Molly, Percy and Missing Weasley

[finwitch]

No: HPFGUIDX 37467

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Amanda" <editor at t...> wrote:
 
>Other objections, harder to
> explain away, were two: (1) that the clock in the Burrow, whose 
description
> I cannot find at the moment (rrrrgh!) shows if any Weasley is in 
mortal
> peril; a glance at the clock should have reassured Molly. Counters 
to this
> ran: dead is not mortal peril; it wouldn't register on the clock, 
and so
> Molly could still be terrified; or, Molly is so wacked out by the 
resurgence
> of her former experience that she either simply didn't think of it, 
couldn't
> bear to look at it, or did and doesn't trust it.

Maybe death would drop the handle out of the clock? And um - Harry 
Potter doesn't have a handle in Weasley clock, neither does Hermione 
Granger! And maybe the clock DID show Mortal Peril on them as Crouch 
Jr. stole Harry's wand. Nothing much seemed to happen, but it doesn't 
mean there wasn't danger! Add Rita's mention of Dark Mark to that 
and...

(2) If Arthur knew that
> Molly was likely to have such a reaction, and it seems he did, then 
he could
> have Apparated to the Burrow, reassured her, and Apparated back to 
the
> children. Counters to this were that Arthur might not have wanted 
to leave
> them, given that one of them is Harry Potter and the perpetrators 
of the
> Dark Mark were still at large. [He could have sent Percy....had 
Percy
> already gone someplace else? sorry, long time since I read this and 
I've no
> time tonight].

Arthur did know - that's why the haste. But.. how do you think Molly 
would react if Arthur Apparates to her *alone*? Definately not calm 
down! She'd ask where the kids were first thing! Arthur could do 
nothing to ease her *except* to bring the kids to her as fast as 
possible.

And of course he'd not leave the kids - not after Amos Diggory 
accused *them* of conjuring the Dark Mark! *Someone* had to defend 
the innocent children from baseless accusations! Besides he didn't 
*know* where the real guilty person was - stunned under invisibility 
cloak(as it was), hiding otherwise under one(grave danger) - or 
disapparated (as he assumed).

It is well possible that there *was* one or more Weasley Children 
that *died*. Say, Molly was out of house giving birth to Ron or 
working. They had a hired nanny to look after the kids, but there was 
a Dark Mark over their house. The Nanny was found dead, as well as 
some of the children. Ron wasn't even *born* then, as I figure it to 
have happened when Percy was 2-3; Too young to tell anyone/remember, 
but old enough to break a rule. So Percy would be afraid of breaking 
rules because it might cause his brothers to die. That's how a child 
in that age would think, I think. Believe that breaking rules 
*causes* a DE to apparate into your presence and kill everyone he 
sees! Percy doesn't remember, but he's been afraid of breaking 
rules/losing his sibling ever since.

The twins note that their brother stopped laughing - and found the 
brother dead later! (he stopped laughing *because* he died)...

Same event, different ways to see what it means-- childlike ways.

-- Finwitch