deathtocapslock | GOF Chapter 5: Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes

Fred is excited at the thought of Dudley eating deadly candy. Oh, *untested* deadly candy, that's even better!
Harry takes an instinctive liking to Charlie because everything in his appearance says 'physical, uncomplicated'. Bill is more of a surprise - you can be a Head Boy *and* 'cool'. (Just like your dad, Harry. Now you don't have to worry he was anything like Percy, in case you ever were.) How does Harry know what people who attend rock concerts look like? Probably from TV.

Yes Arthur, pranking Muggles in life-endangering ways without doing the responsible thing and mind-wiping them in the aftermath undermines wizard-Muggles relations. Unlike, say, taking their magical kids and turning them against their parents.

The Dursleys excuse away Dudley's misdeeds. Arthur is a much superior parent - he doesn't let his wife know about the twins' (or at least tries to avoid letting her know). It does seem as though Hermione caught on quickly and tried to do her bit of protecting the twins from Molly.

This is Hermione's first stay at the Burrow - and she is here even before Harry, who has been here before and who might need 'rescuing' from his home. I wonder how long Hermione was there before Harry's arrival. Nevertheless, this was the last summer she will spend any significant time with her parents. And she will only spend Christmas of 6th year with them because of the Ron/Lavender relationship. To remind you, Hermione will turn 15 next month - an emancipated minor for all intent and purpose.

For the first time in canon, Ginny isn't at all awkward around Harry. Despite not having started dating any other boys yet. (Or has she and we weren't told? We don't know when she and Hermione had their little talk.)

I'm supposed to think Percy is a pompous, ambitious idiot for taking work home and caring about it. Being an adult I see Percy as acting normally and Ron being an immature idiot. BTW after seeing Neville's molten cauldrons can't Ron appreciate looking into safety standards? (No, because danger everywhere is what makes life worth living for most Gryffindors.)

Why are Bill and Charlie staying in the twins' room? In later books (HBP and DH) Bill will suddenly have his own room, which he will also share with Charlie. See www.hplex.info/wizworld/places/w_pl_burrow.html. Did Molly and Arthur decide to add rooms (on the lower floors!) after their sons started leaving home?

Ron is annoyed by his owl. This is typical of Ron - he laments not having things, and when he does he laments them again, even when they aren't obviously unsuitable or in bad shape or taste.

Ron makes a homophobic wisecrack at Percy and his boss. BTW according to the Black Family Tree, it appears Bartemius Crouch Sr is Arthur's first cousin. This together with his outward personality and his position all make him an ideal surrogate father to Percy. (Which starts the theme of disappointed sons in this book.)

Ginny is still an outsider to the trio's adventures - as far as Harry knows. Neither of them had openly shared their involvement with Sirius' escape. (BTW Harry still hasn't questioned if perhaps Albus was a tad responsible for there not being more people aware of what Sirius was or wasn't guilty of.)

Crookshanks was one of the heroes of last year's adventure - sniffing Peter out in his rat disguise, communicating with Sirius, sending messages by post. This year he's just a cat who chases gnomes.

Molly rants about the twins. She blames them of lacking ambition. No Molly, they are more ambitious than anyone in the family. It's just that their ambition is to make a lot of money fast, while causing as much property destruction and humiliation to those around their customers as possible, instead of doing well at school and getting a government job. Oh, Molly did receive the occasional owl from the school about the twins. Though I do wonder if Albus or Minerva framed their actions as bullying the way Dudley's teachers apparently described his stunts. Also, Molly mistakes a twin-made fake wand for her own, thus starting the emphasis on wands in this book. (There will also be emphasis on wands in DH, but everything will work completely differently, despite Rowling's claims about planning and plotting. You have been warned.)

There was a time I found Bill and Charlie's table-duel endearing. By now I have had enough of Gryffindor boisterous behavior.

Even Bill joins those who dis Percy. Because while he works for a bank, his job description is robbing graves, which is much better than working in an office regulating international commercial transactions.

