Prettyveela's Poll - long!

[sistermagpie]

prettyveela has put up a poll here asking people to pick a side in various HP canon conflicts. As usual I have trouble actually picking a side, but I did eventually vote in all of them. What I keep thinking about after doing it, though, is not which side I chose but exactly why I picked one or the other. All the situations are so different that although it seems like it should be easy to come up with rules for all of them, that's not what happened. Reading the comments it wasn't usual to for instance, see two situations judged in ways that seemed completely opposite (I do it too). In situation A X acted with malice but Y was really stupid! So Y is at fault. But in situation B Y was stupid but X acted with malice. So X is at fault.



You can see the canon quotations for each conflict in the original post, so I'll just name it by incident. I seem to have the most to say about Percy and Arthur.

Arthur vs. Percy
I've always been totally with Percy on this one even though it's a fight and probably both say things they don't mean. Part of it is probably that I don't see any reason Percy couldn't have been promoted on his own merits (at least he deserved to be) while I see truth in some of the criticisms Percy has for Arthur. But probably it's more that I feel like there's more at stake for Percy in the scene, and that it's more painful for him to be yet again dismissed as foolish while Arthur should be able to deal with Percy's criticism. But of course not actually reading the fight it’s hard to how it went down.

Maybe beyond that there's something satisfying to me in Percy challenging the Happy Weasley Family myth. Not that I think they're a hotbed of discontent, but especially in GoF I feel like there is real hostility directed towards Percy and it's just unspoken. The Twins always have their jokes as an easy cover for aggression--any questions of why they always go after Percy because he doesn't think it's funny just show one doesn't have a sense of humor. Arthur, too, is in a comfortable position. I don't think he likes Percy much. He loves him, of course, as his son, but I think he possible doesn't care for him much personality-wise. But it's easy for him to just brush him off and laugh when the Twins joke with him instead of really dealing with him.

I don't mean to paint Percy as some big-eyed toddler pulling on Arthur's coattails for attention and getting ignored. I just mean...well, Percy is the son who followed in Arthur's footsteps and he does seem to want to be able to bond with him as one Ministry Official to another. I think Percy probably really is disturbed by the way Arthur works, and Arthur doesn't appreciate that judgment. But maybe even more than that again I like Percy being a squeaky wheel in the family. Arthur's got 7 kids and 6 of them seem to do nothing but bring glory to his name. Sure there are moments where they misbehave, like the one time he yells at the twins for Mugglebaiting. But in general the family all agrees with Molly's view that Arthur is very talented and is only held back by prejudice, they don't complain about being short of money much, understanding that it would hurt their parents (though they may be focused on making it themselves). Harry fits in completely here, since that's a natural way to show affection for him too.

So Arthur seems like he's generally very proud and pleased with all his kids. He's really only got one child with whom there's a problem (personally as well as politically), and he doesn't handle it well. I'd say the way he deals with Percy goes along with his basic personality--he's a bit passive, doesn't much like that kind of conflict. When Percy challenges him openly (and while I hate to use "all teenagers are like that!" as an excuse for anything because it's not, many parents have faced similar outbursts from kids, and worse) Arthur's just as stubborn. Of course there’s the political stuff too, but I can’t help think the way of dealing with the politics has more to do with the personalities.

I can't help but feel like that fight is less about what's going on in the moment than years of building resentment which, imo, Percy is far more aware of than Arthur, who would have preferred to keep telling himself he had no problems with Percy. So given Arthur's mostly smooth-sailing experience as a parent yeah, I think he could make the effort. Percy's brought the anger of the entire family but Molly down on his head, something I think he did knowingly, but still I think he knows it's 7 against 1 for him (as Percy may have felt it's been for a long time). So yeah, if Arthur wants to be such a great dad he can actually reach out to a son with whom he has a painful, troubled relationship. That's part of parenting too. And I think I get some satisfaction out of Percy blowing the lid off the whole thing.

Snape vs. MWPP in the Pensieve
Pretty much everything that happens in the scene happens because James makes it happen, and all of Snape's reactions are fairly predictable.

Hermione vs. Umbridge-the Centaurs
As bizarre (but in character) as it is for Hermione to in retrospect treat this like all she did was make Umbridge look bad at her job, and despite Hermione's strange (but also totally in character) decision to walk past a roomful of people who could help them with Umbridge in favor of her more elaborate Centaur plan, I still go with Umbridge on this one. Hermione is acting defensively in improvising her plan, and once they meet the Centaurs Umbridge provokes them on her own. Hermione might have foreseen that Umbridge would do that, but it's definitely a situation where Umbridge had the ability to see a reason to keep her mouth shut and chose not to do so.

Of course this doesn't leave out Hermione's culpability for her own problems in the scene, for which she is responsible for deciding to use the Centaurs as a goon squad. And she puts herself in that situation partly by overreaching and needing to go for the fabulous secret Hermione plan, which goes beyond being desperate to help Harry.

Ginny and Ron's fight in HBP
This one doesn't really feel like anything about blame, it's just a fight between a brother and sister. Which Ron starts so he's responsible for that, but I think Ginny's response is OTT and comes from her own issues, not his. It's interesting to me sometimes that Ron is faulted mostly for almost calling Ginny a slut as opposed to Ron almost using the word slut. He claims he's worried that other people will call her...something he himself doesn't say. He seems to be voicing the common attitude in the Weasley house to me (we've already gotten Molly's "Scarlet Woman" comment, and the twins, too, offer judgments on how many boyfriends are too many). Just in general when I read the scene I felt like Ginny's anger came out of someplace else or was just too much. So while Ron gets responsibility for speaking up to begin with, Ginny's escalation seems to be more her own thing than something Ron couldn't help but provoke.

Sirius vs. Snape-The Prank
This is one where Snape seems to be getting some points for being stupid and for trying to get MWPP in trouble. To me it's more like the first MWPP scene. Sirius sets things in motion to happen exactly the way they do (save for Snape being saved). I don't think the werewolf was a foreseeable consequence for Snape in taking the bait. There are certain limits within which students expect to operate, and Sirius' deciding to make the thing deadly is all his own. Snape could have been expecting something, just not that. Also, on the "Snape is stupid" side, we probably have to see exactly how this was done to see how stupid it was. As people have pointed out, Snape knows Sirius means him no good, so why listen to him? Sirius must have taken that into account when placing the bait.

Harry vs. Draco - Sectumsempra
I love that this one's neck and neck. It's what makes it a cool scene. Draco starts the fight and escalates it with Crucio, though for once Draco's starting the fight is understandable even to Harry, so for once Harry isn't actually angry at Malfoy when he's fighting him. It's Draco who's desperate and emotional in the fight, not Harry. I know a lot of people think Crucio makes it Draco's fault, full stop, and there's been some interesting discussions about which is worse, Crucio or Sectumsempra. ( I can't help but feel that Crucio thrown by teenaged boys (Harry or Draco) isn't the same as the one thrown by Bellatrix. It's a spell where you want to throw your pain at someone else and make them hurt. Draco's not in a sadistic slow torture state of mind in the bathroom any more than Harry is at the end of OotP.) So while Draco still escalates the fight in using it and so causes Harry to reach for the spell he does, I don't think it explains away Sectumsempra completely.

I guess because the Sectumsempra comes not out of just that moment in the fight but the whole HBP storyline. Harry's been wanting to use it, he knows the Prince's spells always offer just what they promise, only better. This is why I don't agree with the defense that as far as Harry knew the spell might have been another toenail grower--Harry knows the Prince and goes to the spell because in a moment of desperation he trusts him to end the fight for him by taking care of his enemy. If there was any true thought in his mind that the spell wasn’t incapacitating why use it to stop a Crucio? The results of Sectumsempra are so surprising to everyone involved I can't see it as a predictable result of Draco starting the fight. It's imo intentionally different in that way from the train hexings and beat down in OotP. So while Draco starts the fight, Harry's decision to reach for Sectumsempra was all his own.

Sirius' Death - Dumbledore, Bellatrix, Harry or Sirius?
There's a lot of things that get everyone where they are in that scene, but I don't feel like there's any reason to go back any further than two people facing off with one killing the other. This is another malice vs. stupid one. Yes, Sirius was arrogant, but Bellatrix did what she meant to do and it worked. The actions of other people like Kreacher, Harry and Dumbledore may have been part of getting them to that place, but there were plenty of chances to go a different way even with them. With Percy and Arthur the fight seems to actually be about the past, so it's more relevant.

Phew! So that's all of them--I don't know if there's a pattern. The first one seems like I'm just emotionally leading towards one more than the other, with maybe a side of seeing Arthur has having always had more power in his house and having more responsibility as the father. Most of the others are mostly thinking about which person took actions in order to reach the outcome that happened and whether the results were predictable enough that I thought they should have been considered by everyone involved. And then there's the Ron/Ginny fight, where it's more emotional again, figuring out what's really motivating the different characters and what results they are trying for with what they say. Also remembering how many other options the person ignored in order to go for the thing they chose. For instance, saying that Hermione or Harry had to do something in their scenes is not necessarily justification for whatever they did.

Conclusion: it's hard to place blame in verbal fights, even if you side more with one side of the argument or think one person's meaner than the other.

Comments

[in-interval.livejournal.com]

Interesting - I went and took the poll before I read your responses so I could compare my own. I agreed with all your answers except for Ginny vs. Ron and I could have gone either way on that one.

In particular on Percy vs. Arthur, I came down on Percy's side because of the parenting dynamic. I agree with what you've said about Arthur. I also think, though, that in a parent/child relationship, the parent is the one with most of the power and so has more of the responsibility to show maturity in an argument. Arthur not trying to understand Percy is worse than Percy not trying to understand Arthur.

Thanks for the pointer!

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

The two fighting ones are interesting--not only do both people have to have a point, but it's all people who presumably all really care about each other: father/son, brother/sister. With the siblings neither one of them is really supposed to be more mature.

[teratologist.livejournal.com]

One time gettingshitdone took a 'leadership training' seminar (for personal reasons of my own, the word 'leadership' makes me gag violently) in which they did an exercise kind of like this; they told everyone a long story about a princess who left her neglectful husband, ran away with a minstrel who abandoned her, wound up in a forest inhabited by an evil wizard, sought succor from her uncle who turned her away because he disapproved of her behavior, and on the way back through the forest was killed by said evil wizard. After the story you were asked to pick who was responsible for the princess's death and the 'right' answer was the princess, because she was the protagonist and the class was meant to promote the myth that we, as little protagonists, succeed and fail entirely based on our own choices. No one picked the evil wizard as responsible, perhaps because for the narrative to make sense in the context of the seminar's bullshit you basically had to take as given that the evil wizard was a force of nature and not a character in his own right.

Nothing to do with Harry Potter really, I just wanted to get that off my chest.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

OMG, that's hilarious. Of course that never occurred to anybody when they were coming up with that story. If they'd had her die of thirst or something they could easily have made in the princess' fault but no, they have to have her killed by somebody who's somehow not responsible for her ending up dead!

It does seem like he's supposed to just be the embodiment of evil, but still...good thinking.

But then, I would always fail at a leadership seminar anyway.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

Oh, there's a story similiar to that, I found it in a Paul Zindel book. http://www.angelfire.com/ok/freshenglish/teambuild.html
In that version, though, you're supposed to put the people in order of blame, and the order shows what you value most in life.
Certainly didn't end the way gettingshitdone's group did though - that sounds fucked up!

[ljash.livejournal.com]

Wow--I'm pissed off and I'm only kind of able to picture the seminar and everything. And you're right--no female character even in sight. All male characters are forces of nature and the princess should suck it up and form a corporation in her uncle's town or something.

[marionros.livejournal.com]

Well, that is refreshing! Ever since the sixties, Western Thought has been infused with 'victim-think'. Everybody and their dog is a *victim*, it's just sickening.
Use drugs? You're not responsible for shooting up, you're a victim.
Stabbed somebody in a bar brawl? Hey, they knife *just went in*, nothing to do with me at all.
Goof up at school, mouht off the teachers, get detention and bad grades? Your teachers just don't like you. They're mean. And you have a rotten homelife, so it's okay to be a cheeky, slacking little drop-out. You're a VICTIM!

Of course there are circumstances where one *is* a victim. Nobody chooses to be murdered, mugged or raped. Sometimes there are only bad choices and you have to pick the one where there's the most damagecontrol. Sometimes there just are no choices.
But people are not leaves in the autumn wind. We are not fishes in a schole, being swept this way and that without say.
We are human beings. We possess brains and a conscience. We make choices, based on the opportunities we are bid, the morality we possess and the information we have. And sometimes we don't like the choices. And sometimes, in retrospect, we make the wrong choice. That's okay, as long as we learn from it. As long as we claim responsibility for our lives, we can shape it.

Sorry for being such a preacher, but the 'victim mentality' really, really annoys the heck out of me, and anyone (even a bozo at a 'leadership training' seminar) who promotes against this has my vote!

(A good author againt the victim mentality is Theodore Dalrymple. He has written wonderful books, but his essays can also be found on the 'net)

[trobadora]

I agree with you on all of those. With Hermione especially, what I hold against her is less what she does in a desperate situation than that she never seems to regret the unexpected consequences.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yes, people are right to say that she's improvising and panicked when she first does it. What's weird is the whole, "Yup, totally meant to do that. Don't mess with me" attitude afterwards.

[seaislewitch.livejournal.com]

A few were hard to choose, because there are those annoying grey areas. *g*

Arthur vs Percy
To me, Arthur is a camper -- someone who has little ambition. I think he should have a bit more because he's got SEVEN kids to take care of! Regardless of Molly's argument about the Ministry keeping him down, I still think Arthur has let his family down. I think it was secretly embarrassing to Percy that his father didn't have the kind of ambition he has. I think Percy would have thought his family would be proud and happy for him when he got such a great job. They weren't and that hurt Percy, so he made the break. I don't blame him at all.

Pensive Snape vs James
That was an attack, and Snape was not to blame in that one particular instance. We only have that one scene to judge the relationship between Snape and the Marauders, though. For all we know, Snape and other Slytherins could have attacked the Marauders the day before, and this was a retaliation.

