Double standards and believing

[meriaugust]

No: HPFGUIDX 121016


> Del's comments about double standards:
snip
> Ernie's parents believe DD so Ernie believes Harry : good.
> Seamus' mother believes Fudge so Seamus believes Fudge : bad.

Meri: I don't think it is so much bad here that Seamus sides with 
his mother. It's just that he ignores four years of sharing a 
dormitory with Harry. He knows Harry, he's friends with Harry and 
the moment that that got to be uncomfortable he started thinking 
Harry was a nutter. Ernie didn't know Harry well at all in COS, so 
it is easier to understand that he would suspect Harry of being the 
Heir of Slytherin. But again, Seamus has had four years of living 
with Harry. That should be enough to get him to be able to say to 
his mam, "Give him a break." 
 
>Del: Cho learns to think by herself and doesn't do as her parents 
wish : good.
> Percy learns to think by himself and decides not to follow in his
> family's decisions : bad.

Meri: Here I think the issue should not be sticking to one's 
convictions, but more along the lines of what the character values. 
Cho, I think as far as we know, didn't abandon her family or say 
that their actions have caused her embarassment. She simply decides 
to resist as best she can against the maniac wizard who killed her 
boyfriend. Percy, OTOH, puts his career and personal ambitions ahead 
of his family. He insults his father, ignores his mother and all 
because, like Fudge, holding on to his job is most important to him. 
I applaud Percy for sticking to his guns and doing what he thought 
was right. But what he did was for his own personal gain. 

>Del: Draco doesn't question his family's traditions : bad.
> Most of the Weasley children don't question their friend and 
family :
> good.

Meri: Ron might not initially question his family's values, but he 
does modify them a bit. The Weasleys have passed down the some of 
the same prejudices to their children (about werewolves and giants, 
for instance) but he has come to learn the truth about these beings. 
He is willing to learn from others, something Draco doesn't seem to 
be that big on. Plus it isn't bad that Draco doesn't question his 
father, it is that what his father teaches him is bad. 
 
>Del: People don't believe in LV's resurrection : bad.
> Hermione doesn't believe in heliopaths : good.
 
Meri: That's just the nature of Hermy's character isn't it? Now I 
like Hermione very much. I think she's a strong, albeit imperfect 
heroine. And one of her faults is that she totally lacks anything 
resembling blind faith. For Hermy, if she can't read it in the 
library it doesn't matter. IMHO her disbelief in heliopaths is not 
necessarily presented in a positive light. Her dismissiveness of 
Luna kind of annoyed me, and showed again that unless there's 
documentation and photographic evidence to be had, then she's not 
inclined to believe. But why, you ask, did she believe so firmly in 
LV's return? She was in the hospital wing that night, she saw 
Snape's Dark Mark, she's been in on every peice of evidence that 
Harry's had and she knows and trusts Harry. And as for everyone else 
in the WW and why they didn't believe, I chalk it up to why Fudge 
didn't want to believe either: the return of LV would mean messing 
up the lives they had built in the last thirteen years. Denial, as 
they say, is not just a river in Egypt. There were signs even before 
Harry witnessed the rebirt, from the disappearances of Bertha 
Jorkins and Frank Bryce and Barty Crouch, Sr. to the escape of 
Sirius. And, as they also say, ignorance is bliss. 

>Del: Luna believes in crumpled-horned snorkacks : bad.
> Luna believes in resurrection and life after death : good.

Meri: This is a convention that happens in the real world, too. For 
instance, millions, well billions of people profess faith in God, an 
afterlife of some kind and many other things that are accepted as 
mainstream religion, things for which there is no factual basis. But 
the person who believes in flying saucers, the Loch Ness monster, 
and other tabloid fodder is deemed nutty. But again, I don't feel 
that Luna's belief in the unbelievable is presented as bad. I am not 
the only one who feels that she has been written as she has to act 
as a foil for Hermione. 
 
>Del: See where I'm going ?
> There are way too many double-standards being applied sometimes on
> this list IMO.

Meri: I would have to disagree. We as readers are allowed to see 
this whole story from an objective perspective. And in our views of 
course Percy choosing Fudge over his family and Marietta betraying 
the DA are bad while Ernie's faith in Harry is good. We can't see 
things from the limited perspectives of the characters. 

snip
>Del: I've read that people shouldn't trust in other people blindly, 
like in
> Fudge for example. And yet this is exactly what Harry's friends do,
> and what is expected of everyone : trust in Harry blindly.

Meri: I don't think anyone is expected to trust Harry blindly. His 
friends have come to know him over the last four years, and that 
kind of trust isn't blind. DD is even more well known and respected 
and he isn't asking people to trust him blindly either. We may never 
know what kind of testimony he gave to the Wizengamot, but IMO he 
probably presented every fact he could to get people to believe him 
about LV. It would have been foolish of him not to do that. 

>Del: I've read that people should take every fact into 
consideration when
> judging someone. And yet the facts that Harry is a Parselmouth, 
that
> Cedric was a rival in more than one way, and that Harry was gone
> somewhere with just Cedric when Cedric died, should most 
definitely be
> overlooked.

Meri: First off, Harry being a parselmouth should have anything do 
do with anything. Being a parselmouth does not make one evil and 
Harry did not choose to have this ability. And secondly, the 
circumstantial evidence that you describe that would make people 
think Harry murdered Cedric is just that: circumstantial evidence. 

Meri