(no subject)

[mmmarcusz.livejournal.com]

One thing that bothers me about the twins is that no matter what they do, they get away with it. There are never any consequences. When they sneak Harry out of his house, flying a magic car into a Muggle area, there are no legal consequences and Molly blusters but doesn't do anything. When they more or less ignore how badly Ginny's getting on (as do Percy and Ron), and don't notice she's being bewitched, there's no real guilt.

They give Harry the Marauders' Map - what if he disappeared some day - would they have told the authorities that they gave him a method of sneaking out of school? Or just stayed quiet and hoped things worked out?

They slip Dudley Ton-Tongue Toffees - he could have died, but again no consequences. They win their bet with Bagman (it was never explained how they knew it - maybe they used magical means in an early draft) but never face consequences (given that the Ministry is notoriously corrupt, it's surprising that Ludo is always on the defensive, and never tries to e.g. get Arthur fired or have the twins prosecuted for their illegal testing). And then Harry hands them a pile of cash, because there are no more worthy causes.

In OOTP, they spy on Order meetings (how bad is the security?) but no DEs seem to exploit this. They also drop out of school without qualifications - unlike in real life, where this would lead to months of them sitting about in the Burrow doing nothing, they instead become master businessmen.

In HBP, their shop sells stuff that is obviously dangerous if exploited, but even when the DEs use their powder, no-one blames them for selling it, or questions a society that allows such weapons to be owned.

In DH, Fred is killed, but a heroic death in battle. It would be much more likely for him to be killed in one of the twins' experiments gone wrong - this would actually force George to undergo some sort of reflection or growth as a character - but as it is, it confirms that Fred was great and everything the twins did was great.

Comments

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

It would have been fascinating if Arthur would have lost his job for the car incident as he's GUILTY as all sin of misusing the law to suit his own wishes and you know, breaking it pretty openly, and endangering his underage children by having it when they could get it

I am so irritated that no fans can see the hypocrisy of Arthur being in a department to prevent people using magic on Muggle objects, only for him to do that very thing. Like, sure, there's corrupt people in the Ministry who misuse their power, Lucius Malfoy, etc. etc. but don't make Arthur out to be the lone hero when he's guilty of the same! Put that into real world terms, like a member of the Drug Squad that steals drugs for recreational use on his own time, and see if that person would get away with it. >:[

And I love Molly's reaction to anything to do with Muggle objects- it's not 'stop tinkering with them, it's against the law', but 'Muggle things are useless and stupid, why are you wasting your time on them?' *eyeroll*

[dungeonwriter.livejournal.com]

Because Arthur has no problem bending rules, which is his kids problems. It's hard to be authorative when you break rules and overlook mistakes.

How can you expect kids to behave when you won't?

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

I know, right? I mean, I adore Arthur - there is a soft spot in my heart for him - but he's flawed like most everyone in the books. There's the hypocrisy you point out, and his 'benevolent' bigotry against Muggles. (By which I mean he's not malicious or hateful - he simply sees them as inferior to him but worthy of protection. He speaks of them as if they were small children or animals, not his equals.)

Molly is a horror. I do rather like Jodel's theory about the Weasley family though, and it helps me have some compassion for Molly and co. to think of much of the dysfunction of the family being due to a massive trauma like Jodel theorizes.

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/And I love Molly's reaction to anything to do with Muggle objects- it's not 'stop tinkering with them, it's against the law', but 'Muggle things are useless and stupid, why are you wasting your time on them?'/

I think that Molly is a prime example of the problems with HP regarding the anti-racism message. We’re supposed to see the Weasleys as a loving, tolerant family because they welcome Harry and Hermione and they’re called blood traitors by fanatic purebloods. Yet Molly is nearly as (or just as) bigoted as the Malfoys are. Sure, she never joins the Death Eaters and is a member of Dumbledore’s Army, but she doesn’t respect Muggles any more than the Malfoys do. She frequently criticizes their inventions as rubbish, she complains that King’s Cross – a train station built by Muggles for Muggles – is packed with Muggles, and she never compliments Arthur on his job or on his interest in Muggle culture and almost seems to be annoyed by them. She may not want to bother Muggles, but she doesn’t seem to like them much, either.

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

Thank you. Let's see the wizards build their own train station if they are that superior.

I've said it before, but muggles have many things that wizards don't- compassion, ingenuity, creativity, culture... the list just goes on...

[oryx_leucoryx]

Moral philosophy. Sociology.

Also a lot more experience in building societies of different kinds. Just by numbers alone - there have been more non-wizard societies of greater variety than wizarding societies.

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

Pretty much. As cool as having magic would be, I don't think I would ever want to live in a society as insular and backwards as the wizarding world.