[HPforGrownups] Re: Fred and George: should we worry? (Was: next prank)

[elfundeb]

No: HPFGUIDX 43045

  Jenny of Ravenclaw asked, long ago:
  Fred and George are quite the loveable scoundrels, are they not?  Or 
  are they?  Has anyone ever thought of their pranks as a bit 
  mean-spirited?

  "I do!  I do!"  The author of the Evil!Fred line of thinking could not leave such a question alone, though the post lay half-written for a week. But now, since Elkins responded, I am completing this post, because I now have company in my opinions:

  Now, I know that everyone else in the entire universe just adores the twins.  I know that they're popular characters.  And indeed, they have been very nice to Harry -- and I do appreciate it when the characters are nice to Harry.

  But I just have to say it.  I do not like the twins.  At all.  

  Me:
  No!  No!  Everyone else *doesn't like the Twins."  I don't like the Twins.  I do not like them playing jokes.  I do not like them hissing folks.  I do not like them here or there.  I do not like them anywhere.

  Jenny asked:

  When I first read GoF, I delighted in the Ton-Tongue 
  Toffee scene.  Boy, did I love picturing Dudley on his hands and knees 
  in the living room, scooping up as many of the "brightly colored" 
  toffees as his greedy hands could find.  

  Me:
  I've always had difficulty accepting the humor in the scene, though that's clearly the way it's written -- full of comic timing and slapstick elements, with Dudley choking, Petunia getting hysterical, Vernon using the china figurines for target practice, and Arthur attempting to provide reassurance -- with an outstretched wand.  
  Beneath the comedy, however, I see a highly dangerous prank.  There was no guarantee that Dudley would eat the toffee before Mr. Weasley left.  Had Dudley not noticed them lying around right away, or waited to pick one up, he would have been gagging and choking on that growing tongue with no means whatsoever to stop it.  Even if Dudley wasn't in danger, his parents didn't know that.  I could see the Dursleys resorting to something desperate, like cutting off Dudley's tongue, in an effort to save him from the horrific effects of witchcraft.  

  I know the Accidental Magic Reversal Squad would've come upon the scene, and they probably could have magically corrected whatever harm had been done.  But the arrival of the squad might also have caused problems for Arthur.  Not only are his sons charming what appear to be Muggle objects, Arthur might have gotten in trouble for illegally connecting the Dursleys to the floo network.  (The extent to which Arthur's little bending of the laws have contributed to the Twins' delinquency is for another post.)

  Darrin objected, saying:

  And forgive me, but I have a hard time shedding a tear when a bully 
  like Dudley -- you want me to dig up the canon references for Harry 
  getting physically assaulted by Dudley? -- gets it from a bigger 
  bully.

  Me:
  But why should the Twins be going after Dudley? They claim it's because he's a "bullying git," which he is.  But the Twins have never met Dudley.  Besides, he's not chiefly responsible for Harry's miserable life at Privet Drive; Vernon and Petunia are the ones who have contrived to abuse Harry; Dudley only follows his parents' example.  Dudley's an unfortunate scapegoat, IMO, because the Twins think it would be funny.  (BTW -- and I know this is a digression but since I-Just-Don't-Like-Hagrid Jenny started this thread, I'll plunge ahead -- Hagrid does the same thing at the hut on the rock.  After discovering how the Dursleys have kept Harry in ignorance of the WW, he first chastizes them and then gives Dudley a tail.  But Dudley was just standing there, a convenient target for a pig joke.  IMO, there was no justification for this.)

  Now, my question is this:  Are we supposed to be reading the toffee episode at its surface, comic level, taking our cue from Harry's own amusement (he didn't want to leave and "miss the fun").  Or are we supposed to see the dark side of the twins' humor?
  Abigail suggested the former:

  There are certain elements of the books that I am just sure that JKR never 
  gave as much thought to as we have.  Sometimes, I suspect, the answers 
  to many a thorny dilemma are simply "because it's funny", or "because it 
  was more dramatic that way", or "because JKR never gave it that much 
  thought".  


  Yes, I fear, absolutely fear, that you may be right.  But I hope not, and think there's some evidence to support both views.

