OOP: Why Weren't the Weasleys in the Order?; Molly's (and others') flaws

[Marie Jadewalker]

No: HPFGUIDX 66245

> Penny wrote:
> 
> >>>> It really is *Odd* that the Weasleys weren't in the Order the 
> first time, isn't it?  They were certainly old enough ---- they 
> almost certainly must be older than Lily and James (if we believe 
> that Lily and James had Harry when they were still in their early 
> 20s for example).  I wonder if this is important in some way. <<<< 

David replied:
> Sounds like the cue for all those Imperius!Arthur theories again.

Well, if not Imperius!Arthur, then at least the Missing Weasley Child 
aspect of it.  Something to explain why he reacted so strongly to the 
Dark Mark at the Quidditch World Cup.  

Penny again: 

> >>>> MOLLY'S SHORTCOMINGS --  I know I won't be popular for saying 
> it, but Molly Weasley is rapidly becoming one of my least favorite 
> characters.  I completely agree that she just needs to get a grip, 
> and she *really, really* ought to stop smothering her own kids so 
> much (and she certainly should *stop* trying to smother kids who 
> are not her own, Harry and Hermione).  Her interactions with Fred & 
> George really leave me cold.  And my perception is that she's 
> warmed to Ron solely because he's a prefect now.  And, I have 
> always despised the way she hen-pecks Arthur.  And what is she 
> *doing* for the Order anyway?  All I saw is that she was making 
> meat balls one night.  ::::rolls eyes::::::  <<<<<
> 
Me (Marie):
I also liked Molly less in this book, partly because she was so 
overprotective, which reminded me a bit of me own mum.  ;)  But the 
thing that really bothered me was the "That's everyone in the family" 
line.  Not only does that leave out the twins, but what about poor 
Ginny?  She's not old enough yet for them to know whether or not 
she'll be a prefect.  Is Molly assuming that Ginny's already too far 
along the "Fred and George" plan?  

David:
> To me the crucial scene in OOP, which transforms our view of Molly 
> (and confirms it for some of our more prescient members, though not 
> me) is the boggart scene.  The true Molly is revealed here.  It is 
> apparent that her 'woes', as JKR calls them, but really the damage 
> done to her in the past, are much deeper than can be dealt with 
> by 'getting a grip'.  I think this is why I like her better now: I 
> find it hard to like any character who has no vulnerability that is 
> bigger than they are.  It seems to me pretty well a dead cert now 
> that there is a murdered Weasley sibling lurking in the past, and 
> this has haunted Molly's thoughts for all the time we have known 
> her.  Full marks to those who theorised that before OOP - as I say, 
> not me.
> 
> Seeing her family members dead, she is unable to think of anything 
> to make that funny, to make Riddikulus effective.  That says to me 
> that the fear of her family members being murdered grips *her* more 
> than she can fight, and must therefore derive from some past trauma.

Marie:

I was always intrigued by the Missing Weasley theories, but like you, 
I think they have much more canon basis now.  I wonder wether this 
poor child was male or female.  Somehow in my mind it's a girl, two 
years older than Percy, who was named something like Daphne 
Elizabeth.  Percy idolized her.  When she was killed, the Weasleys 
changed Percy's alphabetical name (something like Eustace perhaps? -- 
sorry, I want Percy to reform!) and named him after one of 
Dumbledore's middle names instead.  I think if Percy really is 
Percival after Dumbledore, it's significant that he DROPPED the more 
formal name in ministry usage when he's anti-Dumbledore.  I further 
imagine that Ginny's full name is Elizabeth, after the departed 
sister, but she's called Ginny (From the "Virgin Queen," Elizabeth) 
rather than "Liz" or whatever the sister's nickname had been to make 
her distinct.  

~Marie, who apologizes if that last bit was incoherant; they're about 
to close the library so I've got to go!