I love Percy's earnestness and enthusiastic attitude. His criticism of Bagman is on relevant points - organizing the Quidditch World Cup sounds like something that should have fallen mostly on a department dedicated to Magical Games and Sports (an entire department for that? not a subdivision of a Department for Cultural Affairs or similar? Tells you everything about wizards and their priorities), and an employee going missing for 'over a month' in a place known to be the location of Voldemort in whatever form he was isn't something to ignore. But to Arthur what matters is that by covering up illegal activities of Ludo's brother he got tickets to the Top Box, so he won't be hearing criticism of his friend. Who had bribed him. However having grown up in the Weasley household I think this goes over even Percy's head. Understandably but tragically Percy interprets Bartemius' concern for Bertha's whereabouts as that of a caring boss for a former underling. Of course he is actually concerned because she had subconscious information that might be of use to Voldemort (as well as cause much trouble to Crouch himself if revealed to the public). It has been several years since Bertha became brain damaged. Since Harry forgot all about his dream the mention of her name rings no bells.

Ginny defends Bill's hairstyle to Molly. Showing us that despite lack of awkwardness around Harry this is still her first personality, whose favorite brother was Bill. Next year we'll see Ginny v 2.0 whose role models are the twins.

The Quidditch chatter reveals that like in football (soccer for USians), Britain has separate 'national' teams for England, Scotland and Wales. But all three lost at some point.

Harry confirms - the letter about his scar hurting was the first he sent to Sirius, after receiving 2 from him in addition to the letter he got at the end of POA. Sirius 3, Harry 1. Even with people who are close to him he is more of a taker than a giver.

The twins sent Percy dragon dung in the mail, how hilarious! How kind, how mature.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

majorjune.livejournal.com

That's rather sad, isn't it? Poor Hermione, her home life sacrificed to Rowling's wanting the Trio together. Although it's been used to prop up fanon's idea that muggleborn always end up drifting away from the muggle world.

But until the child reaches the age of majority, wouldn't the parents still have control over him or her? I know *my* parents would have hit the roof if I'd gone away to school and then announced that I didn't want to come home for the Christmas holiday, or that I'd only spend a week or two of my summer break with them but then I was going to go stay with a schoolmate's family.

My parents would have just told me that they didn't care what I wanted, that I damn well was going to spend Christmas/vacation with them!

That was something that really jumped out to me as I was reading the series (which I did back-to-back in 2007), the fact that the Grangers were so laissez-faire with their daughter, especially considering that she was entering a hithertofore hidden world.

I know if it was *my* child who had a letter delivered by owl saying they were magikal and therefore eligible to attend a school for magikal children to learn advanced magik, I'd not only demand to meet with the head/principal of the school, but the whole staff, and I'd demand a tour of the school and grounds!

Especially if those magikal folk also expected me to abide by some secrecy statute of their own devising! ;-)

From:

madderbrad.livejournal.com

That was something that really jumped out to me as I was reading the series (which I did back-to-back in 2007), the fact that the Grangers were so laissez-faire with their daughter, especially considering that she was entering a hithertofore hidden world.

Yeah. And we've got to assume that they loved their daughter, given as how Hermione showed emotion regarding their brainwipe. And they showed up to pick her up from the railway station and such.

No, the Grangers and Hermione's family life were just sacrificed for the convenience of Rowling's story, that's all.

From:

oryx_leucoryx

I know if it was *my* child who had a letter delivered by owl saying they were magikal and therefore eligible to attend a school for magikal children to learn advanced magik, I'd not only demand to meet with the head/principal of the school, but the whole staff, and I'd demand a tour of the school and grounds!

Until one of the staff Confounded/Imperiurized/Memory Charmed you till you agreed. Rowling admitted that if her child had been invited to hogwarts something more than normal persuasion would have been required.

From:

ioanna-ioannina.livejournal.com

Rowling admitted that if her child had been invited to hogwarts something more than normal persuasion would have been required.

