Molly & others' vulnerability (was: Wizard/Muggle "Radar")

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 108973

Magda: 
>>> I think Molly's weak point would be that she'd let her anxiety 
over her children's (and Harry's) safety blind her to reality.  
[snip] Molly's strident efforts to keep the kids ignorant of what was 
going on (Harry in POA, all the kids in OOTP) shows that she has a 
very limited understanding of what the Order is all about and what 
demands it might make on its members.  <<<

 
SSSusan:
>> [snip] it wasn't just Molly who made efforts to keep the kids 
ignorant--Lupin, DD, McGonagall & Fudge also did this.  So I'm not 
sure that this alone shows Molly has a very limited understanding of 
what the Order is about.
[snip] I was fishing for some canon which would show why Molly 
alone would be susceptible to this kind of DE/Voldy manipulation, 
whereas Arthur [or anyone else who loves someone deeply] would not 
be.  
 
We did have the opportunity to see the form which Molly's Boggart 
took in OotP, so we know from that what her deepest fear is.  We 
didn't have the opportunity to see Arthur's or Lupin's or Sirius' 
or DD's... so we don't really know whether they'd have been something 
in a similar vein.  <<
 
dcgmck:
> 1 - Arthur demonstrates in OotP that he can bear being snubbed by 
> Percy (in the hall after Harry's Wizengamot hearing/trial), even 
> though it hurts.  He also trusts his older sons to do their duty 
> for the Order and sides with the others when the younger sons 
> insist on hearing some answers when Sirius invites Harry to ask 
> questions.  He may not accept the notion of pureblooded virtue, but 
> he does seem to buy into the older stereotype of masculine roles 
> and duty within society.  His vulnerability seems to lie in the 
> direction of overextending himself, of not knowing how to say 'no', 
> as he did when he accepted "overtime" guard duty the night he 
> nodded off and was attacked.


SSSusan:
Thank you for this--canon explanation for a view that Arthur either 
isn't as susceptible as Molly or that he's vulnerable in a different 
way.  Your point about his tendency to overextend is a good one.  My 
only quibble would be that being snubbed by a child isn't quite the 
same as having a child taken hostage--would Arthur be able to bear 
that?  Would *any* Order member be able to bear that?  


dcgmck: 
> 2 - Lupin's boggart, at least in PoA, is a full moon, which is 
> partly how Hermione works out that he is a werewolf.  His greatest 
> fear, then, would seem to be his uncontrollable transformations.  
> His dependence on a potion to restrain/contain his bestial impulses 
> seems to be his point of vulnerability.

SSSusan:
Whoops, I did flub there, didn't I?  I wonder if the DEs have ever 
thought about how to take advantage of this particular vulnerability?


dcgmck:
> 4 - Dumbledore only seems to worry about Harry's feelings and 
> welfare when Harry is actually in a sickbed or in Dumbledore's 
> presence.  The rest of the time he seems content to trust that 
> Harry will be protected and/or be able to fend for himself.  Even 
> when Harry disappears from the maze in GoF, Dumbledore doesn't get 
> proactive, preferring to wait and see how things will sort 
> themselves out until he actually deduces that Moody is not the Mad 
> Eye he knows and trusts.

SSSusan:
Good point.  I myself have argued that DD has been willing to allow 
Harry a good deal of latitude to test and/or prove himself.  I would 
argue, though, with the GoF example.  Since Harry & Cedric carried 
the portkey with them to the graveyard, how could DD have been 
proactive in any way?  He couldn't go after them, as he didn't know 
where they were.  

You're right that DD's been willing to stand back & allow Harry--and 
Ron & Hermione--to be in dangerous situations.  What do you think 
that he would do if the DEs actually captured one of the Trio and, 
rather than killing them outright, attempted to use them to bargain 
for something?


dcgmck:
> All of these males are too busy fighting on their own fronts to 
> panic over hypothetical threats to their loved ones.  If Molly is 
> given something more to do than stay behind the lines and tend the 
> home fires, she'll have more confidence in the ability of others to 
> sort out their own predicaments as well, partly from her own 
> experiences, partly because she'll be sufficiently involved in her 
> own quandaries to succumb to threats of hypotheticals.  <snip> In 
> short, (oops, too late...) I don't believe that Molly is innately 
> hysterical and vulnerable; she just needs more to do than hang 
> around wringing her hands.  Look at the folly just such an 
> existence led Sirius to commit.  Why should Molly be any 
> different.  Give the woman something active to do (besides 
> housecleaning) and she'll be fine.

SSSusan:
And *these* points I truly agree with!  People have argued that Molly 
is doing real work, is assisting with the Order...and she IS...but 
her work keeps her bound to the house and bound to her traditional 
work [which probably leaves room for lots of mind-wandering to those 
awful, scary, hypothetical thoughts], rather than putting her out 
into new situations which would push her abilities.  I'm NOT putting 
down Molly, either--I happen to think she's quite strong--but I would 
like to see her out there, in the field as it were, and as you say, 
developing confidence & experience along with the other Order members.

You know, maybe that's the key to this discussion?  That while we 
can't know for certaint how ANY of the Order members would react to a 
loved one's being held hostage, we CAN know how they react in general 
to the work of the Order and the hypothetical dangers they face.  
Because of Molly's situation and the nature of her Order work--and 
probably because of her personality style as well--she's going to be 
more "into" those hypothetical horrors than others.

Siriusly Snapey Susan, who's enjoying the chance to think through 
this very much!