Hermione vs Umbridge
Umbridge was to blame. She's stupid and evil. I was surprised Hermione led her to the Centaurs, though.

Ron vs Ginny
You're right, sistermagpie, it was just an argument between siblings. I think Ron was truly trying to protect her, and she went a bit too far. So Ginny on this one.

Sirius Pranking Snape
Sirius is to blame. He used very bad judgment. Snape was an idiot to go there and used bad judgment too.

Draco vs Harry
Harry was stalking Draco! He shouldn't have gone in there in the first place, and once he saw Draco crying he should have left! Grrrr... I was a surprised when Draco started to cast the Cruciatus Curse, but I can understand why he wanted to hurt Harry. Draco was completely vulnerable and his biggest rival now knew one of his embarrassing secrets. The bottom line is that Harry nearly assassinated Draco. Draco wasn't going to kill Harry. Harry had no idea what that spell would do. He should have used a shield instead. Luckily Snape came and healed Draco. (Whew!) (Side note: One again, Pansy is vilified because she told the school the TRUTH about how Harry almost killed Draco.)

Sirius at DoM
I put the blame on Dumbledore because he was withholding a lot of information Harry needed. You cannot make the best decisions when you are in the dark about the truth. Harry and Sirius were both impulsive. Bellatrix cast the spell that pushed Sirius into the Veil, but she didn't cast the Killing Curse. She gets a second position blame, followed closely by Sirius and Harry. It was just a bad, bad scene.

That was a fun poll.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I can see why Arthur's happy at his job the way he is...but I can see why he drives Percy crazy. Not that it's Percy's business what kind of work ethic his dad has, but you can see why he loses it when Arthur suddenly tries to play the role of badass official who knows all. I think that's often probably a mistake with Arthur the way he's constantly interfering in things that have nothing to do with him and pulling strings when he shouldn't be...maybe that's supposed to come across as competance, but it doesn't.

With the Marauders and Snape I do always assume there's a big history there. I'd imagine there's another day where Snape can't help but hex James for no reason. That day it would just be Snape's fault.

If I was going to vote for who gets the most blame in general in OotP, it would definitely be Dumbledore. And then he ends the book with a big speech about how he's going to confess how much blame he has...and then goes on to blame everybody else.

[go-back-chief.livejournal.com]

I think it's hard to judge the events/arguments we haven't seen for ourselves, ie the fight between Arthur and Percy and the prank. That said, I'm completely on Percy's side in that fight, because as you say, it seems clear to me that it's about so much more than just the promotion and what exactly Percy said to Arthur and vice versa (neither of which we can know). It wouldn't sdurpise me if Percy did say an awful lot of hurtful stuff to Arthur in that fight, things that he might even have known wasn't fair, and that were bound to hurt him, because he wanted to. This is really about the respect Percy never got from either Arthur or from his siblings, the fight was just his way of rebelling, protesting. And while we haven't seen the fight, we have seen how Percy was treated by everyone in his family save Molly, which makes it really easy for me to pick a side there.

I generally agree with what you're saying, except I would probably have voted Ron in the Ron/Ginny-fight. Not that I don't think Ginny took a cheap shot below the belt and was over the top bitchy (as in the entire HBP) but Ron, much as he may have "just been looking after her," was interfering with something that really was none of his business. It's not even the "almost using the word slut" I'm thinking about, but more that whether or not she was kissing her boyfriend and where wasn't anything he had anything to do with, and growing up in a family with traditional gender-roles may provide an explanation for his attitude, but it's not an excuse.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

The Ron/Ginny fight is so weird for me because obviously Ron starts it and there's really no defense for what he says. As you say, even if he's been raised to see girls as people who have honor to be protected, he's obviously just projecting his own screwed up issues. But Ginny's reaction still seems so over the top to me and so completely destroying him I don't really get it. Really it comes down to it being yet another Mary Sue moment for me. Ron's just set up to look dumb all the way around, especially since he is trying to do something nice on one level. (Not that I think that's really the case, actually. He may believe superficially he's protecting his sister, but really he's just freaked out seeing her snogging Dean, imo.)

[bethbethbeth.livejournal.com]

The Sectumsempra question was the most problematic for me (just like fandom, generally). I finally said Draco, but if Harry had had any idea of what the spell did, I would have blamed him, I think, Crucio or no. There are other retaliatory/defensive spells he could have used.

[bethbethbeth.livejournal.com]

Oh, and regarding the Percy issue: if I had been given this really cool job with the Bush Administration, working for Karl Rove or something, I can guarantee you my parents would not have been congratulating me.

Yes, kids need to grow up and make their own decisions, but Percy couldn't have been in any doubt about what his family thought about the current Ministry...and while he definitely should pursue his own dreams, he shouldn't have been surprised that his family wasn't pleased.

[ackonrad.livejournal.com]

On the Percy/Arthur question, I'm completely on Percy's side. I think Arthur Weasley is a horrible father, and his behaviour towards Percy proves it. He willingly leaves the twins and Ginny bully Percy by every possibility they get without doing anything to prevent it, while Molly at least has the decency to yell at them. Just because Arthur isn't willing to sacrifice his screwed-up enjoyment of modifying people's memories for the good of his seven children /meaning that he could get a better job if he wanted, but he just doesn't want to/ doesn't mean that Percy has to think the same way. I blame Percy only for his behaviour towards his mother, not his father.

I voted Ron on the Ginny/Ron issue. It was none of his business whom his sister was kissing and whether they were doing it in public or not. Even if she was screwing Dean in the middle of the school corridor, it still wouldn't have been his business. Yes, Ginny was out of line, but honestly, someone had to tell him what a jerk he was being. I just wish Hermione would've done it.

I agree on the Harry/Draco question - Harry has been living in the MW long enough to know that 'enemy' there means someone you wish more dead than alive.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think, as I said above, that you see a lot of weirdo issues with Ron there--and actually, one of the things that annoys me is that as usual it's being shown as a problem with Ron alone instead of a bigger problem. He's not really trying to protect Ginny from being called names--nobody's ever called her anything and she's not even doing anything so out of the ordinary. He's just freaked out seeing his sister kissing somebody. Which could be about his own problems in feeling inadequate he's also got the whole Weasley-family dynamic that seems to be old-fashioned that way. The Twins are played in their scene as if they're much cooler about it, but really they're giving Ginny the same attitude with even less reason. They're two twin brothers who sell practical jokes and will probably live and die in the same room.

[strangemuses.livejournal.com]

I agree with you on most of your choices but not all.

Arthur vs. Percy: I blame Arthur. He's the adult. He's the parent. I wouldn't be surprised if Percy provoked the incident, but Arthur bungled badly by belittling the idea that Percy may have earned his promotion. I don't know if Arthur even likes Percy. Perhaps Arthur was jealous that Percy was achieving so much so quickly while he was stuck in a dead-end, nothing job. Perhaps Arthur truly was afraid that Percy was being played for a fool. Probably both are true. Arthur is responsible for provoking Percy into leaving the family. Percy is now responsible for growing up enough to get over it and forgive his family.

Snape vs. the Maurauders: agreed with you.

Hermione vs. Umbridge: agreed with you and boggled by Hermione's lack of guilt over the incident.

Ginny and Ron: I blame Ron entirely for this incident. How in hell dare he imply (in front of their mutual friends) that she is a slut? She must have been mortified.

Snape vs. Sirius in the Prank scene: I think that Sirius was astonishingly careless and nasty here. I'm sure that he wouldn't have cared one bit if Snape had been killed. He wasn't thinking about what would happen to Remus afterwards. I don't get the Sirius Black love in the HP fandom. I dislike the character quite a bit.

Harry vs. Draco: I do blame Draco here for trying to use an Unforgivable. I also blame Harry for being a reckless idiot, but Draco was definitely acting out of malice. Harry was reacting out of angry stupidity. IMO, the person who provoked the fight is ultimately responsible.

Sirius's Death: Clearly Bellatrix was the one who willfully killed Sirius. Still, I want to blame Dumbledore because of the way that he withheld information and kept Sirius cooped up even though he knew it would make Sirius do something stupid.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

We're mostly disagreeing on the ones where I'm really close to the line. Especially those two fight scenes where one person clearly starts the fight out of nothing. Although in Draco's case I do think that most guys would see him as having to fight after being caught like that. Not that that makes Harry himself guilty since he didn't intentionally humiliate him, but he's definitely in wounded animal mode there. His bad luck Harry happened to be carrying a shotgun without realizing it!

And Dumbledore is the King of Blame in OotP.

*de-lurks*

[albichorizon.livejournal.com]

Arthur vs. Percy: I totally agree. You really pinpoint why I have issues with Arthur and the OBHWF.

Harry vs. Draco: I just think Harry's idiocity wins the blame game on this. In addition to your points, isn't Harry supposed to be a very good DADA student? Didn't he ever make a lesson to the DA that sometime a simple spell done well works better then a big flashy one? Hmm... on second thought, maybe Harry hasn't learned this lesson - it seems to be against the Gryffindor Code of Conduct.)

For example Harry should know a variety of spells that are quicker to say and just as capable as ending the fight as Sectumsempra. Draco easily incapacitated Harry on the train in HBP with he learned in his first year. Really Harry's stupid decision just seems to win the day one this one.

Re: *de-lurks*

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think that's part of what makes the Sectumsempra scene so grey. Of course Harry could have used a different spell--and I can't help but feel it's got significance on a lot of levels that he chooses such a bad one that Snape created when he was an angry young teenager. You can't say that Harry did it on purpose, but I don't think either you can say it was completely innocent. If Harry was on trial I imagine a good cross-examination would make him look pretty bad: so what did you think it was going to do? The boy was throwing a Crucio for all you know--so obviously you thought this would take care of him more than anything else you know, right? So when Mr. Malfoy escalated the fight to something really dangerous you expect us to believe you went for what you thought might be an eyelash growing spell?

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty offended/vaguely annoyed/whatever that people feel there NEEDS to be blame in the Sectumsempra scene-- that seems to be, y'know, ENTIRELY MISSING THE POINT, HELLO. Either blaming Draco or Harry in that... seems CRUEL :P And exemplifies why I think black-and-white moral judgments just... SUCK (yeah, I can't help the caps, ahahaha). I don't even want to empathize with the mindset of a person who'd NEED to blame either of them enough to ignore all the stuff that brought them to that point, that's really at heart of what happened. If I HAD to, I'd say BOTH of them are to blame and in any situation where someone's malicious vs. stupid, BOTH people are to blame. Stupid = bad and malicious = ALSO BAD. I'm not naive enough to say 'no one's ever to blame', but I'm at least rational enough to understand that misunderstandings, social conflicts & feuds and things are IN NO WAY, EVER the fault of just one side or just one person. It's like Capulet vs. Montague-- who's to blame? Why, BOTH! :P

The idea of picking 'sides' in any family dispute is even more patently ridiculous. I guess in a case of outright abuse, the person abusing the power to physically/mentally hurt the other person is the one who's 'to blame', but why the HELL is that question even raised in that situation? What, is there an alternative where the like, five year-old victim is to blame?? So that's pretty clear-cut; even there though, most likely the person who's the abuser has had a history of child abuse themselves, which doesn't absolve them in any legal/moral practical way, but puts their free will (to choose their behavior) under question, in a similar way an insanity defense would. It's not -insane-, but it's extremely disturbed behavior. Well, this doesn't really apply in any of these cases, but it's an example to show I -can- pick sides, too.

The Snape vs. the MWPP is a bit ridiculous to judge in a single yes/no binary for different reasons-- because it's not JUST ONE INCIDENT-- it's got a history for which it is the climax, and while that doesn't excuse the MWPP, it puts it into context enough so that one wouldn't just summarily send the guys to juvie (in the real world). There is no 'excuse' for endangering another student's life-- period. PERIOD. God. -.-; That's not even debatable. However, first of all only Sirius is to blame there, not 'the MWPP'; secondly, one should be careful what one's blaming Sirius -for-, and also careful not to say he's the 'winner' and Snape is somehow 'innocent', because that's far from the truth. Whether or not he's 'stupid', however, is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT, because, hello-- wilfully endangering his -life-.

The verbal fight thing just makes me laugh. And then blame the person doing the blaming. :/

!

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Ahh, I see what bugs me about this whole idea of placing blame in these situations-- anyone can place all the blame they want, as long as they acknowledge that's an emotionally biased reaction. The thing that I can't stand is rationalizing this emotional reaction as if it was reasonable and perfectly logical. It's just NOT. As far as I'm concerned, ethics always have that implicit 'but this is all subjective' worked into any discussion, and the thing that bothers me is that in fannish discussions like this, I just. Don't 'hear' that implied caveat. At all.

If people admitted they were using their own experiences and emotional biases, I could stand to listen to them. But since they don't, I blame the mode of discussion & not any character :/

[lilacsigil.livejournal.com]

You're very right about the Ron/Ginny scene - I couldn't pick that one and blamed "being teenagers" instead! Your dissection of the Arthur/Percy battle is a very interesting one, and very accurate. I also appreciated that you didn't take the "Arthur should have more ambition to earn more for his kids" route, because I really dislike that idea. None of the family are naked, homeless, hungry or uneducated; Molly and Arthur have decided to have one stay-at-home parent and dedicate free time to the Order, not to earning cash. Percy's ambition doesn't seem to be mercenary - the Ministry is hardly the place to earn a fortune unless he's crooked like Ludo Bagman - and Arthur doesn't accuse him of that.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

That's true--it's funny when people always call Percy the most ambitious or whatever because he's been associated with that in the text when the Twins are pretty damn enterprising as well!

The Weasleys, as you say, aren't starving or anything. I think even for Percy whatever point he was making for Arthur wasn't so much about greed for money. It's probably about some weird dynamic of signals he thinks he gets, or just another way to claim success for himself. I honestly think that even if Arthur had family money Percy and he could have had a similar fight.

Too long!

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I also realise that I have an emotional reaction to every one of these, but then I generally am on the side of the one who is the most victimised in my eyes, and so perhaps my intellectual decision would be the same.

