(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

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/But do you ever think Arthur and Molly are just pretty horrible parents? Seriously, the twins are running wild but no one ever seens to clamp down on them./

Actually, now that I think about it, do you think that the Weasley parents were modeled after Mr. and Mrs. Bennet from "Pride and Prejudice," since JKR is a big fan of Jane Austen? Arthur as the laid-back father and Molly as the harried mother? Because if so, then I think that JKR missed the point. As witty and amusing as Mr. Bennet may be, the narrative makes it plain that he is just as culpable as Mrs. Bennet when it comes to the irresponsible parenting of their two younger daughters. When Lydia runs off with Wickham, Mr. Bennet readily admits to Elizabeth that the fault was partly his. Yet in HP, we never see Arthur or Molly directly acknowledge they are at least partly responsible for their children's behavior or that any blame should be ascribed to them.

[dungeonwriter.livejournal.com]

I wish Percy wouldn't have had to grovel for forgiveness. If they could have just admitted that they allowed him to be bullied and took for him for granted, that they do love him, I could have lived with it.

But Molly and Arthur never seem to consider themselves as part of the problem in any way. Mr. Bennet gets that shutting himself off in his library was unwise. Mr. Weasley never gets that.

Arthur brutally insulted his own son. Even if it was true, he could have not have hurt his son more if he had set out to do so in the first place. And he never backed down and said he was sorry for hurting him.

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

But Molly and Arthur never seem to consider themselves as part of the problem in any way.

Over the summer I read a book about child abuse called, If You Had Controlling Parents. The author says that one salient characteristic of controlling parents is that they cause all kinds of psychological problems in their kids by their crummy parenting, but insist their parenting had nothing to do with their kids' problems. The kids were just born defective. Such a narcissistic, victim-blaming attitude fits right in with this series.

[dungeonwriter.livejournal.com]

Would you actually call them abusive or controlling?

I'd say more neglectful.

[xerox78.livejournal.com]

Arthur brutally insulted his own son. Even if it was true, he could have not have hurt his son more if he had set out to do so in the first place.

Yeah, it's up there with Ron telling Hermione that Viktor Krum didn't actually like her, he was just using her to get an advantage over Harry in the Triwizard Tournament. Even worse because at least Ron's accusation can be written off as a jealous 14-year-old desperately grasping at straws and maybe trying to convince himself because he suddenly realized he had competition. I bet Percy wouldn't have flipped out the way he did if Arthur had at least been diplomatic about it and said something like, "Congratulations on your new promotion, just be on your P's and Q's because Fudge has been trying to get to Harry and he knows our family is close to him."

[dungeonwriter.livejournal.com]

I think any mention of Harry would have flipped Percy out. This was his moment, Merlin damn it, and he just wanted that one second of everyone being proud of him.

If I could have counseled Arthur, (I'm no therapist, but I'm a Percy-like person) to avoid blow ups like this.

First, do not engage in this battle in public. Percy has been humiliated by his family (cough, twins, cough) a lot and is on his guard around them. Do it privately.

Perhaps taking him to the shed for a celebratory firewhiskey, and a man to man talk to discuss this wonderful promotion.

Lavish praise. Lavish it like it's Fred and George and not the odd duck son you tacitly ignore. Tell Percy he deserves it.

Warn Percy that this is a high pressure position. "People will attempt to use you for position, or information. Will you promise me you will continue to be the fair son I love so much and not let people abuse you?"

Percy would be grateful that Arthur is appreciating his fairness.

"Also, try not to get Harry involved. I know he's a political hot potato, just make sure you say he's just a friend of your brother and you barely know him. Fudge's been interested, and I know you might be asked as well. DOn't let your perosnal life interfer with your work."

That might have worked.

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

But-but-you seem to be suggesting that somebody other than the author's self-inserts and their cronies is deserving of courtesy and consideration. Worse yet, this person is somebody who's interfered with the designated fun, likable characters, a stodgy fussbudget control freak. Don't you get it? People like that deserve only to be ridiculed. Heck, that's why they exist! (Just like Snape and MWPP.)

[dungeonwriter.livejournal.com]

Sigh, the sad thing is, that's so very true.

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Yes, I do think Mr. and Mrs. Weasley are modeled on the Bennets.* I also agree that Jane Austen is far, far more aware of her characters' flaws than Rowling is.

*(I said this years ago, when someone in another discussion claimed the Weasleys were working class. I said they weren't. Snape is working class; the Weasleys are the Bennets. Yeoman class, essentially, who have fallen on hard times. They are landowners and purebloods; they just don't have any money. In that, too, they are rather like the Bennets.)

[oryx_leucoryx]

They just went and had more children than Arthur's salary can feed. If they had stopped at 3 I doubt they'd have been poor at all.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Vimes deserves any promotion he gets on other fandoms! (Of course one reason Vimes was hopelessly poor until he married Sybil was because he spent half his salary supporting widows and orphans of watchmen friends who got killed in the line of duty. But the Theory of Boots still applies.)

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

But I am pretty sure that the Bennets were actually meant to be terrible parents, unlike the Weasleys.

[sunnyskywalker]

Yeah. Sympathetically portrayed terrible parents (I think it is even pointed out that Mrs. Bennett was basically raised to be frivolous and hysterical, and she does have good reason to be concerned about being out in the cold someday due to the entail - and Mr. Bennett admits he made some major mistakes), but then that's a level of subtlety Jane Austen could do a lot better than JKR.