Mothers and Fathers (was: Re: James gave his life, why no protection from him?)

[aggiepaddy]

No: HPFGUIDX 107779

> SSSusan sssaid:
> 
> >If someone wants to argue that there is something in Molly's
> >*specific* temperament which makes this likely AND that that same
> >thing is *NOT* in Arthur's specific temperament, then I'll listen.
> 
Janet>
 >Okay, I'll argue that, because it's what I said before after Molly 
>showed us her ugly side in OotP.


Aggie:
When I first read this comment I thought you were referring to 
Molly's interactions with Sirius, but after reading your post I see 
you were not.  Being an over-protective mother can be counter-
productive and annoying to the child concerned but ugly?

Janet:
 <SNIP>
> Molly, in my opinion, takes the limited or short view. <SNIP>  
>She's still trying desperately to run her life and her children's 
>lives as if it were peacetime.  And she hasn't been able to put 
>aside her determination to protect people who neither need nor want 
>to be protected (Fred and George),nor to gauge how much protection 
>even underage people should have when they're in a wartime situation 
>(Ron, Ginny, and of course Harry).>


Aggie:
Never having been in the fore front of a war with my children, it is 
impossible to say how I would react.  I can see the *logic* behind 
not trying to protect the children so much but then *love* has never 
gone hand in hand with logic.  



 Janet:
> There are things Arthur wouldn't do, even to protect his children, 
>because he can see past that desire to the war as a whole.  In my 
>opinion, Molly is not at this point able to do that.  This may be 
>because of her two dead brothers in the last war.  However, by the 
>description of their deaths, she should be proud of them and point 
>to them as role models, instead of trying to wrap up her children in 
>swaddling clothes.

Aggie:
I'm sorry but how do you know what Arthur would or wouldn't do in the 
face of imminent death of one of his children?  I'm sure Molly IS 
proud of her brothers, that doesn't mean she wants any other member 
of her family to go the same way.


Janet> 
> If Voldemort or his agents are looking for a weak link, they may 
>well choose Molly and threaten her through one of her children -- I 
>think Percy is the most likely since they've got him where they want 
>him and Molly knows this. I don't *know* whether or not she would 
>fold under such pressure, but I think it's much more likely than 
>Arthur doing so.

Aggie:
Where in canon do are you deriving your theories from? Please 
enlighten me?  (Seriously!)  I don't remember reading anything that 
would suggest this.  I think this is boiling down to the original 
point of mother's love Vs father's love as opposed to 'Molly' 
Vs 'Arthur'.  I *can* see LV using Molly's motherly love against her 
though. (Just as much as I can see him using it against Arthur.)
 

Janet:
>For one thing, Molly might well be capable of convincing herself 
>that Voldemort would keep his word.  Not Arthur, not for one moment.

Aggie:
What????  Why would Molly believe *anything* that LV promises her?  I 
don't go along with this for one second!!!  She's a mother - NOT 
stupid!! 

Apologies if this sounds like a rant!
__________________________________________________________