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:

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.

From:

charlottehywd.livejournal.com

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.

This exactly. In some ways it reminds me of the rationale used by American slave owners in the 19th century- "We're just being their benevolent overseer/parental figure since they're obviously too stupid to make their own decisions!"

I've also had rabid HP fans get angry with me for saying this for the same reason another poster above admitted to. (it's ok- I appreciate their honesty) And then somebody got upset for my referring to it as mind-raping, despite the fact that by definition that's what obviating is.

I think that some people forget that in the HP universe all of us would just be stupid, ignorant muggles, scorned by the "good guys" and murdered callously by the bad. People talk about how HP deals with real prejudice, and it does, but not with the poor, innocent muggle-born who is subjected to the discrimination of one kid making fun of them or the tacked-on nazi symbolism of the last book, but by the institutionalized prejudice against most of the people on earth. Seriously, the most satisfying ending to the series for me would be to have the muggle RAF (who has known about them the entire time due to superior intelligence but has found it convenient to play dumb) drop a couple of old-school, non-electronic bombs on Voldemort's hideout from higher up than their anti-technology field will reach. And then possibly do the same to Hogwarts, thus eliminating a major threat to British muggles everywhere. The irony, it would be sweet.

I am a terrible person.

From:

charlottehywd.livejournal.com

Crap, that was not meant to be in all italics.

From:

majorjune.livejournal.com

In some ways it reminds me of the rationale used by American slave owners in the 19th century- "We're just being their benevolent overseer/parental figure since they're obviously too stupid to make their own decisions!"

They also used the rationale that they brought Christianity to the pagan Africans whom they made slaves, so that made it all okay... :-/

And then somebody got upset for my referring to it as mind-raping, despite the fact that by definition that's what obviating is.

The TV show Torchwood had a similar subtheme: if an outsider found out too much --or in the case of one Torchwood employee, they habitually spilled their guts out to a sympathetic stranger in a bar -- they had a pill they gave the person that wiped out their memories for the previous 48 hours or so. In one episodes the Torchwood staff themselves had to all take the pill to their own memories of something that had just occurred.

At the beginning of the series the memory pill was presented as "Oh, just give them the pill to make them forget!"...but subsequent episodes showed that while wiping someone's memory was an "easy out", there were moral and ethical repercussions. By the time of the episode where they had to wipe their own collective memories, it was shown that having your memory wiped is really a drastic, hurtful, and traumatic event.

Seriously, the most satisfying ending to the series for me would be to have the muggle RAF (who has known about them the entire time due to superior intelligence but has found it convenient to play dumb) drop a couple of old-school, non-electronic bombs on Voldemort's hideout from higher up than their anti-technology field will reach.

Did Voldemort have anti-technology fields around wherever he was staying? I know that Rowling stated that Hogwarts had some sort of spell that made the use of electricity and electronic devices impossible, but did she make that claim for any other site?

I think Voldemort was so contemptuous of Muggles that the thought of putting up some sort of barrier to prevent Muggle technology would have been laughable to him.

I've asked the question before that even with whatever magik Dumbledore put on/around Hogwarts, would that have stopped a Muggle spy satellite for taking photographs of it? It seems to me that for any "anti-technology" spell to work, the person casting the spell would have to understand said technology, and something tells me that Dumbledore may have understood electric lamps, hard-wired telephones, and manual cameras. I seriously doubt that he had more than superficial knowledge, if any, and least of all understanding of, more modern technology like space satellites, cellphones, WiFi, digital cameras, thermal-imaging cameras, infrared cameras, night-vision devices...

The internal-combustion engine of the Weasley car didn't seem to have any problem on Hogwarts property...

Something tells me that for all their "anti-technology" charms, nothing would have stopped a spy satellite from getting an exact bead on any magikal site, and using GPS any Muggle agency could wipe said site out with a "smart" nuclear device.

Just sayin'....

;-)

From:

charlottehywd.livejournal.com

Something tells me that for all their "anti-technology" charms, nothing would have stopped a spy satellite from getting an exact bead on any magikal site, and using GPS any Muggle agency could wipe said site out with a "smart" nuclear device.

Ah, but Rowling is FAR too in love with her setting to admit this, however satisfying it might be.

From:

jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com

Yes indeed. A muggle will see only a ruin where a wizard will see a castle. But a camera is neither. It ought to show what is actually there. Unless you try to argue that the spells are so powerful that a muggle will see only a photograph of a ruin. And, excuse me, but I don't believe that.

Now I have seen arguments that spells interfere with electronic transmissions (for that matter, I theorized that they interfere because both use the same frequencies and consequently they are fighting for the same bandwidth) and that consequently areas rendered unplotable would be unphotographable as well, at least by digital cameras, resulting in known anomolies in the muggle reference materials i.e. the "Wiltshire blob" or the "Scots blur", or whatever. But how did that work back when survey cameras were film cameras? Because there have *been* aerial photo surveys since the first half of the 20th century.

From:

oryx_leucoryx

And we know Colin's Muggle camera worked at Hogwarts.

Camera

From:

urbanman1984.livejournal.com - Date: 2011-02-03 11:14 am (UTC) - Expand

From:

majorjune.livejournal.com

Now I have seen arguments that spells interfere with electronic transmissions (for that matter, I theorized that they interfere because both use the same frequencies and consequently they are fighting for the same bandwidth)

The problem with that theory is that magikal spells would have to be using all bands, includia radio (short, long, and medium waves)/radar, sonar, microwave, infrared, ultraviolet...

I just don't buy it. Of course we're dealing with Jo I-Can't-Be-Bothered-With-Real-Science Rowling here, but even if for the sake of argument we postulate that magikal spells do utilize all bandwidths, then when Muggle society started using more and more of those same bandwidths, there should have been competition for the limited "airwaves"...

IOW, it should be a two-way street. If spells can interfere with electronic transmissions, then electronic transmissions should also be able to interfere with spells.

It may not be so much of a problem at Hogwarts, being in a remote, rural area...but it seems to me that the Ministry building should be effected by all the electronic transmissons in and around London.

Because there have *been* aerial photo surveys since the first half of the 20th century.

Well I guess Rowling would argue that it would work the same way with pilots, that they would only see ruins and not take pictures. Of course that ignores pilots who were just taking aerial surveys for topographical/mapping purposes, and so would have just flown a grid pattern over a certain area.

Rowling would probably then argue that the cloaking spell worked for a certain distance over Hogwarts in addition to surrounding it on the ground. But then the question is, just how far up does this cloaking go? A couple of hundred feet? A couple of thousand? To the edge of the earth's atmosphere?

Surely she can't expect us to believe the spell works for thousands of miles into outer space? (But being Jo I-Can't-Be-Bothered-With-Real-Science Rowling, maybe she does) Maybe a pilot of a plane wouldn't be able to see Hogwarts, maybe a manual camera wouldn't be able to capture its image (perhaps resulting in fogged film), but I can't accept the premise that a spy satellite with a high-def digital camera couldn't take pictures of it.