I tried to deal with this in a short story - and you should see the hatred and shouting directed to me! :-(((
Well, the other part of the readers was like "what a good lesson for her"...
And it was quite mild - no Memory Charms, no threatening, just delivering of a letter, nothing more.
Hm.

From:

urbanman1984.livejournal.com

This could have been interesting subject matter if handled by a less morally challenged author than JKR.

From:

charlottehywd.livejournal.com

You said it. The treatment of Muggles has struck me as being incredibly icky from the very beginning.
I had a classmate who said it reflects Rowling's religious views- wizards are the elect, while muggles are just those other people who go to hell because they aren't special enough. This doesn't seem unreasonable in light of the ickiness, but I'd be fascinated to see if there is anything in her interviews to back this up.

From:

mmmarcusz.livejournal.com

She probably read it at http://www.ferretbrain.com/articles/article-161.html.

From:

charlottehywd.livejournal.com

What an interesting article! Thanks.

From:

borg-princess.livejournal.com

I absolutely loathe the treatment of Muggles. And people defend the mind-wiping by saying it's necessary 'coz Muggles would experiment on wizards/witchs and persecute them...well, we don't know WHAT would happen, sure, that's one path, but considering that the PRIME MINISTER OF BRITAIN knows (and is totally cowed by them, even though it's ridic that he should be so meek and weak-willed)and hasn't put together a special ops team or commissioned scientists to come up with some chemical warfare that'll target wizards or whatever, it's an incredibly weak justification for treating fellow humans as mere cattle. (seriously, people talk about how persecution of Muggle-borns is at the heart of the series, but no, I see more persecution of Muggles, and worse, it's practiced by and condoned by our 'heroes')

Their attitude to the guy in GoF was so disgusting- the way JKR wrote it, we were actually expected to FEEL SORRY for the poor wizard who had to keep obliviating the guy who ran the grounds where the event's being held. I mean. WHAT. Never mind the poor guy whose mind's being tampered with, let alone whether he's gonna end up with brain damage from ten or more Memory Charms a day over an extended period.

From:

majorjune.livejournal.com

but considering that the PRIME MINISTER OF BRITAIN knows (and is totally cowed by them, even though it's ridic that he should be so meek and weak-willed)and hasn't put together a special ops team or commissioned scientists to come up with some chemical warfare that'll target wizards or whatever

Being an American, I can't speak for the personalities of British PM's...

But I can just imagine what a similar type of relationship would have been like between an American Minister of Magik and American presidents of recent memory:

EISENHOWER: Thank you for your help in WW2. I'm not sure why you won't help us in this Korean thing, but at least you can give us a hand on the construction of the interstate highway system.

KENNEDY: Can't you people do something about those missiles in Cuber?

JOHNSON: So what if the Whitehouse elves yelp when I pick them up by their ears? They like it!

NIXON: I think those (explictive deleted) wizards are the ones leaking info to The Washington Post!

FORD: Don't you people have some sort of spell I could use so I don't keep tripping and falling all the time?

CARTER: Was it you people that were in that UFO I saw?

REAGAN: Mr. Minister of Magik, Nancy and I appreciate the astrologers you've sent us...but Mr. Minister of Magik, IT IS TIME TO TEAR DOWN THE WALL between our societies!

BUSH #1: Read my lips...NO NEW SPELLS!

CLINTON: I did NOT have sex with that witch!

BUSH #2: Heh-heh-heh-heh-heh! (he was Confunded)

OBAMA: Can't your goblins lend us enough to get our economy jump-started?

Re: Magical means of persuasion

From:

karentheunicorn.livejournal.com - Date: 2011-02-04 12:19 am (UTC) - Expand

From:

merrymelody.livejournal.com

From:

mmmarcusz.livejournal.com

We never even see her writing to them, nor do Ron or Harry ask about them or ever express a wish to see them - so really, they don't exist. A lot of characters in the Potterverse have no backstory and seem to pop into existence when they hit the Hogwarts Express.

