OOTP Chapter Eight: "The Hearing"

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

* And we’re up to p. 126, and the first interesting thing in the book. Back in COS we’d already had the whomping willow, the writing on the wall and the trio coming up with the plot to spy on Malfoy. Oh, for the good old days of tight plotting...

 

* Hey, Percy’s eager to do his job, the rotter! Good people know that government is never anything but evil (unless it’s a Labour Party government, of course), and therefore expect civil servants to do their job in the most unenthusiastic and dispirited manner possible.

* I’m a bit surprised that the Minister of Magic is allowed to sit as judge in a criminal trial. Wouldn’t that rather compromise judicial impartiality? I mean, I know that wizards are generally a bit behind muggles, but I’d have thought that they’d have at least reached 1689 by now.

* I’m not sure how they do things in the WW, but I’d be surprised if they didn’t take a dim view of their judges being interrupted. It’s a bit odd for Dumbledore to interrupt Fudge here, then.

* It’s clear that this trial has nothing to do with underage magic, and everything to do with Fudge trying to get Dumbledore through Harry. Really, this is what you get when your constitution doesn’t have even the most basic legal safeguards.

* For all that wizards look down on the muggle world, I’d feel a lot safer being falsely accused and then tried in a muggle court than I would being falsely accused and then tried in a wizard court.

* Producing a corporeal Patronus is such an achievement. Until the plot demands that the whole DA need to learn it, when it suddenly becomes a spell a group of teenage schoolchildren can cast. Either that, or Harry just displays a hitherto un-guessed-at genius for teaching. Gary Stu? Don’t be ridiculous!

* Also, note how it’s specifically Percy’s reaction that goads Harry into action. Is this because Percy was, if not especially close to Harry, then at least closer to him than Fudge or the other Wizengamot members, and his bad opinion therefore matters more to him?

* Does anyone know what Harry’s supposed motivation for this crime was? Because randomly casting Patroni for no reason seems a bit odd.

* Fudge doesn’t know anything about wizarding judicial procedure, it seems. Yes, he’s really making himself and his case look good here, isn’t he?

* I like it how Squibs are apparently so marginalised that nobody knows whether or not they can see Dementors. Sometimes, the WW’s just so bigoted it just makes me want to swear loudly and throw my book through the window.

* Why does Mrs. Figg feel the need to lie about seeing Dementors? Does she worry that she won’t be taken seriously if she doesn’t look magical enough? Remember kids, racism’s the fault of a few posh bigots like Draco and Tom Riddle! It can be easily solved by killing one person and making his group of followers marry outside the aristocracy. It’s not at all a deep-seated problem with complex societal and sociological causes, which can take decades to reduce and can never be truly eradicated.

* Fudge isn’t being very professional here. Snorting derisively? For heaven’s sake, man, you’re the head of Wizarding Britain’s government; why not try and act like it?

* “But naturally, you would not care how many times you heard from a witness, if the alternative was a serious miscarriage of justice.” Yep, say what you like about Dumbledore and his chums, they sure hate miscarriages of justice. Unless they can get Quidditch tickets out of it, of course. Or one of the criminals knows that you’ve been illegally letting a werewolf study in Hogwarts. Or they’ve told the authorities of your illegal student organisation. Or you can’t be bothered to try and prove the defendant innocent. Or…

* So, do Wizard courts not have barristers to cross-examine witnesses? Or is that the judges’ job?

* I can’t help but have a sneaking respect for Dumbledore’s handling of the trial. He’s a bastard, but (as TV Tropes would say) a magnificent bastard nonetheless.

 

Comments

[mmmarcusz.livejournal.com]

* Producing a corporeal Patronus is such an achievement. Until the plot demands that the whole DA need to learn it, when it suddenly becomes a spell a group of teenage schoolchildren can cast. Either that, or Harry just displays a hitherto un-guessed-at genius for teaching. Gary Stu? Don’t be ridiculous!


Not to mention that incantations require specific instructions and wand movements in the early books, but later books all you have to do is say the incantation. I don't think that they got better at magic, it just got easier.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

I don't think that they got better at magic, it just got easier.