Arthur vs. Percy:
I was absolutely on Percy's side. Someone else in the replies compared working for the Ministry to working for Bush - I don't agree. Arthur works for the Ministry (i.e. Bush) as well. It's just that the Ministry to which Percy is so obviously loyal has gone one way, and Percy has gone with them as opposed to going with the dangerous crank with his personally loyal army. (Perfectly reasonable outside view, I think.)

Percy's young, ambitious and constantly belittled at home, plus he (and Ron!) have enormous issues about their poverty. (And yeah, if a man has a limited income and access to birth control, I think he should be more responsible than to have seven children, so this places me on Percy's side sort of pre-emptively.) Arthur doesn't seem to care about his child's emotional problems. Just don't rock the boat, Percy! (And never say that the boat is shabby or daddy is a bad captain, or you'll be thrown off the side.)

Moreover, it seems Arthur threw the first stone. Percy came home going 'yay promotion!' and Arthur said 'not on your own merits, my boy!' I think it's perfectly reasonable that Percy exploded, and then his family closed ranks on him. Now, Percy is painted as pompous and irritable and so on, and may be hell to get on with, but he's their family and I think they should try a little harder than this. Percy didn't sign on with the DE, he signed on with the Ministry. Ron once said he thought Percy would sacrifice his family, but it looks like they're sacrificing him. Also, I find it somewhat endearing that he tried to reach out to Ron (the other resentful brother!) with his letter, even though the letter condemned Harry and thus Ron was being loyal ignoring it. I also found it endearing that Percy tried to guard Ginny from the twins in CoS (having obviously borne a lot from them on his own account) and was appalled that Ginny became the third twin and threw potatoes at him.

While Percy may have been insufferable and stubborn, and should possibly apologise to his Mum (I'm not all that fond of Molly, but I genuinely feel for her in this situation, she is the only person who seems to remember she loves the others) for being stiff-necked, I think he deserves an apology from Arthur. (and Ginny and the twins, while we're at it.)

Snape vs Marauders in the Pensieve

James and Sirius are both gits in this situation, and should have been forced by some teachers to apologise to Snape. Of course, almost nobody is likable in this scene aside from Lily, whom I press to my bosom and defend against all charges of being like Ginny. (Whom one imagines holding onto James's arm adoringly and, once he had Snivellus' pants off, casting the Bat Bogey Hex on his private parts.)

Hermione vs Umbridge - the Centaurs

While it showed off Hermione's Cold Vengeful Disturbing Streak excellently (and I think this is an important and interesting facet to her character) in this case I blame Umbridge. She was going to Crucio Harry and she'd already set Dementors on Harry: she'd made herself a serious enough threat that attacking back in any way was justified. Sure, a nicer girl than Hermione might have done things differently (and I say this liking Hermione, and thinking she is a decent person) but, I blame Umbridge.

(If we discuss Hermione, blame and Marietta, however...)

Re: Too long!

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

Ginny vs Ron

See, here is where my emotional reaction trumped my intellectual one. I want to blame Ginny, because Ron's reaction at least indicates affection and concern on some level. However, I would be outraged if my brother interrupted me simply kissing my boyfriend and freaked out and seemed to be about to call me names. I might even blow my top and say inappropriately horrible things.

I hate that Ginny needlessly goes for the jugular. She does with Hermione, Fleur, Zacharias and everyone in the world aside, it seems, from Harry and the twins.

So Ron's to blame and owes his sister an apology. (But I find his sister much more unpleasant.)

Sirius vs. Snape - the Prank

Well, we're not quite sure what went on there, are we? But pretty clearly Sirius is to blame, since he tried to murder someone and tried to use his friend as a tool for that murder. I believe he may not have thought of it as murder, but he was meant to be intelligent and a single instant's thought should have told him it was. And Snape may well have been dumb in his spite, and his eager desire to get the MWPP into trouble. Really, so what? Snape doesn't deserve to be eaten for it.

Sirius should've been expelled, and owes Snape and Lupin both an apology. I'd also thank James for the fact Sirius escaped Azkaban for like, five more glorious years?

Harry vs. Draco in the Bathroom

I also love that this one is neck and neck, and I really don't apportion blame at the time. Makes sense that Draco, a basket case trying to convince himself he's so big and bad, goes for the Crucio. Makes sense that Harry, trusting the Prince and in all probability knowing a hell of a lot more about the Cruciatus than Draco, lashes out with Extreme Gryffindor Prejudice. Both of them are being criminally stupid rather than deliberately malicious: Draco is half off his head, and Harry has had the Cruciatus used on him before and can't be blamed for acting on instinct. (Not that I don't think both of them can be deliberately malicious, I just read the scene as Thoughtless Emotional High Drama. Everybody sucked, and I loved the scene, and I lay no blame.

However. In the aftermath of this, it might have come to Harry that having (unwittingly in both cases) humiliated and eviscerated Draco, some response might be in order. Harry came off so far the best: Draco came so close to dying, that I think an effort to find out whether he'd permanently scarred Draco from the infirmary/a mumble of 'I didn't actually mean to make you almost bleed out on the bathroom floor'/an apology should have arrived.

Instead Harry complains about the consequences of his actions, which were much lighter than the consequences Draco faced, and hears his charmer say she's really glad Harry had a metaphorical butcher knife up his sleeve. Harry at the time has no proof and only a suspicion that Draco is working for the Dark Lord, and an instant's thought on the subject would tell him that Draco is acting, according to his own words, largely under compulsion.

I blame Harry for his actions after the bathroom, not within it.

Sirius' Death

Sure, it was Bellatrix. She killed him. Sirius was reckless, but Harry is often reckless and it doesn't get him killed. Harry was a twit and to this day I cannot believe that there is no moment where he says 'I could have used the mirror all that time! I am the king of all dimwits in the land!'

But I blame Bellatrix. That one was easy. All the others are complex and interesting, since it's a question of apportioning most blame or - as I took it - who should apologise if only one person could? And I feel that my emotional reaction was only wrong once, so I am pleased.

[prettyveela.livejournal.com]

Hey thanks for your comments and linking me! The Harry/Draco one is the only one in a dead heat.

It's REALLY hard to choose but that's why I said "Who do you blame MORE" so that even if you find both at fault, you blame xyz just a lil bit more than the other person(s).

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Thanks! I keep wavering back and forth on the Ron/Ginny one. I almost changed my vote...then went back and kept it.

The cool thing about Sectumsempra is wow, who would have thought there'd ever be a scene between those two that could be a dead heat?

[static-pixie.livejournal.com]

Arthur vs. Percy - Arthur's more at fault here. If anything just because he's older and should have handled it better.

It's interesting, though, the way that Arthur's irresponsibility is pretty much the same as Dumbledore's. They've both put themselves in these positions where they’re responsible for large numbers of children, but seem unable to take up this responsibility because another one seems more grand and important. Although, JKR never dwells on this, of course.^^ It’s like, if you don’t want the responsibility, just don’t take it on Although, Arthur's is more unforgivable because at least Dumbledore is thinking about winning a war and kind of needs to be around to sort of moderate things, whereas Arthur just likes his muggle toys.

Snape vs. MWPP - I never understood people who blamed anyone but the four kids who ganged up on the one for no reason here. It seems pretty obvious to me.

