Prank

[eloiseherisson at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 80447

Sylvia:

>I'm getting increasingly worried about the use of this word "prank". 
>It has such a light-hearted sound about it. My dictionary defines it 
>as "a sportive trick, a mischievous act". I can see nothing sportive 
>or mischievous about an act that can lead to someone's death. I 
>can't believe DD's casual attitude to it. Ask yourself how you would 
>have reacted if one of your children had confessed to such a "prank".

Agreed. Just to be clear, something which sometimes gets missed is that the 
use of the term "Prank" is a fandom term (I don't know if it's unique to HPfGU 
or how it originated). It is *not* used in canon (waiting for someone to 
contradict that!) and you are not the first to object to  it. It does tend to be 
distinguished by capitalisation, which is an acknowledgement of its 
non-canonicity.

Lupin describes it as  "a trick...which nearly killed him, a trick which 
involved me - "
He is in no doubt as to the seriousness of the incident.

It was not a "prank", it was possibly an attempt at murder, or to get Snape 
bitten by a werewolf (arguably worse than murder), it was Sirius using his 
friend, it was his putting of his own friend at great risk (what would have 
happened to Lupin if serious harm *had* come to Snape?). It is a key reason why many 
of us find it difficult to like Sirius.

Did Dumbledore take it lightly? Well, we don't really know. I think not, but 
what he had to do, for Lupin's sake  was organise a cover-up. Had Sirius been 
publically disciplined for what he had done, then Lupin's secret would have 
been exposed. And of course, Snape *shouldn't* have swallowed the bait and 
followed, just as Malfoy was in the wrong for being out after lights-out during the 
Norbert incident. Sirius, James and Peter shouldn't have been rampaging round 
the country with a werewolf, either, come to that. None of those involved in 
the incident can claim much credit, really, except James.

Snape, of course, wouldn't see it that way and I *do* think that his disgust 
at the lack of justice he perceived  in Dumbledore's treatment of him may have 
been what finally tipped him over into Voldemort's camp. 

I once wrote,

> It's not so much what the Marauders* did that's the problem, as what 
> Dumbledore *didn't* do. I fancy he felt ever so let down by 
> the 'light' side, didn't find justice in the all-wise all-just 
> Dumbledore. . . . What's the point of allying yourself with 
> goodness if evil goes unpunished? Is there any difference between 
> the two sides? Perhaps not.   
    

I'm sure that, just as he disagreed with Dumbledore in his assessment of 
Lupin in PoA, he would have disagreed with his harbouring of such a potentially 
dangerous creature in the school then. To have nearly lost his life and get no 
revenge, but for a werewolf's rights to be favoured over his? Given the climate 
of general wizard opinion and prejudice (and even *Lupin* concedes that he's 
not really safe to be allowed around children), I can rather see his point. 
    
So no, what we know as "The Prank" wasn't a prank at all. It was a serious 
incident with, I think, some pretty far-reaching effects.

~Eloise

* This is also, of course a fandom term, quite inaccurately deriving from 
their use of The Marauder's (singular) Map.


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