  HF (yr awen) correctly pointed out the Twins' best quality:

  I agree that some of the stuff they do can be pretty mean, but they're also pretty staunch allies in Harry's camp. 

  Me:
  Yes, and even I have to admit that giving the Marauder's Map to Harry shows generosity on a grand scale.  It wasn't at all necessary to make a gift of the map just so Harry could get into Hogsmeade; they could have simply loaned it to him for the day.  But they only gave it to him to support his rule-breaking; I get the sense that they don't see themselves as having any role in the Voldemort struggle; it's just that Harry is a superb Quidditch player, a fellow Gryffindor and an all-around Good Kid To Have Around.  In some ways they're like bullies everywhere, who pick the *coolest* kids for their own circle.

  Frankielee (and others) suggested that this the Twins' exuberance is simply a normal outgrowth of being in a large family:

  They've obviously distinguished
  themselves from the other boys to Molly and Arthur by deliberately not
  choosing intellectual or political futures. It's not entirely in a
  good way, but as middle children, at least they are getting attention...

  But isn't this a problem for the other siblings?  F&G command so much attention that other siblings get correspondingly less?  Isn't the root of Ron's jealousy problems the fact that he lacks the twins' talent for attracting attention?  Don't their actions just exacerbate Percy's relative isolation from his siblings?  At the very least, this type of sibling rivalry really only functions well if everyone is able to give it as well as get it. 

  Abigail suggests:

  Just because Percy is too full of himself 
  to play the game doesn't mean Fred and George can't, and what do they do 
  to him that's so terrible, anyway?  They make fun of him for being proud of 
  being a prefect.  They tease him for his self-importance.  They play with his 
  head boy badge.  We never see this have any adverse affect on him - I think it 
  would take quite a bit more to deflate someone as stuck up as Percy, and 
  I think the twins know that too.

  I have to disagree with the premise that the jokes do not affect Percy.  There have been a number of posts in the past detailing the negative effects of the Twins' teasing on Percy and the Weasley family dynamic in general.  See, for example, post # 37315 (by Barb Purdom).  Percy does not know how to give it back, and it has isolated him from the family.  And in post #38730, I suggested that the treatment of Percy has had a similarly negative effect on Ron.  So I find it hard to accept the notion that it's all in the family.

  Jenny also asked:

  Many people dislike Snape, Draco, Rita Skeeter and some aren't even 
  crazy about Ron - all because of their attitudes.  Fred and George are 
  funny and fun, and obviously talented wizards, but are they nice?  

  Yes, they are funny and fun and talented.  They are, in a word, entertainers, and they derive their energy from performing.  But in their flair for the dramatic they hurt others, both in a physical sense (treading on Draco on the train) and a psychological sense (Percy's outsize pomposity). 

  Others have pointed out incidents such as the hissing of Malcolm Baddock when he was sorted into Slytherin.  I'll add, from PS/SS, that they made catcalls when Lavender Brown was sorted into Gryffindor.  I checked my dictionary, which confirmed my understanding that a catcall is what the stereotypical construction worker does when an attractive young woman walks by (I do not want to offend any real construction workers here.)   I consider it rude in the extreme, and it's no way to greet the first new Gryffindor of the year, especially an 11-year-old girl.  Like the Malcolm Baddock greeting, this one struck a very sour chord with me.  I cannot see any reason to include this -- because it's not funny to me -- except as a very early signal that the Twins do push the envelope too far sometimes.

  Jenny originally asked:

  Should we applaud them for their prank inventions and encourage them 
  to do more?  I for one would love to see them open a new jokes shop, 
  but maybe they should be steered away from their current passions for 
  practical jokes.  Maybe they should be more heavily recruited to help 
  Dumbledore and Harry in their battle against Voldemort and the DEs.:
  To which Elkins replied:

  As much as I dislike the twins, I think that they should definitely open their joke shop.  It's what they really want to do, it's what will make them happy, they certainly have both the drive and the hustle to succeed in business, and their joke items are obviously very well-crafted.  Indeed, the twins so strike me as exceptionally talented.

  And besides, selling their gag products would be a *productive* outlet for their sadistic brand of humor.  Harry's right: the WW is going to need its yuks, and apparently a lot of people in the WW actually find the twins' sense of humor funny.  

