[HPforGrownups] Re: Magic Detection/ Ron and the dress robes/ Socks and Celebrity (and sweaters)

[Richelle Votaw]

No: HPFGUIDX 45006

Jodel writes:

> Book 1. For ten years Harry has been producing intermittent but highly
> noticable spontaneous magical "breakthroughs" and the Ministry of magic
does
> *nothing* about any of them.

True, but he wasn't in school yet.  I mean, look at the Quidditch World Cup.
There were toddlers running around doing magic, no owls came flying through.
Maybe they're more strictly monitored because of the fact that they're in
school and now know what they're doing, particularly in the case of a Muggle
born or a child raised by Muggles like Harry.

> Book 2. One floating pudding and Harry gets a nasty-gram threatening
> expulsion within five minutes of the incident. Furthermore, that floating
> pudding was produced wandlessly (House Elves are forbidden to have wands,
> remember?), how did the MOM come to the conclusion that this wasn't just
> another breakthrough?

This was the first time magic had been done at Harry's residence since his
admission to Hogwarts and the knowledge of the WW.  First time anything
magical had been done since he knew he wasn't supposed to do it.

> Book 3. Harry produces another and fairly spectacular breakthrough
> (wandlessly again, I might add), The Magical Reversal squad, complete with
> obliviators show up within the hour. Harry is reassured that no one seems
to
> hold this against him and his Aunt Marge doesn't remember a thing.

Well, at the time half the MOM was out looking for Sirius Black, who
everyone thought was after Harry.  So therefore when they did find him they
were so vastly relieved that he was in one piece that instead of a slap on
the wrist he gets a pat on the head so to speak.

Eric Oppen writes:

> that unsuitable, I'd either start working with the Transfiguration skills
I
> had, or approach someone I knew that _had_ such skills.  I don't know that
> I'd trust Gred-and-Forge, but I bet Professor McGonagall would be willing
to
> recommend someone he could ask.

Then Calypso wrote:

> Hum. . . I had always assumed that things witches and wizards bought in
the
> wizarding world couldn't be altered. Wouldn't be very economic for
retailers
> to sell stuff that customers can just change to their liking all the
time--
> they wouldn't make any money that way! I think that things like robes
> probably have some type of magic woven in them to keep people from
> transfiguring them or trying to alter them too much like Ron tried with
> cursing off the lace and ending up with uneven sleeves

I always figured Ron just wasn't quite up to tailoring standards with his
Severing Charm.  While it is possible that WW clothes can't be magically
altered, surely they could still be adapted somewhat, like removing the
lace.  I think it was a matter of pride on Ron's part that he wouldn't go to
someone for help.  While I can't quite see any of the fellow Gryffindors,
other than perhaps Hermione, managing something with those robes, if he had
put his pride in check McGonagall would've helped I'm sure.  All he'd have
had to do was summon a few sniffles and she'd have taken care of it.
However, that calls for a major ego issue, so he just did it himself and
went with frayed sleeves.

Jessica writes:

> Then we have Dumbledore, who says he sees himself
> holding thick, wool socks when he looks into the
> Mirror of Erised. You see, though Dumbledore seems
> almost God-like he is human and he has human needs and
> desires.

While it's all a good theory, we still have only Dumbledore's word for what
he saw in the mirror.  Even Harry doubted he'd told the truth, it was
extremely personal.

Jessica writes again:

> and identity. They're warm and protecting and - with
> the first initials of each of the Weasley children on
> each child's sweater - it is a specific statement of
> love and recognition to that one person. Ron's sweater
> is Ron's. Fred couldn't wear it. Neither could George
> or Percy. It was made specially for him and is, thus,
> an expression his mother's love for the unique and
> specific individual Ron is. Of course, Ron is

While I'm sure it's true that a great deal of love and labor goes into these
sweaters that Molly makes, and they are individualized, but still they're
always the same.  Ron always gets a maroon sweater with an R on it.  I don't
think Ron really is tossing away affection by not appreciating the things
his mother makes him, he's probably just tired of it.  After all, Fred and
George had to shove Percy's sweater on him, so it's not just Ron.  I'm
assuming Molly makes these sweaters every year, even before the kids started
at Hogwarts, so does that mean that Ron's had 14 years of maroon sweaters
with an R on them?  A little variety, please!  He's had at least four we
know.  All the same.  Harry's had four sweaters too, all different.  Why?
Harry'd have been just as pleased to have four green sweaters with H's on
them to match the Weasleys I'm sure.  But they aren't all the same, they're
all different.  I love Molly, but I don't understand everything she does.
Or maybe everything she *doesn't* do.

Richelle

****************************************************************************
****
"May it be a light to you in dark places, when all other lights go out."
---- Lady Galadriel, The Fellowship of the Ring
****************************************************************************
****