Fudge and the Longbottoms

[darrin_burnett]

No: HPFGUIDX 40438

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Leanne Daharja Veitch <daharja at b...> wrote:
> Hiall,
> 

> 1. First of all, I don't think Fudge was sincerely surprised about
>  Voldemort's return at all - I think he is in league with V. This 
would
>  explain the MOM's inability to actually *do* anything about V's 
rise
>  again. BTW, "Fudge" is English slang for "fake": i.e. to say "I 
fudged
>  the test" = "Ifaked the test". Considering Rowling's continual use 
of
>  meaningful names throughout, it makes sense to me that Fudge may 
live up
>  (or down) to his name.


First of all, welcome! This place is great fun. 

A large portion of the fans feel that Fudge is essentially just like 
Neville Chamberlain (which I guess would make Dumbledore like Winston 
Churchill.)

My own feeling is that Fudge might not be knowingly and actively 
working for Voldemort, but is such an easily manipulated fool that he 
might as well be. I believe we're talking about a guy who truly is 
not suited for wartime and would rather just believe everything is 
going on swimmingly. 

Now, that's what I believe to be going on now. It is entirely 
possible Fudge is actively working for Voldemort by the end of the 
series. But I do not think he's been in on it from the beginning.



>  2. I'm convinced that Neville Longbottom is / will turn traitor.
>  Possibly he was resposible for his own parents' deaths. The 
similarities
>  between Neville and Peter Pettigrew (Wormtail) are too many. Even 
their
>  names are similar Worm=Long, Tail=Bottom. He's quite clearly a
>  traitorous character to me. In fact, the only time he stands up to 
Harry
>  et al is when they are off to save the Philosopher's stone - this 
makes
>  sense in light of the fact that he would have wanted V to get the 
stone.
>  And it seems odd to me that, despite his continual stuff-ups, he 
never
>  gets into real danger.

Ah, here is where I disagree, although I think this is a novel 
theory. :)

I believe that the similarities between Pettigrew and Longbottom are 
far too unsubtle (McGonagall flat-out says it in PoA) to be true, if 
that makes sense. When leaving clues as to the traitors in the midst, 
JKR is never so obvious.

Besides, my image of the Mauraders is that they hung out together 
constantly. Pettigrew DID learn how to be an Animagus, which 
indicates some long study hours, plus running about in the forest 
with the gang. Perhaps Pettigrew was the little groupie, but I think 
he was with them all the time.

Longbottom isn't with the Trio all the time. He has a huge role in 
SS/PS and declining roles in the following two books, with the 
revelation about his folks in GoF. (And really, not a big role in 
that book.)

As for the scene in PS/SS, I'm not sure we can say that Neville is 
doing Voldemort's bidding. I think a case could be made that 
Voldemort/Quirrell wanted (or NEEDED) Harry to show up so they could 
try use him to get the Stone out of the mirror.

As for Neville not ever being in real danger, that is true, but he is 
also not one of the more adventurous characters. And as I've said 
before, I believe the reason the Slytherin gang has largely left him 
alone, except for sneering from behind Snape's skirts in Potions 
class, is that he started whaling on Crabbe and Goyle in PS/SS.

But hmmm... did he have something to do with the death of his 
parents, you ask? First, they aren't dead. But I'll adjust your 
theory to being responsible for their condition. :)

If I have the timeline right, the Longbottoms were maimed sometime in 
the couple of years after Harry defeated Voldemort. I remember from 
GoF that Dumbledore says their attack was a shock because everyone 
was so giddy about Voldemort being gone.

Since Neville is the same age, give or take some months, as Harry, 
that would make him certainly no older than three, or maybe four 
years old, when his parents got hurt. 

So it hardly seems possible that he had anything intentional to do 
with it.

Ah, but unintentional? Maybe. :)

Darrin 
-- I remember the first time I posted here. I was very kindly 
told "There are 2,643,534 other messages on that topic. Here are the 
numbers!"