Umbridge's goal calling in Dementors
Grey Wolf
grey.wolf.c at gmail.com
Tue Apr 5 21:34:17 UTC 2005
No: HPFGUIDX 127148
Eustace_Scrubb wrote:
><snip canon>
> Did she expect that the Dementors would successfully administer the
> Kiss, thus eliminating this irritation permanently?
I think that was probably her intent, yes.
> Or as Senior Undersecretary to the Minister, was she aware that the
> Potter boy had already survived at least one Kiss attempt from a
swarm
> of Dementors and was in fact capable of producing a corporeal
Patronus
> that would be sufficient to ward off two Dementors?
I have to wonder, however, how the Senior Undersecretary to the
Minister - or even the Minister himself - would know, at the time
the order was issued, that Harry could succesfully produce a
corporal Patronus strong enough to ward off two dementors. The
fact is that Harry's ability wasn't out in the open until after the
attack at the start of OotP, unless you count the time when Harry
"patronused" Malfoy & co. at the quidditch match, and the time
Harry "patronused" a boggart during the third task of the
Triwiward Tournament. Neither reflect the reality of a true
Dementor attack - in particular, how much harder it is to generate
happy thoughts when the Dementors are busy drawing all heat
and light and happiness from the very air.
Remember that Harry's best patronus, at the lake, was witnessed by
none but the Dementors and Harry himself. During the
conversations following the scene, Snape cannot (or doesn't want
to) tell the Minister that a Patronus was what saved them, much less
that it was Harry the one that did it.
> If the latter was it a setup to provoke underage magic/magic
performed
> in front of a muggle and thus a charge that could at least get Harry
> expelled and possibly sent to Azkaban?
Apart from what I've said above, I feel that Umbrigde probably cannot
bring herself to believe that Harry - or any other child - can have
enough power to create a Patronus enough to defend himself from a
concerted attack by two Dementors. This is the same woman that
feels that anything beyond reading the theory in class is too
advanced and dangerous for children. As a case in point, Dolores, in
that facet, reminded me of the kind of parent that is forever
protecting the child from anything that they feel they're unsuited to
see/hear - getting to the point where swearwords and anything
remotely sexual or violent must be banned from his/her education
(particularly TV). That kind of extreme position is, IMO, as bad as a
complete laisez-faire, and JKR is pushing the point too, through
Dolores.
> I suppose it doesn't make too much difference, except perhaps to
> delineate the extent of Dolores' evil.
I have the feeling that we have not been told exactly what went on in
the Dementor attack. Either JKR was sloppy, or we will be coming
back to this (or a third, unseen by me, possibility, of course). It is a
way too open attack, and too easily waved away as a rash action
from Dolores, I think, to explain why a woman - even one as
thoroughly cruel as Dolores - would set two killers on an unruly child.
Hope that helps,
Grey Wolf
More information about the HPforGrownups
archive