Hermione vs. Umbrdige - I liked the comment this person made about this one. Although, probably the fact that Hermione is a child and Umbridge is an adult should come into play, but then, JKR's had Hermione playing with the adults and winning for so long, it's hard for me to put that much stock into that idea. Umbridge may have spurred them on, but with Hermione here, it's sort of the same as Sirius in the murder plot, in that not only did she attempt to bodily harm someone, she tried to use the centaurs to do it, thus 'dehumanizing' creatures who do have their own independent thought process. So, Hermione.

Ginny vs. Ron - I think what bothered me about this is that Ginny goes after Ron for saying pretty much the same thing the Twins say earlier because she knows that Ron's more vulnerable and she knows she can win. It's a pattern with her, putting Ron down because he's the only one in the family she can have any power over. Which, to me, is the mark of a bully. I don't care whether it was defensive or not, you wanna pick on someone...be like Draco and pick on someone your own size, or bigger. XD It's not so much who I blame as who I'm more disgusted with, actually, and that's Ginny.

Snape vs. Sirius - Sirius, all the way. For the same reasons you put down, Snape had no idea what to expect and probably figured that, while Sirius was mean, he wouldn't ever actually try and kill him. Plus, Snape's weakness is that he wants acceptance and respect so badly and so I think that, no matter how mean Sirius had been to him in the past, there would always be this little part of him that would hope to one day be brought into Sirius’s little circle. Which is why he's so happy to see him locked up, alone and broken, in Grimmauld place. And so I think that if Sirius said the right things, Snape would trust him because of this tiny hope.

Harry vs. Draco - Alright, so, I picked Harry. Duh. :) But, honestly, I'm not surprised it's so close, either, because like everyone's saying, it's not really about apportioning blame here. However, what I really dislike about Gryffindors is their tendency to believe that, once someone has done something they consider wrong, any level of payback is justifiable. I think it's what keeps them from feeling remorse a great deal of the time, even when they do something despicable, and it's just scary to me. At least the Slytherin, um, ethic is fluid enough to judge each situation on its own. And I think that that Gryffindor idea was the the one Harry was operating on and that because Draco had used the Crucio, anything Sectumsempra might do was fine. So I 'blame' him more here.

Sirius - Eh, I blamed Harry, although I think I'll change my mind and vote Sirius. Because he deliberatly provoked a psycho knowing what the stakes were. And that's not only dumb, it's irresponsible, too.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

she tried to use the centaurs to do it, thus 'dehumanizing' creatures who do have their own independent thought process. So, Hermione.

Hermione has a fucked-up attitude to centaurs throughout the book, so it's funny to see all the 'Umbridge shouldn't have been racist to the centaurs, she deserved it!'
(It's also interesting, because there's plenty of prejudice to other people in the books who are minorities and the victims of hatred that's totally brushed over, because it's the good guys being intolerant - Muggles and Squibs would be two large examples.)
There's the bizarre part where Lavender and Parvati are crushing on Firenze, and she says 'I've never liked horses' (which seems to me as offensive as any 'Mudblood' slur, especially when she calls him a 'part-human' in the next paragraph when referring - oh, the irony! - to Umbridge being prejudiced. So there's no confusion that she's aware he can be referred to non-judgementally as 'a part-human', she's just putting him down by calling him a horse.), they're 'shocked' and tell her he's a 'centaur' to which she shuts them down by 'coolly' saying 'Either way, he's got four legs'.
There's also the part where she squeals at Hagrid because he's calling them 'mules' to their faces, knowing it will offend them. So it's okay for her to call them that behind their backs, but better not to their faces, because they might hurt her and her friends.

Because he deliberatly provoked a psycho knowing what the stakes were.

To me, it seemed pretty much like Sirius had a death wish, so while I wouldn't say 'OMG, Bellatrix is innocent!', his getting killed doesn't offend or upset me particularly. He got what he wanted.

I think what bothered me about this is that Ginny goes after Ron for saying pretty much the same thing the Twins say earlier because she knows that Ron's more vulnerable and she knows she can win.

Exactly.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

I don't think it explains away Sectumsempra.

Casting the Sectumsempra itself never seemed that bad to me. I don't buy the 'OMG, he thought it would fire teddy bears and rainbows!' but I could see how in a situation like that, Harry might not be thinking (although I find it hard to imagine what Harry thought it would do - and he had been musing on the Sectumsempra for quite some time, already, as you said - and of course, he could always use 'Expelliarmus!' or the Body Bind or something.)

Of course, it's interesting to see how Draco's 'Cruc-' becomes that he'd cast it and it would have worked OMG!1! in people's minds - we've no idea whether Harry would have just be knocked off his feet, like Bellatrix was - when Harry's tried three times (and the last two are interrupted only by circumstance, just like Draco's.) I mean, the situations are different, but either this is a last-stop, black and white, 'If you cast it, you deserve to die' or it isn't. If you think Draco deserved to be sliced up for it, then Harry does, too.

It's the reaction afterwards that I think makes me blame Harry more. All through the book, we see Draco falling apart, presumably mainly through panic that he'll fail and Voldemort will get him and his family; but I think it's clear that he's also feeling guilty about nearly killing Ron (who he probably dislikes just as much as Harry does Draco, so it's not like it's a situation of 'Harry shouldn't feel bad, they hate each other!') and Katie; whereas Harry's main guilt here is for himself - now I won't be the star of the Quidditch team, what if Ginny gets pissed off and doesn't want to be snogged by me? (I'm trying not to judge other's answers here, but I thought it was hysterical someone was saying how Harry 'blamed himself, as usual.' Yeah, he was really cut up about it, hiding the book and saying how he didn't deserve so much as detention and all.) What looks like a horrible mistake turns into a truly nasty turn for the character if there's no remorse.

He seems to be voicing the common attitude in the Weasley house

Which Ginny as a character seems designed to play into, too - the baby who remains immune to the teasing the others get, presumably because she's a girl; the only way into the Weasley family for Harry.
Right in this scene, Harry's monster is roaring in agreement, which seems totally ignored by most of the audience, but it totally undercuts it for me.
Like, it's very bad of Ron to be sexist and judge Ginny for being a girl who wants to date several boys (not to mention that judging people for this sort of thing is all over the books - Ginny's position isn't that she's a liberated woman and it's no-one's business if she dates 100 guys, it's that Ron is a loser for dating no-one, which is eventually validated, both by the text and by JKR's bizarro interviews where she explains how Ron needs to get 'mature' and worthy by using kissing someone. Like, god forbid he come to an inevitable relationship with Hermione where she's more experienced.) but Harry's attitude is that he'll protect Ginny from Ron (doesn't he shove him against the wall when the conflict gets physical? - which is initiated by Ginny, iirc.) but also hold the same thoughts about 'scarlet women' or whatever Ron's going to say, which is romanticised with H/G's subsequent relationship. The end of this isn't that the boys learn they were wrong to think Ginny's a slut or whatever, it's that she stops being 'too popular for her own good' with men by just dating Harry. (And of course, the reveal that she's not like one of those girls, since she apparently had no sexual feelings for any man but Harry all along, after all.)