  I have two thoughts on F&G's fate.  Now that they've got the thousand Galleons Harry gave them, they can get inventing.  But, as Ron points out in GoF, most of the stuff they create is really dangerous.  And I can't help seeing certain other characteristics as subtle clues that there may be more to this "get inventing" than the surface, comic relief role that most readers assign to the Twins.  Porphyria, in her follow-up post on the darkness of wandless magic, hinted at one of them:

  I had imagined that 
  wandless magic was analogous to the Real World equivalent of picking 
  locks, hotwiring cars, hacking into computer systems and so forth. 
  There might be some legitimate uses for these talents -- people 
  accidentally lock themselves out of their homes and need a locksmith 
  to get them back in -- but for the most part, even knowing how to do 
  these things makes someone look suspicious since they lend themselves 
  to criminal behavior so easily. 

  Exactly.  Yet it appears that I'm the only reader who thought it extremely odd that the Twins arrived to rescue Harry on CoS armed with lockpicking tools.  Why would wizards living exclusively in the wizarding world need to pick locks?  Why?  I solemnly swear they are up to no good.

  And, as Abigail pointed out:

  The only exception I can think of is the owlery scene in GoF.  Here the 
  twins are actually engaged in borderline illegal activity.  This is serious stuff, 
  and I think it's telling that this is the first time that we've ever seen them 
  disagree and are able to tell them apart - suddenly Fred and George get to 
  climb one rung up the ladder to fully-fleshed character.  It's following this 
  scene that Ron expresses his fears that Fred and George have an unhealthy 
  and possibly dangerous obsession with making money.

  Me:
  Well, I'd quibble with the suggestion that Fred and George have been indistinguishable until now.   I see a big difference between Fred and George.  The books are full of instances of kindnesses from George (catalogued in ## 37532 and 37604).  There are *very* few initiated by Fred; the only one I can think of is his kind words to Harry in the hospital in the "Grim Defeat" chapter of PoA.

  But I've cited the Owlery scene as hinting at the Twins' dark future before, and got a lot of flak for it.  Well, the Twins are not lacking in charisma.  

  So I see two alternatives.  One possibility is they will invent something that will be used with great effect in the battle against Voldemort, and its use will provide much-needed comic relief in a Book 7 that it otherwise very grim.  They certainly have the talent for this, and it would do a great deal to soften Molly's opinion of them.  But it would be boring.  And it would give a very large presence in the books to two characters with little plot significance.  

  On the other hand, there's a (much Bangier) possibility that they will simply keep inventing that dangerous stuff and sell it to the public, in the spirit of entrepreneurs everywhere.  In that case, I have a theory that the biggest customer, or maybe a financier, of the joke shop will turn out to be a front person for Voldemort, who intends to use F&G's products for their own ends.  In blackmailing Ludo Bagman to get him to pay up on an illegal gambling debt, the Twins have shown a willingness to push the rules to the limit.  Fred actually admits that it's blackmail:  George says it's blackmail, Fred says it's time to play dirty, George says if it's in writing it's blackmail, and Fred shuts him  with "Yeah, and you won't be complaining if we get a big fat payoff . . . ." (p. 566 U.S.)).  If they've played fast and loose with the rules as they've done at Hogwarts, they may find themselves being blackmailed themselves, and by a Dark wizard whose powers of persuasion they will find difficult to resist.  Canon support?  Well, Ludo Bagman, who's  on my Ever So Evil! short  list, was *very* interested in their stuff.  A "bagman" is a front person in an illegal scheme, and though Bagman was definitely involved in illegal gambling in GoF, he was not presented as a front for someone else.  And now that the Twins have actually tried to blackmail him . . . .

  I'm probably being a bit Snapelike about this, as in RL I have a tendency to wish for people who flaunt the rules for laughs, and gain enormous popularity for doing so, to be taken down a notch or two.  But the Twins *are* mean, and my gut feeling is that JKR has thrown in enough over-the-top incidents involving the Twins to have prepared us for them getting into very deep trouble, from which they will find it very difficult to escape. 

  I'd find that much more interesting than comic relief. 

  Debbie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]