I think both Cho and Marietta were bad friends to each other, in varying degrees, throughout the DA's existence. Neither seemed to be particularly concerned for the other in the actions they took. They didn't seem to be communicating in an upfront manner about their worries or real interests. But, like you say, they were human and these are things humans do, as is forgiveness. Over-the-top, one-sided, sneaky and pointless retribution, on the other hand, is a little disturbing. It just serves to reinforce the notion that some people should be shamed, some should be feared, and some get to make those decisions on behalf of everyone else. Magic is might!
It seems the worst thing you can be in Rowling's world is a traitor. Even Severus, who risked quite a lot to go to Dumbledore and tell him of Voldemort's plans (not that Dumbledore really did anything) had to pay for his decision to "tell." If I remember, one of the Marauders said that during their schooldays, Severus was always trying to find out what they are doing so he could inform on them. (Whether this is true or not, who knows? He didn't tell his best friend after he was attacked by a werewolf, after all, although she wasn't listening -- possible Marietta and Cho parallel for me. Anyway, Severus was given the reputation as a tattletale, deserved or not.) The thing is, the Marauders were roaming the countryside with a fully-transformed werewolf. They admitted it was lucky someone didn't end up injured or dead. So, would Severus have been wrong to tell Dumbledore about them (not that Dumbledore would have done anything)? Lupin, on the other hand, kept his friends' schoolboy secrets well into adulthood. Was he the better person for it?
I see cases now where students are acting peculiarly in schools and other students are turning them in because they fear these students are learning how to shoot guns or make bombs. Are the people who inform on these disaffected students wrong to have done so? It's actually hard for me to say, but I don't think peer pressure is the most important consideration when making the decision.
Great evils can occur in closed groups where keeping secrets is the top priority -- see religious cults and political cells, for example -- but keeping secrets on behalf of bullies and other violent abusers occurs on a daily basis. When Rowling was asked what advice she would give to someone being bullied, she said to go to an adult or authority figure. Her books preach the exact opposite, however, the code of the playground or something. Keeping secrets reinforces the power of abusers (not that authority figures always do something about abuse).
I'm wondering if those who are so upset at Marietta would feel the same towards either Crabbe or Goyle had they informed Dumbledore of Draco's activities in the Room of Requirement (not that Dumbledore would have done anything). In fact, look at Dumbledore, who kept his secret about Grindlewald's ambitions... how much damage might have been prevented had he just told the truth and right away?
We don't really know what Marietta thought when she told Umbridge about the DA. Without that knowledge, I can't condemn her out of hand.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2011-10-12 05:08 pm (UTC)It seems the worst thing you can be in Rowling's world is a traitor. Even Severus, who risked quite a lot to go to Dumbledore and tell him of Voldemort's plans (not that Dumbledore really did anything) had to pay for his decision to "tell." If I remember, one of the Marauders said that during their schooldays, Severus was always trying to find out what they are doing so he could inform on them. (Whether this is true or not, who knows? He didn't tell his best friend after he was attacked by a werewolf, after all, although she wasn't listening -- possible Marietta and Cho parallel for me. Anyway, Severus was given the reputation as a tattletale, deserved or not.) The thing is, the Marauders were roaming the countryside with a fully-transformed werewolf. They admitted it was lucky someone didn't end up injured or dead. So, would Severus have been wrong to tell Dumbledore about them (not that Dumbledore would have done anything)? Lupin, on the other hand, kept his friends' schoolboy secrets well into adulthood. Was he the better person for it?
I see cases now where students are acting peculiarly in schools and other students are turning them in because they fear these students are learning how to shoot guns or make bombs. Are the people who inform on these disaffected students wrong to have done so? It's actually hard for me to say, but I don't think peer pressure is the most important consideration when making the decision.
Great evils can occur in closed groups where keeping secrets is the top priority -- see religious cults and political cells, for example -- but keeping secrets on behalf of bullies and other violent abusers occurs on a daily basis. When Rowling was asked what advice she would give to someone being bullied, she said to go to an adult or authority figure. Her books preach the exact opposite, however, the code of the playground or something. Keeping secrets reinforces the power of abusers (not that authority figures always do something about abuse).
I'm wondering if those who are so upset at Marietta would feel the same towards either Crabbe or Goyle had they informed Dumbledore of Draco's activities in the Room of Requirement (not that Dumbledore would have done anything). In fact, look at Dumbledore, who kept his secret about Grindlewald's ambitions... how much damage might have been prevented had he just told the truth and right away?
We don't really know what Marietta thought when she told Umbridge about the DA. Without that knowledge, I can't condemn her out of hand.