From:

oryx_leucoryx

You know, Seamus' mother has more presence in the series than the Grangers, and Seamus is a lot less central than Hermione. But his mother is a witch, so she counts.

From:

sharaz-jek.livejournal.com

As do Neville's grandmother, and his catatonic brain-damaged parents.

From:

aasaylva.livejournal.com

But his mother is a witch, so she counts
Actually, I am not sure that's the true reason. At least to me, it came off as "they don't make any difficulties, so they may be swept aside". Rowling's attitude in general seems to be a very "male" one (as in traditional gender perception, not in sex) according to which someone who "doesn't stick up for himself, does deserve to be overlooked, neglected and brushed aside". See Neville - he starts being a person instead of a goofy charity case as soon as he decides to act on his inner love - read: to avenge his parents and learn how to battle Bellatrix and other DE. Ginny's transformation from slightly laughable little sister with a crush into breathtaking GIRL coincides with her "not taking shit from anyone" personality (at least, I suppose that's how JKR intended her aggressiveness to come across).
So I think Seamus' mum and Neville's gran got more spotlight because they at least were annoying to Harry directly or indirectly -whereas the Grangers were cast in the typical bland parents' roll of not making a fuss but (how wonderful) quietly disappearing into oblivion (the latter quite literally).

From:

borg-princess.livejournal.com

People insist that OF COURSE Hermione cares about her parents, she was totally writing to them all the time! Which is why they didn't notice anything wrong in CoS when she was petrified for months on end, of course.

I mean, come on, JKR. You can write a whole arc about Hermione sending letters to Viktor because it gives a chance to flog the tiresome R/Hr 'relationship', but not even one line to indicate she's writing to her parents? It wouldn't be that hard.

("Oi, Hermione, you're weeks ahead on all your classes, give the essays a rest and come for a walk with us.'

"Can you wait a few minutes? I'm just finishing off a letter to my parents, I'll be done soon. And let's stop at the Owlery before we go anywhere else."

"You know, you could've given that orange menace back and gotten an owl of your own, then you wouldn't have to keep using the school ones... Oww! I didn't mean it, Crookshanks, get off! Hermione!"

"There was no reason to be mean, Ronald. Oh, all right, come here, Crooks, I'll never get my letter done with him yelling bloody murder."

"How good of you to care."

"Hush!")

nor do Ron or Harry ask about them or ever express a wish to see them

She spends all this time at the Burrow- you think she'd reciprocate and have the boys over at her place. Even if it was just for a visit, instead of staying over for a few days. I mean, that's how my parents raised me- if someone does something nice for you, you do the same for them. It's just good manners. But I guess Hermione was too ashamed of her background?

From:

majorjune.livejournal.com

I think in OotP it's mentioned that the Grangers miss Hermione, but she sort of uncomfortably brushes it off and notes that she told them that everyone stays over school and it's important if you want to do well (ie. if they selfishly insist on seeing her, they'll be holding her back.)

But she's been doing it since at least Book 2, what does that have to say about what Hermione really thinks about her parents and homelife in general?

Between September 1991 and September 1997 (when she mindwipes them and packs them off to Australia), Hermione spends more time with Harry, Ron, and the Weasley family than she does with her own parents.

I'm sure Muggle-obsessed Arthur and Molly would have loved to have Hermione's parents stay over along with their daughter during summer vacations, or come visit during Christmas break; the problem seems to lie in Hermione herself.

I think it would have been an interesting subplot to see how Muggle parents tried to adjust to the magikal world their child had become a part of.

From:

charlottehywd.livejournal.com

Oh, but they're just Muggles. I mean, it's not like they are real people or anything. :-(

From:

https://me.yahoo.com/a/gNLVidA.xeLuPiOU_2B_USM.HYNFjA--#b0b6b (from livejournal.com)

That's so true - Hermione's parents never became real people. I have to confess something: after I'd just read DH and hit the internet to discuss it, I was dismissive of one person who was angry about the way Hermione just went and erased her parents' identities. No no, I told them, don't you see how upset it made her? It was very brave of her to do something so drastic to keep them safe.

