[HPforGrownups] Re: Fred and George - Prefects?

[Shaun Hately]

No: HPFGUIDX 125194

On 25 Feb 2005 at 18:07, Richard Jones wrote:

Richard:
> Even forgetting about the evidence for the theory(which Shaun 
> concedes is weak), I have a basic problem with the idea of "secret 
> Prefects": how has this theory advanced the plot any?  Apparently, 
> they can't tell anybody about the fact because DD has more of them.

First of all, I am not saying that Dumbledore has 'more of them'. I 
merely offered that as one possible reason why if this has 
occurred, they may not have gone public after they left the school. 
Personally, I think it is fairly odd to suggest that a secret in a 
time of war - and that really does seem to be the type of situation 
dealt with here - would suddenly be revealed just because two 
people are no longer doing something that was secret. That is not 
how these things are done. But you seem to think that this would 
have suddenly been made public, so I gave just a couple of possible 
reasons as to why it might not have been.

The simplest and most straightforward reason is that when you have 
secrets in a conflict situation, you reveal them only when you 
absolutely have to. Many of the major secrets of World War II 
(Enigma comes to mind) were not revealed for decades.

As for the idea that this theory doesn't advance the plot, that 
remains to be seen. This is a series of seven books. The fact that 
everything isn't clear at the end of book five of a series is not 
an indication that something may not be a plot element later on. 
The books are rather self contained, but not completely by any 
means.

Molly's comments have not been explained in book five. *If* they 
have any real relevance, the explanation is therefore going to come 
later on.

Richard:  
> The idea (from vmonte) that Fred and George may have done some things 
> for DD makes sense.  But for DD to have a corps of "secret police" 
> sounds creepy and totally out of character for DD.  Remember Prefects 
> are for maintaining order and there is zero evidence that Fred and 
> George would want anything to do with that and zero evidence that 
> they did in fact have anything to do with that.

One duty of Prefects is to maintain order - and it's not their most 
important duty at Hogwarts by any means. The primary stated purpose 
of a Prefect, in most schools that have them, is to provide 
leadership - it doesn't always work out that way in practice, 
necessarily, but that is generally the point. Part of this duty can 
involve helping to maintain order and discipline, but that doesn't 
mean that's all they do, and it doesn't mean it's their major 
function.

Frankly, the most important function of Prefects at Hogwarts seems 
to be to keep their fellow students safe. Generally speaking that 
duty implies enforcing rules, because rules are necessary in a 
school to keep kids safe - but in certain situations, such as those 
that develop in Order of the Phoenix, what is needed becomes quite 
different.

As for the idea that they are secret police - not at all. 
Umbridge's Inquisitorial Squad fits the mould of a Secret Police 
force better (and 'secret police', historically, are rarely 
actually secret in the sense of being undercover and hidden. To me, 
if Fred and George are being used in this way, they fit far more 
into the mould of something like Britain's Special Operations 
Executive (SOE) of World War II. And the establishment of something 
like that, would seem to be entirely in character for Dumbledore.

Richard:
> All in all, it seems like a very convoluted theory to try to explain 
> Molly's remark.  The "secret Prefects" seem so secret that even JKR 
> doesn't know about them.  

To me, it seems a far simpler theory than many of the other ones 
people are suggesting to explain that remark.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia