Fred and George: The Bullies You Do Know

[lucky_kari]

No: HPFGUIDX 43155

Would it surprise you that I agree totally with Elkins?

It wouldn't?

Oh well....
--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "ssk7882" <skelkins at a...> wrote:
> And...let's see.  Who else?  Well, there's Dudley.  Ton-tongue 
>toffee, anyone?  The kid is three years younger than they are, and 
>he's a muggle besides; it is plain to see that he is absolutely 
>*petrified* of magic, and the twins are passing him cursed sweets.  
> Very nice.

In general response to Elkins' post, Abigail wrote:
>You know, I've had the feeling for a long time that, as a group, we 
>tend to over-analize the Harry Potter books - at least past a certain 
>point.

Now, it seems to me that there is an assumption here that subversive 
opinions such as "Fred and George are mean, insensitive bullies" are 
the fruits of over-analyzation on the part of those who propose them. 
This is not the case. We subversives come to our subversive readings 
instinctively. 

Debbie wrote:
>I've always had difficulty accepting the humor in the scene.

Nods. The ton-tongue-toffee made me feel sick, just really sick. I 
couldn't laugh at all. And that was an instinctive reading, as 
instinctive as any hearty guffaw at the "hilarious" situation. 

Now, Debbie has already done an excellent job of explaining what was 
wrong with the prank, so I'll pass on to Cindy (who is getting edgier 
all the time), who took a great deal of heat for saying:
>See, I think the twins have a superiority complex when it comes to 
>Muggle relations. Maybe there are good reasons for this, but I 
>sense it nonetheless. 

Darrin responded:
>No, there is no evidence Fred and George go after Dudley simply 
>because he is a Muggle or simply because he is fat. Again, they go 
>after him because he is a bully himself and they know what Harry went 
>through 

Cindy's objection holds water, though, in my opinion. Of course, Fred 
and George don't target Dudley out of hatred for Muggles. But it was a 
disdain for Muggles that underlaid the whole incident, in my humble 
and most sycophantic opinion. Muggles are really at the whim of the 
wizarding world, we have seen. People like Albus Dumbledore believe 
that wizards have no right to have other human beings at their whim. 
People like Draco Malfoy think that's perfectly fine. And then, 
there's the twins. Being brought up by Arthur Weasley, they would 
probably claim to be completely on Dumbledore's side. However, their 
actions belie this. I think Arthur Weasley was perfectly right to lose 
his temper at his sons. He says that after all he had done to prevent 
mistreatment of Muggles, look what Fred and George did. Fred and 
George crossed a line. They took advantage of their magic to hurt 
someone without magic. In other words, they took on a position of 
superiority, a position which their father has been waging war on for 
years, towards another human being. I don't care that they were 
avenging Harry. It still reminds me suspiciously of nasty things like 
colonialism and "the white man's burden." To sum it up, I grovel 
firmly by Cindy's side. 

Elkins wrote:
> Oh, and then there's little Malcolm Baddock.  Eleven years old, it's 
>his very first day at school, the poor kid's probably scared out of 
>his gourd to begin with, he's just been sorted into Slytherin, and on 
>his way to the table, big strong sixteen-year-old Fred and George 
>actually *hiss* him.

Now, isn't that disgusting? You know what that reminded me of? It was 
an election in which tempers were running very high. We had a sign on 
our lawn for one political party, and some fellow came by while my 
younger siblings were out on the lawn, and made some abusive remark 
about their support of the political party. People like that are 
creeps. At seventeen, perhaps Fred and George can escape a life of 
perpetual creepdom - I hope they will - but that is just plain creepy 
behaviour. I don't care if Malcolm Baddock wasn't traumatized for the 
rest of his life. Neither were my brothers. 

Elkins wrote:
>They can't even manage to be nice to the Ever So Decent Cedric at 
>the beginning of GoF.  He's trying to be friendly, and they're 
>scowling menacingly at him, just because he had the unmitigated gall 
>to whip them once at Quidditch.  