[ljash.livejournal.com]

Like, it's very bad of Ron to be sexist and judge Ginny for being a girl who wants to date several boys (not to mention that judging people for this sort of thing is all over the books - Ginny's position isn't that she's a liberated woman and it's no-one's business if she dates 100 guys, it's that Ron is a loser for dating no-one, which is eventually validated, both by the text and by JKR's bizarro interviews where she explains how Ron needs to get 'mature' and worthy by using kissing someone. Like, god forbid he come to an inevitable relationship with Hermione where she's more experienced.)

Hmm. Interesting. I had said that Ginny's comment to Ron seemed a little truthful, and then read lots of comments about how it was such a bitchy and unfair thing to say. It was. But I was thinking how it did seem that Ron's comments were partially motivated by jealousy of everyone else. I still think that... but you're right in the deeper meaning of the comment in the book. Ron is portrayed as backwards or confused or prudish for not leaping on the make-out wagon, even if he didn't really have a partner. He did then end up using someone just to do it.

Ginny did end up saying something like how she'd never felt anything for those boys, only Harry, didn't she? I have a kind of mental block about the end of that subplot.

i have moved beyond such petty mortal things as the lj comment limit

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

overreaching and needing to go for the fabulous secret Hermione plan, which goes beyond being desperate to help Harry.

All these situations are pretty much written almost like any horror movie, where no-one can do the sensible thing because it wouldn't be dramatic - Harry could disarm Draco (or vice versa), Hermione or Harry could call for help - but yeah, at this point, especially with Hermione looking 'triumphant', it seems like it's gone beyond 'OMG, this person is going to Crucio my BFF!' into 'Haha, you're going to get yours, bitch!' and wanting to get some concrete revenge rather than the anti-climactic 'Flitwick called Aurors, we're okay!' or whatever.
(Which I think is definitely a part of things in OotP - everyone's keen to be a grown-up and fight some battles, just like in the MoM when they're all disappointed that Sirius isn't there and they'd wanted something 'exciting' to happen.)
But then, I guess that's what the readers supposed to be feeling by then. Whether that's because Hermione (like her friends) is heading down a dark path and JKR's planning to go somewhere with that, or whether that's because this is the default reaction to events in the books - let's see something bad happen to the baddies and feel better - I don't know.

Re: i have moved beyond such petty mortal things as the lj comment limit

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

You know the thing with Sectumsempra to me, is obviously they're both at fault for everything they themselves do--like, Draco starts the fight and keeps fighting even though we know Harry himself isn't really into it. He's not angry at Draco, he's just shocked and then trying to block hexes--until years of Malfoy anger can get kick started.

But with Harry using that spell, as you say of course he could have done something else. The two of them have been blocking each other's curses throughout. But it never really occurred to me Harry wouldn't use Sectumsempra (despite the fact it's impossible he managed to get out all those syllables before Draco was able to say: "io"). As soon as he sees it you know he's got to use it in the worst way, and obviously not on McLaggen because it's got to be used on an enemy, and that's clearly going to be Draco, the designated enemy since Book 1. It's one of the moments where as the hero of the book I almost expect him to know this is the moment to use that spell he got back in chapter 20, you know?

[the-bitter-word.livejournal.com]

I'm always lurking in this journal. You often have such interesting discussions going on here.

I had to choose Hermione over Umbridge because, as a well-read Muggle, Hermione would have known that Centaurs were noted in Greek mythology as hellraisers and rapists, with the exceptional noble Centaur thrown in when the race rampaged itself to extinction. I don't think Hermione intended serious harm to Umbridge, but she could not have claimed ignorance about the possibility. Luring a woman into the hands of a murderous and lustful gang is unconscionable to me, no matter what the motivation. And, as I noted in the comments following prettyveela's poll, Hermione again demonstrated her arrogance towards non-human magical creatures in assuming she knows best and the creatures would follow her.

I also felt Dumbledore's secrecy about the Prophecy was ultimately to blame for Sirius' death. That secrecy may have impacted the actions of many characters, including Sirius, who might have sobered up if he knew what Harry was facing. More importantly, not knowing the Prophecy arguably led to Harry's blowing off Occlumency lessons and to his generalized hostility and insensitivity towards those who were trying to help him. Had Harry known about the Prophecy earlier, he might have been more mindful of how much responsibility he carried and how much danger he faced. Or maybe not... little in the sixth book demonstrates subsequent mindfulness in Harry. Still, I have to go with Dumbledore as the big mistake-maker in this scenario.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

It's funny given the conversations in other threads here about Hermione's horse comment that that's not brought up with regards to the way she deals with the Centaurs. They themselves flat-out accuse her of trying to use them as basically savage beasts thinking that they have to follow certain rules as she understands them.

Dumbledore's secrecy about the prophecy is probably the single most important thing in OotP. It's behind almost everything--he and Voldemort are like the twin forces causing things to happen the way they do. Them and Harry, but Harry responding more honestly and is being acted upon. Dumbledore's holding all the cards and in every scene he makes things more difficult--even when you'd think any normal person could see it was causing problems. Write a note to Harry or something, you idiot! And that's not even speaking about his plans for Sirius. Is he really so busy throughout the year he can't think of a different plan there?

[ljash.livejournal.com]

I actually found most of them easy to vote on.

1: Percy v. Arthur: I've always been more on the side of Percy than I was intended by the author. I also agree that it's nice to see the Perfect Weasleys take a blow--not according to them, of course, to them Percy is an ass. And it's pretty well written that way, as well. Because Percy did that comment about them not having much money, he seemed like the bad guy. And that wasn't a fair thing to say. But was a small thing in the overall argument.

Percy could easily have been hired on his own merits and it's really awful to suggest otherwise. He was the one who was excited about looking at defective cauldron reports or whatever it was. He was mocked mercilessly for this because he's boring and fastidious. But wouldn't that be just the kind of thing that would show he'd do his job well? I think he's just the kind of person who would appeal to people in the Ministry who are into enforcing rules--people who are not like Arthur. Arthur enforced them when he felt like it, and his judgement about what was actually harmful was pretty good. But if you want to have actual rules and not let people have perks just because they can get away with it, Percy is the kind of person you'd really want. And if you're that kind of person, Dumbledore will make you nuts. Percy also looks like the bad guy in the scene because he insulted the Great Dumbledore.

Ginny v. Ron: I blamed Ron more, but maybe that's because I'm a girl. Yes, Ginny is upset beyond his comments, possibly because she's struggling against what is the opinion of her upbringing and entire family. But Ron really was being a doofus. She pointed out that he's upset because he's the one not getting any, and that was kind of true. He was taking some things out on her that were really about him--more so, I think, than the other way around. But for the most part this one wasn't a big deal.

