoking him in a bookshop and then lower himself to brawling (although, if I recall correctly, the brawling was started by Arthur in true Gryffindor fashion - foreshadowing of George and Draco in OotP?)
no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 09:17 pm (UTC)It explains why Molly needed a love potion while insisting she and Arthur were 'made for each other', her attitude to Ron (it was that pregnancy that nearly lost her Arthur) and Narcissa's unpleasant face at the World Cup - Arthur could have had her, but he went back to that red-head!
no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 10:18 pm (UTC)But what about my Severus/Arthur ship? Or is Arthur just an all-around cheat?
no subject
Date: 2011-01-24 01:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-24 02:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-24 04:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 10:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-24 03:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-23 10:37 pm (UTC)Ah, but Vernon is overreacting. As if any of the good wizards would ever harm a Muggle!
Seriously, I agree. On a slight tangent, I've also seen the argument that James defending his family proves he'd become a good man, which I think Vernon here disproves pretty conclusively. I mean, Vernon would definitely have fought for his wife and infant son, and so, most likely, would Lucius Malfoy. It's possible James was a good person at the time of his death, if somewhat unlikely given he was still a dick at nineteen, but the way he died doesn't make it so. His death seems no more exceptionally virtuous than Lily's.
If Arthur is amazed at the way the Dursleys do not respond to Harry's farewell then I don't think he figured out yet the nature of the relationship between them and Harry.
Doylist view: The author is anviling us that even casual visitors notice how the Dursleys don't give Harry no respect. Like the bit in DH when Diggle, sensing a distinct lack of asskissing, flat out asks why they're falling down on their Harry-worship. Especially amusing since the only way the Dursleys could know Harry is the latest WW savior god figure would be for him to tell them in so many words.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-24 12:03 am (UTC)Why he'd have Obliviated their memories of ever having had a son, of course!
no subject
Date: 2011-01-24 01:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-24 07:03 pm (UTC)And why didn't Dumbledore remove the tail, a task which he could have performed in seconds and would have helped Harry had a much easier summer? IITS! (it's in the script)
no subject
Date: 2011-01-27 01:52 am (UTC)Jason McCullough: Well, it seems Joe murdered a man this afternoon.
Pa Danby: The way I hear'd it, he killed a man in a fair gunfight.
Jason McCullough: I was standing right there.
Pa Danby: You was standin' right where?
Jason McCullough: In the saloon when Joe killed him.
Pa Danby: Well, now that was real smart of him, weren't it?
Jason McCullough: I've been around Joe all afternoon and I haven't seen him do one smart thing yet.
Which reminds me of something I wondered about. Did Dumbledore provide the Dursley any means of asking for magical help? What if Harry's accidental magic caused a serious problem? What if there was an attack? The "protection" wouldn't help when they were out about town as the Dementor attack showed. The Dursleys didn't know Mrs. Fig was a squib. And as a squib there wouldn't be much she could do in an emergency.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-27 11:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-27 10:57 pm (UTC)I don't get this. In SS/PS, the owl letters come through the mail slot and down the fireplace. Wouldn't that be a traditional one with bricks and a chimney, not a wall-grate electric model?
So, do you think Fred's candy bag spilled completely accidentally or was it a planned move?
Planned. They're just so funny that way.
Harry is reluctant to leave because he was enjoying the sight of his cousin in mortal danger and cousin's parents getting hysterical with fear. Full of love, this boy.
In this case, "love" seems to be a code word for another four-letter excretive.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-28 02:12 pm (UTC)Maybe they upgraded in between books (possibly to avoid any reoccurence of mailstorms).
no subject
Date: 2011-02-24 05:15 pm (UTC)(Although I can only imagine Petunia and Vernon had a lot of "fun" trying to explain to the doctors how he got a freaking's *pig's tail*. Plenty of awkwardness to go around. :P)
To be fair regarding the candy, Arthur *did* bawl out Fred and George for being a pair of idiots -- but yeah...Harry's reaction...I'm going to let Ursa from ATLA say it for me:
URSA: What is *wrong* with this child?