I can't agree more. By the time they got to book 7 they were verbalising all of their spells, which were around 4'th or 5'th year in origin. Simple polyjuice potion was getting them almost anywhere they wanted. Other than the waterfall thing at Gringott's (if I'm remembering correctly) there was nothing magical at all that was a surprise to our three Hogwarts dropouts.

[wolf-willow31.livejournal.com]

Yeah, Harry picked up Sectumsempra simply by seeing its name scrawled in the margin of a book, and it worked perfectly for him the first time he ever tried it.

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

I'm actually in Harry's favour here - he was being subjected to the effects of a Dementor while learning to cast his first Patronus. The DA were at least allowed a relatively stress-free environment to get the hang of the spell before having to face anything Dementorish. I think Harry's teaching approach sounds like the better one in this case.

[sunnyskywalker]

Dumbledore does manage this effectively. It helps that Fudge and Umbridge didn't set up their railroading process very well, but still.

I guess because the Patronus is sparkly and interesting, it wouldn't be too unreasonable to assume that a kid might cast it to show off, but if they knew anything about Harry's home life, they'd know that he doesn't have any friends there and would be a lot more likely to cast a hex if he cast anything around the Muggles. But then, they don't know about his home life, and neither Harry nor Dumbledore goes into that.

Do they have a constitution? Or is it a hodgepodge of various legal documents like the UK generally? Regardless, yeah, lacking in basic legal safeguards. And lawyers.

[sunnyskywalker]

On second thought, if Fudge or Umbridge know about PatronusMail, maybe they think Harry was communicating with Dumbledore, but they can't come out and say it? Although we don't have any indication that they do know about that feature, which I think we're supposed to believe is an an amazing new creation known only to Order members - but seriously? No one thought of it before?

[oryx_leucoryx]

Who would know what a Patronus is and what it is good for other than some DMLE members who cart prisoners to/from Azkaban?

[sunnyskywalker]

Well, if these were anything like real people, anyone who is geeky enough to study advanced magic for fun, and there's probably at least a couple every generation. As far as we know, learning about Patronuses isn't restricted at all, so they would be able to find the spell. It seems like someone would have wanted to experiment in the last century or so. And those DMLE members - or at least their R&D people who develop counter-spells against whatever the criminals have thought up these days, if they have those - might want a way to send a quick "Something's gone wrong, send help" message (even if they haven't used it, best to be prepared).

But then, wizards don't act much like real people.

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

I like it how Squibs are apparently so marginalised that nobody knows whether or not they can see Dementors.

What does it even matter if she can see them or not? Anyone can feel their effect. There was no point in this even being brought up, except anti-squib prejudice.

Although I don't know that it's a sign of marginalization that no one knows whether squibs can see Dementors or not. How often does it come up? How often does *anyone* in the WW encounter a Dementor, unless they're imprisoned in or work in Azkaban?

[oryx_leucoryx]

How often does it come up? How often does *anyone* in the WW encounter a Dementor, unless they're imprisoned in or work in Azkaban?

Or is involved in bringing dangerous alleged offenders to trial or is suspected as a dangerous offender. Barty had been exposed to dementors even before his trial.

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

* So, do Wizard courts not have barristers to cross-examine witnesses? Or is that the judges’ job?

This seems reminiscent of the French legal system, which if I remember correctly has an inquisitorial system. I'm not sure why wizarding Britain abandoned the adversarial system since I think it's been in use in non-ecclesiastical courts since at least the 12th century.

* I can’t help but have a sneaking respect for Dumbledore’s handling of the trial. He’s a bastard, but (as TV Tropes would say) a magnificent bastard nonetheless.

Given the calibre of his opponent here, I think you do him too much credit. (But then, that goes for everyone on Team Good in these books).

[harpsi-fizz.livejournal.com]

I like it how Squibs are apparently so marginalised that nobody knows whether or not they can see Dementors.
Never thought of this point, but yeah, the WW is really quick to dismiss people that don't meet exact specifications for kind treatment. And I'd love it, too, if the series would point it out at least a little! Or, if not point it out, then not have the good guys praising it so much. It wouldn't even have to be widely panned by the good guys. If one character each pointed one thing out that they didn't like, that'd look natural as well as fair. Nobody agrees with everything in their government.