Harry v. Draco: I like that this one is neck-and-neck as well, though currently Harry has pulled ahead. I answered this one "I blame someone else" and it's the only time I used that answer. It just didn't seem like it was either one's fault more than the other. You'd either have to blame them both for the rivalry they've had all this time, or blame someone else. And I think I'd blame someone else. I didn't really blame anyone for that scene, it just seemed like it was coming for the two of them. If I were to blame anyone it might be Lucius and Sirius, or whoever else shaped the boys the way they were. Or I'd blame the Wizarding community that made such dangerous spells so easily available (ok it wasn't THAT easy, one was unforgivable and one was created by someone for his own use in a private book). But you know what I mean--it's so easy to damage and repair in that world that people would, on the spur of the moment, tear the shit out of each other in ways that are shocking. I think that neither was really prepared for what happened, either. Draco might have been equally shocked if he's really crucioed Harry.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

1. Yes, that's the thing--it comes down to "Can you believe Percy said that thing about the money?" when it seems like that wasn't even Percy's main point. If anything the money was just a sign that Arthur himself wasn't one to talk about being valuable to the Ministry. It's very strange that Percy's shown as being someone who's really into his job and happy to do work other people don't want to do and keep things running smoothly--something that's very valuable--and yet for some reason everyone acts like he couldn't be valued because...he's boring? Someone on the poll I noticed said something like that Percy failed at the one job he was given at the Ministry but he didn't fail at all. He ran the whole thing. He "failed" only by not figuring out his boss was possessed, which why would Percy ever figure that out? It's not like Crouch was telling him to kill Muggleborns, he was just running the place from home. (And of course, Dumbledore didn't notice that Moody wasn't himself at all, and that's not held against him.)

2. I'm so torn on this one. I feel so much like Ron's set up in the text, but he starts the fight and Ginny is absolutely right. He's totally projecting his own issues--it upsets him to see Ginny kissing someone, therefore he's protecting her. Not.

3. That's a good point about Draco's potential shock at Crucio--I agree. I tend to go back to their first midnight duel where Ron says all they'll be able to do is shoot sparks at each other. This is basically the same thing, only now they're both dangerous.

*waves*

[(Anonymous)]

Arthur-Percy: ITA that their dustup was years in the making. Outside the context of Percy having felt underappreciated for a long time it doesn't make much sense. It's just not a situation where Percy was likely to stop and consider if Arthur had a point. For that matter, if Harry had had an excellent reason to tell Ron while he was still fondling the Prefect's badge that he's only Prefect because he's Harry's best friend and because Dumbledore thought Harry had too much on his plate, I doubt Ron would have taken it well either.

The other thing is, few people in the books can know for a fact that Voldemort returns in GoF. There's no obvious, evidence-based reason to believe Dumbledore over the Ministry. It comes down to, either you trust Harry and Dumbledore or you don't. Arthur still trusts Dumbledore and he expects his family to follow his lead. So he wants to draw heavily on Percy's family loyalty at a time when, as you say, Percy's become more and more alienated from his family and Arthur doesn't appear to have done a thing to prevent this.

Umbridge vs Hermione: This one's frustrating because I blame Umbridge and still consider the Hermione option ("this wasn't the answer") to be 100% correct. Umbridge had to be stopped, but Hermione's Rube Goldberg plan was dumb and could have gotten them all killed.

-L

Re: *waves*

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

You to appreciate the way that while people mostly remember Percy being snooby for five books the background of his always being the butt of the family's jokes is there too-and that's just what Arthur's words must play into. Percy never hurts anyone when he's stuck up. His crime is basically being no fun. I just realized it's kind of a shame you never see any scenes where the family sticks up for him at all. So you don't even get the sense that they tease him but no one else is allowed to--on the contrary, they seem to have the most trouble with him.

One of the funny things about OotP is the way the good guys seem to take it for granted that everyone should see the truth, even while you see that there's no reliable news sources. They're feeding laws to the Prophet, and have gotten news from it in the past, but suddenly only idiots read it. Then they put the truth in a magazine that's completely rubbish, but everyone should now trust that one.

A funny thing about Hermione is how as usual, once they get away due to totaly luck (Grawp) her plan becomes brilliant and not, you know, something that almost got all of them killed too.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

Harry can learn to...love...

I guess. I'm just not sure JKR can pull it off, when she seems to be hinting the job's already done - the pure heart and ability to love remains intact, and it was already present at the beginning of the books; in her view.

I think Harry does love people - in his own way.
(I'll preface this, by saying the great example of Lily's love for her son never quite grabbed me. I mean, it's touching and all, but I have my issues with it - mostly that I can't imagine many parents or even non-parents not being willing to sacrifice themselves. The whole 'She had the choice to step aside!' seems BS - who on earth would step aside and give a baby to a murderer? I mean, I can't imagine saying 'Sure' even if it was a stranger's baby, let alone your own, and I don't see many people in the books as being capable of that - even Petunia would rather have her whole family suffer a person they hate in their lives, and her own beloved son being occasionally endangered than reject Harry, knowing that he'll be vulnerable to Voldie.
Plus the love of a mother to an infant seems a very 'easy' kind of love - it's primal, and it's a still unformed personality. I mean, obviously babies each have their own quirks and all, but it's not the same as loving someone through hard times, much like Harry's love for the parents who dramatically died for him is touching, but it's not the same as loving someone who grounds you and forgets your favourite sandwich fillings or whatever.)
His love for Hagrid and for Ron and Hermione is interesting, though, because it's a totally opposite attitude - Hagrid can screw up over and over without endangering Harry's basic devotion to him, whereas Harry is incredibly quick to cut out his friends when they go against him (which is understandable, since he's not had too much experience loving people through things: there's Lily and James, who are pretty much perfect 'lovers' since they require nothing back, and no living person can match them; and there are the Dursleys who he hates.)
He misses Ron in GoF (although I don't believe he would ever have reconciled without Ron making the first move. Not that that's a bad thing - he was in the right, and accepting wrongs too readily isn't exactly healthy either: see Hagrid!) but he's also quick to keep Ron in his 'place' as the second.
He doesn't seem to miss Hermione so much in POA, although I've not read that in forever, so maybe that's wrong (I'll be fair and say that he manages to be friends with the two in HBP while they fell out with each other, which he never did before) and again, he's can be very cold to her if she does something he doesn't approve of.
I'm getting on to friendship dynamics rather than love now, but I guess it could be seen as withholding love and giving it based on a reward system, which is something that Ron and Hermione themselves seem incapable of. They can ignore each other, and get pissed off with Harry, but they'll eventually crack.
Of course, it's possible that Harry would crack, but the structure of the books is such that he'll never have to, because it's usually someone else who's in the wrong in his and the narrators view.
Mind you, I don't see him as being capable of withholding that from Hagrid, Sirius (this is gray bit, since he and Sirius seem to have some long-ass sulks in OotP) or Dumbledore, which makes me wonder about the power dynamics there, since those relationships have an inequal balance in favour of the adult, whereas Ron/Harry and Harry/Hermione have a weight in Harry's favour.

The Dumbledore and Hagrid stuff makes me a little uncomfortable, not just because I truly cannot understand why anyone would love them, although I can't, but because it's prompted first by gratitude. It's the same issue I had with H/G, especially with that line about how Harry's saved most of the Weasleys. You can never be sure it's love for the person so much as love for the symbol of the rescuer.
And with Sirius, it's kind of clouded, too - Harry and Sirius never really get to know one another, so the mourning seems to be more about the lost opportunity and the way they both connected to James through each other.
Not that love should be straightforward and black/white 'I love X for Y reason'.