Something wrong with this Fudge

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 107446

SSSusan, previously: 
>>>"MY original point was that some people have claimed Fudge is a
good ESE! Candidate because he opposes DD, is friends w/ Lucius, is
unfair to Harry in his trial, won't take the position of informing the
WW that Voldy's back even though the evidence is clear, etc.-- all the
CLEAR, SURFACEY detail from canon. I then went on to point out that
often people argue back that, no, these things don't make Fudge ESE!,
they simply make him a waffling, weak, power-hungry bureaucrat. My
final point was that, wouldn't it be interesting if, in the end, we
find that Fudge truly is ESE! But not for the reasons typically stated
and reiterated in this paragraph)? What if it's because he really has
been orchestrating truly evil things, such as setting the Dementors on
Harry, being in on the Potters' death or helping Wormtail somehow,
having Barty, Jr. "kissed" before he could testify so as to protect or
hide something, helping Voldy return?"<<<


Jim: 
> If that's true, then Fudge is a DE, maybe not in name, but in 
> thought and deed.
> 
> Fudge is part of a theme and a contrast by JKR – selfless courage,
> duty, standing up for one's friends, represented by Dumbledore, 
> Harry, Harry's friends, and many of the Hogwarts staff, and 
> venality,malfeasance, self-interest and cowardice, represented by 
> Fudge, Crouch Senior, and Umbridge.  Does this make Fudge evil? I 
> say it does, and Umbridge shows us how far it can go.  
> 
> Nobody can say that Fudge didn't do the things you speculate he 
> might have done, but mostly it wouldn't be like him.  He's a man of
> inaction, as Harry is a man of action. 


SSSusan responds:
Ah, but how do we KNOW that he's a man of inaction?  Part of what 
some of us are speculating is that the "bumbling" may be somewhat put-
on or part of his cover for his *truly* evil actions.  In other 
words, he may very well be a man of action, but it's SILENT or BEHIND-
THE-SCENES action.

We don't get to SEE how the Dementors were sent off to Hogwarts in 
PoA, nor how they got their instructions & what those were.  We don't 
get *necessarily* the full picture of what happened between Sirius & 
Peter & the street full of Muggles.  We definitely don't have the 
whole picture of Godric's Hollow nor of how Wormtail ended up w/ the 
Weasleys.  We don't *necessarily* know the full story behind the 
Weasleys winning the Daily Prophet contest and being photographed in 
Egypt and the photo happening to end up w/ Sirius.  It may be that 
Fudge had no part--no "evil" part, anyway--in any of these 
situations.  But it's also possible that he did, since he was closely 
involved and/or present in each case.  

He's a man of SILENT ACTION, I tell you! ;-)


Jim:
> Is Fudge evil? I think so. I just don't think he's a DE or a mole, 
> or that major a player any more.
> 
> JKR is character-driven.  Know her characters and you can predict a
> lot of what they'll do.


SSSusan:
But that's just it--I'm afraid we *can't* always know her 
characters.  The ones we know best--Harry, Ron, Hermione, Hagrid, 
etc.--I suppose have become fairly predictable to us.  But it's that 
*not*-knowing, in fact, our inability to fully know because of what 
JKR has chosen to leave out, that makes it impossible to fully 
predict the actions of people like Snape, Ludo Bagman, Lucius 
Malfoy,....  And I'd add Fudge.  The speculation is part of trying to 
figure out whether we *can* know him better than we'd thought.

Siriusly Snapey Susan