A chorus of voices have chimed in saying that hating perfectly decent 
people is a very natural reaction. No, it isn't. I don't think it is 
at all. I don't say that we won't have adverse reactions towards 
decent people. Harry certainly does. But his jealousy towards Cedric 
does not seem of the same category as George and Fred's animus against 
Cedric. Fred and George can not even be polite in front of their 
father to a fellow classmate who has shown them nothing but goodwill. 
Harry, when extremely jealous of Cedric, can be quite civil, even if 
his tone of voice was cold. The twins think that they are allowed to 
display their irrational negative emotions publicly. May I add egotism 
to the list of twinnish vices?

Elkins wrote:
> Even when the twins target adults, it's always *vulnerable* adults.  

>They don't hurl snowballs at Professor McGonagall, do they?  No, of 
> course not.  They throw them at Professor Quirrell, whom they have 
>every reason to believe is indeed precisely what he appears to be: a 
>stammering, shell-shocked wreck of a wizard who is tottering right on 
>the edge of a nervous collapse.

Indeed, the targeting of Professor Quirrell is particularly 
disturbing, imho. I've been in school recently enough to get the 
chills just thinking about. There is a sort of blood lust in people, 
but particularily adolescents, a blood lust that causes them to attack 
once they smell weakness. I know it very well. I must regret to say 
that I know it because I have felt it, and taken part in it. I was in 
Grade 6 when I made my science teacher's life a living hell, because 
she was weak. Quirrell's original description reminded me of her and 
many other teachers, who perish at the hands of students. Children can 
 be so cruel. I know I was. Even thinking of it gives me the shudders 
now. I was very badly bullied in elementary school, so you'd think I 
would have behaved better. But, I didn't. I don't know why. 

However, I grew up. By the time I was a teenager, I could not stand to 
see that sort of bullying. I would get quite protective of people like 
the substitute Choir teacher who stammered and had a hard time keeping 
control of his class. And I regarded and still regard the  16, 17, 18 
year olds who exploited his weaknesses as bullies. And so do I regard 
Fred and George. Darrin said that Fred and George would have been very 
happy if Quirrel had thrown a few snowballs back. I'm sure they would 
have been. But they knew that he was incapable of doing so, that he 
was a nervous wreck, an object of ridicule across the school. And he 
was their target, not someone like Snape who could give them better 
than they got. 

Elkins writes:
>They remind me far too much of so many bullies I have known: the 
charismatic bullies, the
>popular ones, the ones who are always favored by those in authority, 
the ones
>except for their victims.

Right, I knew those. Much too well. 

"All sorts of things, horrid things, went on which at an ordinary 
school would have been found out and stopped in half a term; but at 
this school they weren't. And even if they were, the people who did 
them were not expelled or punished. The Head said they were 
interesting psychological cases and sent for them and talked to them 
for hours. And if you knew the right sort of things to say to the 
Head, the main result was that you became rather a favourite than 
otherwise."

So begins my fav. C.S. Lewis book: "The Silver Chair." During that 
miserable period in my life, I really loved the book because Lewis had 
bullies down pat. I remember thinking, "Just wait till I write a book 
about you, and expose you for what you really are. You'll be sorry 
then." 

But, in regards to all the chilling evidence about Fred and George, 
they do seem to be Dumbledore's pets. Cindy noted that they get away 
with much more than Draco. I would like to point out that they are the 
only students Dumbledore publically favours. Dumbledore has long chats 
with Harry in private, but he'll interrupt his public speeches to talk 
to Fred and George, stare pointedly in their direction during the same 
etc. 

>A case can be made for the twins' assault on the
>Slyths on the train at the end of GoF as "retributive" to be sure, 
but what
>about Malcolm Baddock? What about Professor Quirrell? And what about 
Percy? 
>The twins aren't picking on Percy because he has injured them 
terribly through
>any particular action he has taken against them. They're picking on 
him
>because he is *vulnerable,* and because they have identified some 
trait that
> makes him, to their mind, "fair game," thus enabling them to 
rationalize their
>behavior. In Percy's case, that trait happens to be pomposity. But 
what if it
>had instead been ugliness? Or intellect? Or talent? Or timidity?

