Sneakoscope reprise; Lupin the questionably evil

[dfrankiswork at netscape.net]

No: HPFGUIDX 39648

We have had some discussion about sneakoscopes.  I think the critical question is: do they react to untrustworthy people (regardless of their current actions) or to actions that are untrustworthy presumably defined as breaches of trust)?  The wider OT question of whether people are defined by their actions will run and run, no doubt.

In his letter to Harry in POA 1, Ron describes the sneakoscope as reacting when someone untrustworthy is present.  It's plausible that he is quoting either the salesperson or a knowledgeable family member.  He mentions that it reacted, apparently to F&G putting beetles in Charlie's soup.  Later on, on the Hogwarts Express, when Ron describes it as unreliable, he says it went off when he was attaching it to Errol's leg, and Hermione 'shrewdly' asks if he was doing anything untrustworthy at the time, based in all probability on book knowledge of the devices.

So Ron's letter says that the sneakoscope reacts to people, while Hermione's question could be interpreted as implying she believes it reacts to actions.  Given Hermione's known views on the seriousness of rulebreaking and moral infringements, and the wider place of rule-keeping in the series - much discussed in the recent past - I would go with Ron here.

In that case, it seems implausible that the sneakoscope would (if functioning correctly) react either to the beetle prank or Ron tying it to Errol.

A further consideration is that the likely role of the sneakoscope on the train is to make us suspect Lupin: I think the F&G and Errol examples are meant to sound suspiciously feeble and cause us to wonder what it is reacting to (and what lovely misdirection it is too - get it half-right and you suspect Lupin; get the Egypt examples right and you suspect Scabbers or any of the Weasleys - put them together and you only have Scabbers and Ron).

JKR's daring twist is to use the sneakoscope in the same way again in GOF, but turn the warning on its head by having them broken.  Since she hasn't ever told Harry or the reader in an authoritative voice what they have really reacted to, there is plenty of scope for them to come up again.  How will she twist it this time?

All this suggests that Dumbledore might benefit from having one in his office, though if a dark wizard dared to go there (as Crouch does) he might be able to take (temporary) measures to fool it, as he did the Goblet.

While we are on the subject of deceit and the train journey in POA, a thought for Pippin: I know that it is questionable canon to use JKR inteview quotes, but do we have an explanation (other than evil!Crookshanks) for why Crookshanks the alleged part-Kneazle does not react to evil!Lupin?

David


__________________________________________________________________
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop at Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/