Even when it finally sunk in for me how contemptuous wizards are of Muggles' mental autonomy, it still took me a while to realise that, hey, maybe forcibly removing someone's identity and installing a new one in them isn't a nice thing to do. I think it's largely because the Drs Granger never really had any identity in the first place (and also because I'm rather slow, yeah), so why should I care if they've suddenly been transformed into different people? Imagine the impact if the trio found themselves having to obliviate Hagrid, Prof. McGonagall or the Weasleys, for example.

I also think a teenage part of me wants to applaud Hermione for so swiftly and painlessly ridding herself of a couple of boring family members who just don't get what it's all about and are the only thing stopping her from doing and going about as she pleases. I imagine there are a lot of young readers who would like the idea of being able to 'absolve' themselves of their parents the way Hermione did.

From:

karentheunicorn.livejournal.com

No no, I told them, don't you see how upset it made her? It was very brave of her to do something so drastic to keep them safe.

In the book, no; it didn't feel that way to me, the way it read to me was it came across as an afterthought; oh by the way my parents are taken care of, etc. Liking putting unwanted dogs in the pound, etc.

I think it's largely because the Drs Granger never really had any identity in the first place

Exactly. We the reader were never supposed to think of them as important. They were there to play in the background, fill the hole to explain that Hermione was a muggleborn. There was no emotional depth there to connect us the reader with her parents. We hardly ever got it from Hermione so why should the reader care either.

A lot of writers can make you feel things for characters you never see by how the main character displays emotions and talks about the character. Hermione hardly ever mentions her parents, this is a flaw that takes the depth away from the character and the background characters.

The problem is, none of the main characters seem to really give a damn about Hermione's muggle parents. Oh look, the funny muggles, and Hermione in the book seems to end up having the same opinion.

In the movie I have heard they are giving some airtime to show Hermione and the parental memory removal. I haven't seen it so I can't say for sure what they do, but it makes you wonder.

Why would they spend time in the movie on this or perhaps to word it more appropriately why would the movie spend time on this when JKR didn't? Unless the movie people think like some of us do. Maybe they've read what some fans have written. The book version seems pretty shallow, cold and empty.

The movies have totally taken out and exempted certain important things in canon. They've also changed stuff as well. So what would make them spend time to show this tiny bit of information when in other instances they've left way more important information out?

Are they attempting to give the characters debth that we did not see in book?

Imagine the impact if the trio found themselves having to obliviate Hagrid, Prof. McGonagall or the Weasleys, for example.

I've made this same statement in reference to when Snape was bleeding to death in the shack. If it had been Ron laying there or anyone else they would have done everything they could to save that person. Instead you basicly have Hermione, Harry watching snape die, while Ron just stands aside looking like a puppet with strings cut. Ron does nothing in that scene.

Okay, so maybe there was no hope but that doesn't explain their inaction because a few chapters earlier you have Ron and Harry trying to save Peter when the silver hand was choking him.

I think part of the problem I have with the memory alteration of Hermione's parents is it shows an act of taking someones will away from them. And this is a good character? The choice by the author seems to be because it's a 'good' character it's okay and we the reader will accept it.

The bad guys can use the same excuse, they believe what they are doing is correct and right for them. So how exactly is Hermione any different than the evil she is fighting against. If Hermione was in charge one day then apparently it would be perfectly acceptable to mind wipe people you're supposed to love as long as you 'believe' you are protecting them.

My moral outrage meter jumps off the charts with that mentality.

I think that if there had been some sort of struggle emotionally from the main character, or if it had been given more than lip service and a passing thought, I might have been able to agree that it was Hermione acting responsibly. But since we're not really given the emotional connection through Hermione to her parents - it just comes across as void and inhuman.

I get that it was supposed to be for their own good but in my case I would have liked to have seen a more realistic portrait of a only female child who is about to possibly loose her parents and never see them again.