CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 14, Percy and Padfoot

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 93097

Questions for discussion:

1. If house elves are freed against their will, where do
they go? Can they stay at Hogwarts if they desire? If so,
what does it matter if a house elf is inadvertently
freed?

bboy_mn:
First, no one has, as of yet, has convinced me that a house-elf can be
free by anyone other than the people who have the authority to do so.
The thought that an elf is instantly freed simply because it touches
clothes just doesn't fit. Nor does the thought that elves can be freed
by any random person walking by, or that they can be freed 'against
their will'. Exactly what does 'against their will' mean in this context?

Hermione, as smart as she is, is still a kid, and just as prone to
impulsive thinking and impulsive actions. I'm sure when she thought of
this grand plan, it made great sense, but that is because she went
with her impulse instead of thinking it through.

That's how kid's minds work, they focus on the event but never look
past it to the result or consequences. Jumping from a roof with an
umbrella for a parachute sounds like a great idea to a kid, but they
only look at the jump, and aren't far sighted enough to look at the
landing or consider the possibility that it might not work at all.

Hermione can no more free the elves by knitting them hats than I can
walk into a random business and start firing employees. She doesn't
have the authority; I don't have the authority.

As far as the 'against their will' part, that's the wrong question.
Nobody, with a few extremely minor exceptions, wants to be fired,
that's a given. The real question that must be asked is, does Hermione
have the authority to fire Hogwart's house-elves? 

Many people have speculated possible scenerios in which a student
might have the authority; they are SCHOOL students and the elves work
for the SCHOOL, since they are both part of the school, and since the
elves are the servants, then the students, as a part of the school,
can fire the elves. If you believe that path of logic, then you must
also reasonably believe that Harry can fire Snape. That seems to be an
application of the identical priniple, but when couched in that
context, we can see how ridiculous it is.

Summary; Hermione was completely misguided by her youthful enthusiasm,
and couldn't have freed so much as a Hogwart's housefly with her plan.


2. Why does Mrs. Norris make some sort of contact with
those students she's suspicious of- making eye contact,
brushing up against them? Is it something to do with her
strange connection to Filch- does it set off a bat
signal, of sorts?

bboy_mn:
It's seem very likely from the examples of Filch and Mrs. Figg, that
Squibs have an affinity with cats. Hints and clues are that they can
communicate to a far greater degree than common cat owners and their
cats. So, we see both Filch and Figg using their cat to spy for them.

As far as the looks or eye contact, I think those are just accusatory
stare, and the leg brushing is just natural cat behavior.



3. What happened in the forest to make the Thestral fly
out of it? Is this just something Harry didn't notice
before, because he couldn't see them- or was there
something more sinister happening?

bboy_mn:

I can't think of anything in the book that could be tied to that
Thestral sighting, but I am very strongly reminded of the last time
Harry observed a creature from the Owl Tower. In GoF, Harry sees an
Eagle owl soar by moving toward the castle, we later learn that that
was a message from Voldemort to fake!Moody. So, I am very suspicious
of the Thestral sighting, but can't tie it directly to anything,
unless perhaps is might have been the scuffle between Firenze, the
other Centaurs, and Hagrid. Although, even I will admit that is an
extremely weak possibility since it occurs early in the book, and
before Hagrid's return.



4. Who are Filch's "sources"? Is it really just Umbridge?

bboy_mn:
If I recall this occured early in the book before Umbridge became High
Inquisitor, before she had been give a great deal of 'authority'.
Without the Ministry backing to intercept mail and monitor the Floo
network, there wasn't much she could do. 

However, it is perfectly reasonable she would have seen a kindrid soul
in Filch, and asked him to keep an eye out for any letters Harry might
send. At that time, she would have made up an excuse that she felt
Filch would accept. Only later in the book, when she had greater power
and knew that Filch would back her up, would she have been inclined to
tell him the truth.


5. Why wouldn't Sturgis testify? Of course he could have
said he had been acting under a curse. Was he afraid
information about the Order would get out somehow? If he
was sentenced to 6 months in Azkaban, why did we not hear
anything about his release (which should have been in
March), either as another tiny Prophet article or from
someone in the Order?

bboy_mn:
Curious, I never notice that Sturgis never re-appeared after his
sentence. Perhaps, he was fired from his job at the Ministry. It's
also possible that since he is or was under the Imperious Curse, he
may not have been able to adequately defend himself. He may not have
had a good explanation of why he was doing what he was doing, or even
been aware that he was doing it.


6. We know now that Percy's letter wasn't written under a
curse, nor was it a matter of him trying to keep under
cover as a double-agent. Why would it have mattered if
the letter arrived during breakfast? Students don't read
one another's mail. Does he think one letter from the
estranged family member can turn Ron against all his
friends and family?

bboy_mn:
Someone implied that Percy's actions and JKR's latest chat statement
shot a huge whole in the P.I.N.E. supporter's theory; Percy Is Not
Evil. I, however, and still a firm supporter of the belief that Percy
is not evil; pompous, self-important, misguided, misunderstood, yes,
but not evil.

Percy, after a rocky start, has a new job that recognises his worth,
something he has struggle to get his family to do, he came home proud
as can be after having been forgiven by the Ministry and given a job
fitting his talents, and what does his family do to him in this proud
moment? They crap all over him just like they always do. I, for one,
don't blame him for being mad.

On another point, Percy is doing the right thing. He is standing by
his duly elected (or appointed) government, he is supporting the
authorities that are empowered by their offices to guide and protect
the wizard world. If you don't think that's considered a proper and
normal course of action, just look at the massive fall out the befell
anyone who dared criticize the President after he sent troops to Iraq.
One small criticism and you were branded a trator.

I think the best explanation of Percy's actions that I've read, took
the line that Percy cut himself off from his family to prove to them
that he could get and keep his job based on his own abilities, and not
because he could offer inside information about his family or about
Dumbledore. By cutting himself off, he could prove the his father
accusations had no foundation.

Now, having said that, I will admit that Percy continues to act like a
first class pillock. But we have to understand that Harry and
Dumbledore offered no real proof that Voldemort was back. There is no
evidence, and given the nature of government to self-preservation and
preservation of the status quo, their attitude is very predictable.
Percy being loyal to the government and having no proof, simply shows
support for his elected/appointed government.

Percy is not a double agent, although from book six on he could be,
but is there really any need for him to be now that it's common
knowledge that Voldemort is indeed back? Fudge's idea that Dumbledore
is plotting against him is shot to hell, Fudge's own credibility is in
the dumper, and I suspect that Fudge is pretty powerless to affect
anything. I can't imaging that the entire wizard world won't call for
a vote of 'no confidence' and get rid of Fudge altogether. 

As far as when the letter was delivered, I think the idea was for Ron
to read it alone away from Harry's curious eyes.

I believe Percy's letter was sincere, but severly misguided.

Percy was more than willing to GET an apology; will he be just as
willing to give one?

I'm a firm believer that there will be reconciliation between Percy
and his family, I just hope we get to see it. It would be unfortunate
for the next book to casually mention in passing that Percy and his
family made up, and move on from there.

Just a few thoughts.

bboy_mn