McG / DD / Re: Why should Harry be expected to listen to anyone at H

[festuco]

No: HPFGUIDX 123053


SSSusan:
> You're correct that he "knows" these things. OTOH, what he doesn't 
> know is the "why" behind all of them. WHY were the Dementors sent? 
> WHY was his trial rigged? WHY does Fudge seem to dislike him so 
> much? WHY won't they believe him? It's obvious to us readers, but I 
> don't think it's obvious to Harry. 

Well, now it's my turn not to agree : ). He has seen the way Fudge
reacted at the end of GoF for a start. And in OoP it is explained to
him in his first night at Grimmauld Place: 

p. 89 Oop (Bloomsbury Hardcover edition)
'How can he think that?' said Harry angrily. How can he think
Dumbledore would just make it all up - that I'd make it all up? 
'Because accepting that Voldemort's back would mean trouble like the
Ministry hasn't had to cope with for nearly fourteen years,' said
Sirius bitterly. 'Fudge just can't bring himself to face it. It's so
much more comfortable to convince himself Dumbledore's lying to
destabilise him.' 

Here it is actually spelled out to him. Further proof of this he gets
in his trial. 

SSSusan:
> So in one way I agree with you that Harry is to blame, but not 
> fully. His being kept in the dark contributed to his 
> inability/unwillingness to follow directives. But MM certainly did 
> better than DD in at least trying to help Harry understand. *And* 
> she offered him biscuits. :-)

She sure did. But I don't think DD's mistake is really that huge as a
lot of people make it. He could have done better. It would have been
more fair to Harry, and probably would also have helped a bit, sure.
But in every occasion Harry has enough information to put two and two
together, he still behaves like a spoiled teenager who wants to get
his own way. The way Harry is in OoP I don't believe for example
Dumbledore explaining to him the value of Occlumency would have been
enough to counteract Harry's own idea that his dreams would be
valuable, as was the case with Arthur and the Snake. 



Dungrollin interjects:
> Stick to your guns, Gerry!
> I am of exactly the same opinion - and I agree with McGonagall, too. 
> If someone is in a position of power and authority and is bent on 
> making your life hell, giving them extra incentive to do it is 
> foolhardy. Nobody is defending Umbridge's actions in those 
> detentions, nor anywhere else. But Harry clearly wasn't listening to 
> McGonagall because he went and did the same thing again almost 
> immediately afterwards. 

Thanks. Exactly!

Dungrollin:
> Using his brain, listening to Hermione and McGonagall, and resisting 
> Umbridge's reign *in secret* was the sensible thing to do, and was 
> what he ended up doing anyway. But it appears that he wouldn't 
> consider that anybody else has a better understanding of the 
> situation than he, and has to go through the whole horrible week's-
> worth of detentions again, before finally he learns to keep his head 
> down. Evidently he needed two weeks of hellish detentions to make 
> him take Umbridge seriously, because explaining it to him didn't 
> work. What's immoral about that?

It was even worse. The score until detention:
- he had dementors after him
- he got a letter from the MoM he was expelled for using underage
magic for defending his life and saving Dudley's
- he got a trial the MoM tried every way they could to rig
- the MoM was perfectly willing to ignore a dementor attack if that
attack was meant for Harry Potter. 

Bill explained to him Fudge's position, and even that together with
all this first hand experience was not sufficient to make clear to him
that Fudge would rather see him dead than being believed. Fortunately
for Harry he sent a petty sadist to Hogwarts, and she managed what
real danger could not. Make him careful of the MoM. Make him finally
believe that they meant business. That he should use his head to get
around them, if he wanted to be able to use his wand in the next
confrontation with LV.

 

Lupinlore:
> It is my hope that Gerry actually meant to say something closer to 
> the second meaning and not the first. Thus, as I said, I choose to 
> believe that he did not mean what he actually said, and request that 
> he be much more careful in the future.
 
I'm sorry but I'm not into political correctness. I meant exactly what
I said, and will do so again in the future. Good and nice are not the
same thing. Sometimes the good thing is nasty, and the nice thing is
bad for you. Those detentions were a very good thing, in themselves.
Not something 'horrible but with some good coming out of it.' They
were his wake up call. No matter how unpleasant and nasty they were,
they made him finally understand how dangerous his situation really
was, what the real danger he had been in before had not managed to.
Apparently he needed a more hands on experience with injustice and
pain to get that message across, and the detentions did that job quite
nicely. Since the detentions he actually understands what Umbridge is
capable of, and with what she can get away with. And that if he
himself does not keep his head down, he will lose his place at
Hogwarts, there will be no adult to protect him. Not nice, but it is
the reality he has to live in. 

If Umbridge had not been a petty sadist, she would have been far more
dangerous to him. He would have had a normal detention, would still
not have believed that shouting out the truth would not make any
difference at all. And would very likely have lost his wand the next
time he did something heroic but very much against the rules. 

Besides I don't think they were horrible. Getting dementors after you
is horrible. Getting the MoM that's supposed to protect you trying to
expel you for defending yourself is horrible. Getting that same MoM
to give you a criminal trial in which they do their utmost to get you
convicted for defending yourself is horrible. Getting your MoM
ignoring that dementors were after you is horrible. 

What Umbridge does with her detention is just petty evil. Not nice,
not at all. But nothing compared to what happened to him during the
Summer.

 

Nicky Joe:
> And just how many times does Voldemort have to try and kill him 
> before he picks up the clue phone and runs off to hide? I can't 
> believe anyone would think it a bad idea that he stand up to 
> Umbridge. Yeah, maybe it was stupid, but at least he made the 
> attempt! At least he tried to get through to that little evil 
> peabrain of hers. He's fought Voldemort, for crying out loud! why 
> should he be afraid to stand up to a teacher? Especially when she's 
> dead wrong? Oh wait, is this another one of those "repect for 
> authority" things? I have issues there...

Well, Maybe because this teacher is actively looking for ways to get
him expelled. Which means losing his wand and thus most of his magic.
Which is a really bad thing if he wants to be able continue fighting
Voldemort.



Alla:
> I think that text does not encourage "submission" to Umbridge either. 
> We clearly see at the end  that Fred and George resistance is 
> approved by all teachers and they are greeted as heroes.
> 
> I admire that Harry stood up to Umbridge. He did what good person is 
> supposed to do when faced with evil, IMO.

I'm sorry I don't agree. Fred and George are of age and therefore they
can afford to leave Hogwarts. They do so before she can expel them,
and they actively pursue this course. They also have something to go to. 

Harry is a minor, and therefore subject to the department of underage
magic. He cannot quit Hogwarts, without losing his place in the
magical world. And if the prophecy is correct, deliver the magical
world to Voldemort in the process. 

For him standing up to Umbridge openly is not a safe thing to do. And
doing it in class is not a worthwhile effort, because it will have no
effect at all except Harry getting more punishment. Organizing the DA
is. Giving the interview also. But these are not as much actions
against Umbridge as actions against LV. Here he chooses not to let
Umbridge stand in the way of the higher purpose. The purpose is clear
and has a chance of succeeding. Harry is aware of the risks and takes
them willingly and with conviction. 

But standing up to Umbridge because she is evil? No, for Harry that is
not a good thing to do. It may cost them the war against LV. Sometimes
you have to keep out of things for the greater good. 

Gerry (female)