Weasley Courage (Was Re: Dolores Umbridge)

[saturniia]

No: HPFGUIDX 139027

 
> RoxyElliot at a... wrote:
> > What I'd like to  see is for her and Percy to both have to
> > choose between what is easy and what is right, with Umbridge 
> > going with the easy and Percy finally choosing what is right.
> 
> Derek <derek at r...>:
> Sounds good to me!  I'd love to finally see some reason to
> believe Percy was correctly sorted into Gryffindor, when all
> we've seen of him thus far clearly (IMO) indicates he was more
> suited to Slytherin.


Saturniia:
You know, I am sick and tired of people trashing Percy just because 
he made a choice that was objectionable to his family.  Dare I 
remind you that this so-called "Slytherin" choice was made *after* 
his father suggested that Percy gained the post because Fudge wanted 
to spy on the rest of the family and their connection to Dumbledore, 
rather than his own merit?  To a nineteen-year-old who had just 
gotten a promotion most wizards twice his age would probably kill 
for, that had to have hurt.  The choice was reactionary, yes, but 
not cunning or "evil".  In fact, to stand your ground, leave your 
family behind and move out into the world for the first time, and 
remove yourself from the situation for which your employer might 
have promoted you, whether you wish to believe it or not, is 
*courageous*.  Going back to your family's home for Christmas 
dinner, a year and a half after you moves out, and staying through 
the meal when only your mother welcomes you and the rest of your 
family either ignores you or is hostile to you is courageous.

Tossing parsnips at one's sibling at Christmas dinner?  Not quite as 
brave.

So really, the Weasleys are trapped in a "no bad guy" situation as 
far as Percy is concerned.  Was Percy wrong to not take his father's 
words into consideration, and pack up and leave in a huff?  
Perhaps.  Was he wrong to slam his door in his mother's face, return 
her Christmas present, and ignore his family?  Yes.

Were his father and his siblings wrong to not correspond with him 
when he made the effort, ignore him when he *did* visit, and toss 
mashed tubers at him?  Yes.

However, I digress.  This post was not supposed to be about placing 
blame, but rather the Weasleys' courage.  *All* Weasleys we've met 
have courage.

Bill and Charlie have an adventurous sort of courage, taking 
dangerous jobs and generally being "cool".

Fred and George have a maverick sort of courage, making bets that 
seem like a long shot, investing their money into a business that 
could make or break them, and working behind the scenes to produce 
supplies for the Light side of Voldemort's second war.

Arthur and Molly's courage comes from the fact that they're putting 
themselves on the line *again* to stop Voldemort, and continue doing 
so without complaint even though they know every one of their 
children are in the line of fire for one reason or another.

Ginny's courage is partly attributed to having been possessed by 
Voldemort in her first year.  It also comes from learning how to 
stand up against her six brothers, and being ignored by her crush 
for six years.

Ron's courage is displayed mostly in incidental ways, usually as a 
result of being best friends with The Boy Who Lived.  "Following the 
spiders" is one such display.

Lastly, Percy's courage is of an ordinary sort.  He's the everyman 
of the Weasley family, who doesn't have seven children to protect, 
or his own business, or an especially cool job.  His best friend, if 
he has one, isn't particularly famous, and even though he and Ginny 
both became tougher from the "six against one" situation that 
sometimes happens with the Weasley children, the motivation is more 
often closer to persecution than protection.  Under these 
circumstances, standing his ground when he believes he's right is 
courageous