[HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's fate in book 5 & Amos Diggory

[wynnde1 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 49413

Hello, Everyone!

A few days ago, I wrote:

<< [Amos] Diggory's . . . a bully, a hypocrite, dishonourable, and pompous. >>

To which Jo Serenadust wrote:

"Well, I'd have to agree that Amos definitely has bullying 
tendencies, and is rather pompous as well.  I didn't pick up on 
anything especially dishonorable or hypocritical about him as much 
as the fact that he's so besotted with Cedric and his 
accomplishments, that he's got a rather large blind spot where he's 
concerned."

Catlady also responded to my comments, saying: 

"Amos Diggory is *definitely* vulgar, but what evidence is there of 
him being *any* of those other things? His rough way of questioning 
Winky when she was found with Harry's wand near the Dark Mark is 
often cited as an example of him being a bully, but I have always 
read that interrogation as Amos and Arthur using the well-known "bad 
cop, good cop" technique. That they fell so easily, as if by habit, 
into their roles, gives me the idea that they had previously worked 
together in some investigatory or law-enforcement job."

Now me:

After going back and re-reading the sections featuring Diggory (the Portkey 
Chapter and Dark Mark chapters of GoF), I realise that my strong dislike for 
Diggory is perhaps more intense than the actual canon warrants. That's not to 
say I'm backing down on disliking him <G> - but I did realise that it would 
probably be easy to read him as being far more sympathetic. That's just not 
the way I read him.

As for him being pompous and a bully, I just can't see him any other way. I 
do see the validity in your reading, Catlady (good cop, bad cop), but that's 
just not the way I read it. Yes, he's acting like a "bad cop" in this 
scenario, but I think that's just the way he is, as opposed to it being a 
tactic used (even somewhat unconsciously) by him and Arthur. I particularly 
dislike the way he treats Winky in the Dark Mark chapter of GoF - 

"You've been caught red-handed, elf!" Mr. Diggory roared. "Caught with the 
guilty wand in your hand!" 

Winky is obviously terrified and distraught, and the suggestion that she 
could have actually been the one to conjure the mark is ridiculous, actually, 
so I find it wholly unacceptable for Diggory to treat her in this manner. 
Even if there was a chance she was guilty, this sort of intimidation doesn't 
sit well with me - whether or not it's a "tactic," which I don't think it is. 
I think he just likes to bully and intimidate people.

Come to think of it, I'll add another item to the list of Diggory's sins: 
Bigotry. He questions Harry about conjuring the mark, but the only person he 
actually screams at is Winky - which tells me that he doesn't believe House 
Elves are beings who deserve rights and respect. Okay, admittedly, most of 
the Wizarding World seems to feel this way, but that still doesn't make it 
*right*.  I'm with Hermione on this one "He didn't care how frightened she'd 
been, or how upset she was - it was like she wasn't even human!" I will 
choose to ignore Ron's reponse to that ("Well, she's not") <GGG> And 
actually, wherever elves do fall on the scale of "beings" I still believe 
they should be treated with respect. What it reminds me of (although this may 
be a poor analogy) is people who think it's okay to mistreat their pets 
because they're "just animals." I've even heard the argment that animals 
can't actually feel pain (because they are not complex enough organisms, or 
whatever), so it's not wrong to kick them or starve them or perform medical 
experiments upon them. That's just stupid, but apparently there are people 
who believe that. Okay, maybe worms don't have highly developed nervous 
systems, but cats and dogs and rats? Hmnh. This makes me wonder how it feels 
to be transfigured into a teacup. After all, Draco was described as being in 
pain after being transfigured into a ferret (of course, that could have been 
because of being bounced about the stone floors of the castle <g>). Still, it 
kind of puts all that transfiguration of MacGonagall's in a somewhat sinister 
light, doesn't it? ;-) In any case, Diggory's treatment of Winky is, to my 
mind, deplorable.

Okay, so I've still got Diggory down as a bully, and as pompous (do I need to 
back this one up? Isn't this fairly obvious, especially in the way he treats 
Harry upon their first meeting?), and now he's a bigot as well, at least in 
regard to elves. For his other sins of dishonour and hypocrisy, well, these 
are going to be more difficult for me to justify. I started believing these 
things about him based on the scene where Harry first meets Amos while 
waiting to get the portkey to the QWC: (The Portkey, GoF)

       "Ced's talked about you, of course," said Amos Diggory. "Told us all 
about playing against you last year . . . I said to him, I said  - Ced, 
that'll be something to tell your grandchildren, that will . . . You beat 
Harry Potter!"
       Harry couldn't think of any reply to this, so he remained silent. Fred 
and George were both scowling again. Cedric looked slightly embarrassed. 
       "Harry fell off his broom, Dad," he muttered. "I told you . . . it was 
an accident . . ."
       Yes, but you didn't fall off, did you?" roared Amos genially, slapping 
his son on his back.  "Always modest, our Ced, always the gentleman . . . but 
the best man won, I'm sure Harry'd say the same, wouldn't you, eh? One falls 
off his broom, one stays on, you don't need to be a genius to tell which 
one's the better flier!"