P.S- I feel fine liking and respecting Dumbledore after reading these reviews and flaw examinations. There are two kinds of liking him. One is the "he's always right" blind way of the most rabid-of-rabids, and then there's the kind of liking that comes from seeing someone who is chaotic neutral. Forgive me, but it reminds me of the wink Gandalf gave to Aragorn when he was allowed to keep his "walking stick".

Theme of this reply: The only respect-worthy admiration is one that comes with seeing the good and bad of the subject.

[fishinginthemud.livejournal.com]

Hey, Percy’s eager to do his job, the rotter! Good people know that government is never anything but evil (unless it’s a Labour Party government, of course), and therefore expect civil servants to do their job in the most unenthusiastic and dispirited manner possible.

He doesn't even have the grace to look ashamed of himself in the presence of the mighty and righteous Potter. He could at least acknowledge that he sucks in some way, instead of just doing his job like Harry doesn't matter or something.

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/* For all that wizards look down on the muggle world, I’d feel a lot safer being falsely accused and then tried in a muggle court than I would being falsely accused and then tried in a wizard court./

Yet in the DH epilogue, we're assured that "all is well," despite no mention of any reforms of the wizarding world's legal system or of the government itself. Nobody seems to care that the Minister is appointed, not elected, or that wizards are sent to an inhumane prison without trial, or that house elves and other magical creatures have no civil rights, etc.

/* I like it how Squibs are apparently so marginalised that nobody knows whether or not they can see Dementors./

Given the fact that the main point of contention between wizards and Muggles is that wizards have magic and Muggles don't, I'm surprised that Squibs weren't the main targets of the Death Eaters. Muggle-borns can pass for pureblood wizards as long as nobody asks about their family trees. Squibs, however, stand out by virtue of having no magic.

/* Why does Mrs. Figg feel the need to lie about seeing Dementors? Does she worry that she won’t be taken seriously if she doesn’t look magical enough?/

Sadly, I think that may be it. If she says that, like Muggles, she was only able to sense the dementors, then she'd admit to being on the same level as Muggles, and we all know how the wizarding world regards them.

/Remember kids, racism’s the fault of a few posh bigots like Draco and Tom Riddle! It can be easily solved by killing one person and making his group of followers marry outside the aristocracy./

Even though Grindelwald's defeat didn't do anything to improve the wizarding world's relationship with the Muggle world. What makes everybody think that Voldemort's defeat will?

/* Fudge isn’t being very professional here. Snorting derisively? For heaven’s sake, man, you’re the head of Wizarding Britain’s government; why not try and act like it?/

Because Fudge is a farce. He was just so obnoxious and over-the-top in this book that I couldn't wait for him to be gone.

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

"Given the fact that the main point of contention between wizards and Muggles is that wizards have magic and Muggles don't, I'm surprised that Squibs weren't the main targets of the Death Eaters. Muggle-borns can pass for pureblood wizards as long as nobody asks about their family trees. Squibs, however, stand out by virtue of having no magic."

Yeah... a lot of the blood prejudice thing makes more sense if you assume that it's culturally- rather than racially-motivated. Squibs, for example, would be raised by their wizarding parents, and so be properly assimilated into wizarding culture; unlike those newcomer Muggle-borns, they'd "know our ways" and wouldn't want to betray the wizards to the Muggles. It would also explain why Half-bloods are apparently accepted into wizarding society by all but the most ardent Pureblood believers, even if they like to play down their Muggle heritage (and really, can anybody seriously imagine Hitler trusting a half-Jew as much as Voldemort trusts Severus, or a white supremacist and son of a senior KKK member liking a half-black teacher as much as Draco likes his Potions professor?): whilst they may be half-Muggle, they are nevertheless reasonably familiar with wizarding culture, and therefore "acceptable" in the eyes of most wizards.

"Even though Grindelwald's defeat didn't do anything to improve the wizarding world's relationship with the Muggle world. What makes everybody think that Voldemort's defeat will?"

But Voldemort's more evil, which makes all the difference! And they've got Harry now to help them! Seriously, though, imagining that killing Voldemort will get rid of all of Wizarding's Britain's ills is woefully naive. A bit like if someone suggested that we could sove all the UK's problems by killing Nick Griffin.