Or what if it had been a humourless obsession for Quidditch? If you 
want an illustration of the maliciousness in the twins' attitude 
towards Percy, you should look at the twins' attitude towards Oliver 
Wood. Wood, it is made clear throughout the books, is humourless 
(though funny for us to read), quite arrogant in regards to the 
importance of his pursuit in relation to peoples'
lives, and completely obsessed to the point of boring people.  But, 
Fred and George, you see, are interested in Quidditch. Their approach 
to Wood's peculiarities is really funny, light-hearted, and friendly. 
They gently dig at Wood's foibles. A good example would be their 
recital of Oliver Wood's tense opening speech in Harry's first game. 
Oliver retorts by telling them to "Shut up!" 

Now, I find it quite telling that in the Potterverse, "Shut up!" seems 
to be a gentle inoffensive almost endearing form of adress among boys. 
(And in my family as well, I must say.) Our first Percy/twins exchange 
reminds me of this. Fred and George make fun of Percy's pride at being 
a prefect, and Percy tells them to shut up. I wouldn't say there was 
much resentment between them
at that point. Later in the book, there is the heartwarming sweater 
scene, where it's obvious that Percy has dropped in because he wants 
to be with the rest of the family, and that Fred and George really 
treasure their older brother.

But things change. As Elkins once asked, can you picture Fred and 
George making Percy spend Christmas with them now? Not in GoF, at any 
rate where Percy's brothers keep as far away from him as possible. 
Now, the whole Ron/Percy dynamic is fascinating enough, but I would 
suggest that it bears little relation to the F&G/Percy dynamic. 
There's a lot more emotion between Ron and Percy. There are great 
displays of pride, cruelty, loathing, and love between those two. I 
once ventured that I believe Ron and Percy to be very similar in 
character. On which of course I was asked for details. But it is a 
post I've never got around to writing.

Fred and George, on the other hand, have no connection with Percy, as 
far as I can see. Where Ron is sincerely bothered by Percy, the twins 
seem to find their brother amusing, a target for their jokes, and most 
disturbingly, a pawn in the war against their mother.

"Percy, the perfect prefect," says one of the twins when their mother 
is trying to correct them for their illegalities. Obviously, Mrs. 
Weasley has been holding up Percy as a standard of behaviour, and Bill 
and Charlie as well. But Percy can be got at. The very unfunny 
relentless teasing of Percy at the beginning of PoA is a case in 
point. They are quite obviously ticked off with their mother's pride 
in their brother. Therefore,

"How're we getting to King's Cross tomorrow, Dad?" asked Fred, as they 
tucked into a sumptuous chocolate pudding.

"The Ministry's providing a couple of cars," said Mr. Weasley.

Everyone looked up at him.

"Why?" said Percy curiously.

"It's because of you, Perce," said George seriously. "And there'll be 
little flags on on the bonnets, with HB on them - "

"-for Humungous Bighead," said Fred.

Everyone except Percy and Mrs. Weasey snorted into their puddings."

Oh yes, Percy really was just asking for that one, wasn't he? So 
remarkably witty too. 

But, as many listies have hastened to say, going after your siblings 
is perfectly acceptable behaviour, and makes everyone love each other 
ever so much so more. Well, it doesn't. Let's face it, of the families 
we know are all the adult siblings very cozy with each other? One of 
the worst bullies I know is a cousin who makes the exact excuse that 
he can behave in any way towards his brother. Even between siblings 
who seem friendly enough, there is still a good deal of resentment 
over childhood wrongs. And, as Penny has pointed out, Percy's coming 
out of it so splendidly, isn't he?

Another note from the Fred and George file: (Page 493 GoF)

"Then Fred said abruptly, "I've told you before, Ron, keep your nose 
out if you like the shape it is."

Eileen