That just gave me a very bad feeling about Diggory when I first read it. And 
it still does, although in re-reading it I can see that he's not actually 
rude or offensive, just very insensitive, making Harry and Cedric both 
uncomfortable, not to mention what the others may have been feeling. What Jo 
(see above) calls his "rather large blind spot," I tend to think of as being 
somehow more damning than that. I'll say a bit more on that later. However, 
since Diggory does seem to believe his version of things, I suppose he can't 
really be called a hypocrite. So, I'll take back hypocrite, *but* will add 
insensitive to Diggory's list of character flaws. As for dishonourable, I 
think it would be more accurate to say that Diggory and I have a different 
definition of what honourable is. By his standards, I imagine that he feels 
entirely justified in everything he does and says. But, as I think he's an 
insensitive, pompous, bigoted bully, I obviously don't agree with him. <G> So 
I'm sticking with dishonourable, although I'm not sure it actually has solid 
canon behind it. <G>

Athena offered her support to the theory that Harry could be framed for 
Cedric's death when she wrote:

"You see, I've done a lot of thinking about that and I think Harry is 
going to be painted in a *very* unfavorable light.  I think Fudge is 
going to make Harry, Sirius Black and Dumbledore look like they are 
responsible for all that is wrong with the Wizarding World.

I also think that Amos Diggory will soon come to believe that Harry 
killed Cedric and will subsequently do anything in his power to get 
at him.

Here is my poisoned pen rendition of what the Daily Prophet might 
run."

<snip Athena's excellent take on a story which might appear in the Daily 
Prophet>

Now me:

I love it! And thanks, Athena, your post is a terrific illustration of what I 
was talking about - it would be so easy to make Harry look very suspicious. I 
like the way you show how easy it would be to make Dumbledore's actions look 
dodgy, as well. (Plus, I had a couple of really good laughs reading your 
post, as well . . . especially Narcissa crying while telling how her son was 
found unconscious with footprints on him LOL!). How easy it would be for 
Diggory to take something like this and start an anti-Harry campaign 
throughout the Wizarding World. There is only one part of your article with 
which I disagree: 

You wrote:
" It is commonly known that one cannot Apparate or Disapparate on 
the grounds of Hogwarts, so any claim that Potter and Diggory left 
Hogwarts, saw You-Know-Who rise again and then reappear at Hogwarts 
grounds should be treated with great suspicion said a source from 
the Ministry of Magic."

Actually, as far I can can tell, Hermione and Snape are the only ones who 
seem to know this! <said with tongue firmly in cheek> Everyone else (Ron in 
particular) seems to have trouble remembering this little fact from Hogwarts 
- A History. ;-) Tee hee hee. 

Moving on . . . Jo Serenadust also wrote:

"I'm so glad that someone besides me thinks that 
Amos Diggory and his past and future role in the story will be 
significant.  Yet, somehow I just can't bring myself to *really* 
dislike him.  I know that he's given Harry a hard time, and will 
very likely give him worse in the future.  I just can't help feeling 
so very sorry for him.  After all, the last time we see him in GoF, 
he "sobbed through most of the interview."  For all of his bluster, 
I imagine that his wife is the stronger of the two of them, and that 
he's so utterly destroyed by Cedric's death, that his future actions 
will be the result of a broken, irrational heart.  Of course, that 
doesn't mean that they won't be terribly destructive, particularly 
to Harry."

Well, I partially agree with you here - I do have great sympathy for him over 
the death of his son. And you are probably right that his wife is the one 
with more genuine strength. *However* I think Diggory is going to be a prime 
example of someone doing what is *easy* rather than what is *right*. This may 
sound a bit harsh as I'm speaking about Amos, who is certainly suffering 
intensely. We (I mean we culturally) seem to take for granted that people 
will do drastic and extreme things in the aftermath of a tragedy. Which is 
understandable, of course it is . . . to a certain degree. However, even 
though Amos is suffering, that doesn't make it okay for him to try and 
destroy Harry (or anyone else) just because he is grieving for his son. You 
say that he'll be acting from his "broken, irrational heart." I say that, no 
matter how broken hearted he is, he is still responsible for his actions. My 
point is that if he does things which are destructive and harmful to Harry, 
it will not be solely because of his grief - yes, that would be the catalyst 
for him to act. But it is the character flaws he already has in place which 
will allow him to pursue his vendetta against Harry no matter what - I see 
him becoming very single-minded and unwilling to listen to any evidence of 
Harry's innocence. He'll make his decision based on the information he is 
willing to accept, and then run with it, much as he did with his analysis of 
Cedric's Quidditch victory. It had nothing to do with which one of the boys 
was the better flyer, as it was the Dementors which caused Harry to fall. But 
does Amos care? No, I don't think he does. (I am assuming that Amos knew 
about the Dementors, based on what we know about Cedric - I think he would 
have told his dad the whole story). He focuses only on the parts of the story 
which make him feel good about his son (and, by extension, himself).

You say you can't help but feeling sorry for him. Well, as I said, I have 
sympathy for him, too. But I didn't like the person he was before Cedric was 
killed, and if he goes after Harry now, I won't be able to believe he's 
acting that way just because his son died. He'll be doing it because that's 
just the sort of person he is - someone who likes to attack and intimidate 
others, and someone who isn't willing to consider points of view other than 
his own. So, it's not Amos' broken heart that will cause him to attack Harry. 
He was a bully long before Cedric died.

All this is IMVHO, of course! :-)

And, on a more personal note to Jo, I'd like to agree with the comment 
someone else already made that if you aren't getting a lot of responses to 
your posts, it's just because they are so well-thought out that there's 
nothing else to say but, "me too!" And, I'm also ever-so-grateful that there 
is at least one other person here willing to discuss the dastardly Mr. 
Diggory. <G> But please don't hold your breath for the 9-part defamation. I 
think I've already said just about everything I can think of to say about 
Amos Diggory. I just don't think I'm clever enough to come up with anything 
more! <G> But, if you and I are correct, there will be *tons* more dirt on 
the man after Book 5 comes out! :-)

Cheers!
Wendy




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