pet rat

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 126205


a_svirn wrote:
> 
> << What has me in puzzle though is why a rat-pet was allowed in
> Hogwarts at all. It was clearly said in the letter of admission: "a
> cat OR a toad OR an owl". Why there were special allowances made for
> Weasleys? >>
> 
Catlady responded:
> It seems to me that a rat is the kind of small pet (didn't Ron
> sometimes keep Scabbers in his pocket?) that a kid can keep secretly
> even in a school that doesn't allow pets at all. In addition,
Hogwarts under Dumbledore doesn't seem very picky about rules; a
student can probably have any pet (e.g. a hippogriff) if Filch doesn't
catch him/her with it and the other students living in the same dorm
don't complain. I personally think Lavender is Muggle-born, partly
because she looked ignorant when the Grim was mentioned, but partly
because she left her bunny at home; if she were from a wizarding
family, she would have known that 'a cat OR a toad OR an owl' didn't
mean 'no bunnies'. OTOH she has a perfectly wizarding name.


Carol notes:
I think we *are* told somewhere that Lavender is a Muggleborn, though
you're right: Lavender Brown exactly matches the pattern of Narcissa
Black. (Hmm! wonder what that might signify. Probably exactly as much
as Lily Evans/Mark Evans.) But Lavender might also have been worried
that the cats and owls might *eat* her bunny and consequently left it
at home. (Ironically, the protective measures didn't save the bunny.)

At any rate, I think the operative word in McGonagall's letter is the
repeated and capitalized "OR." Students may bring one pet, but not,
under any circumstances, more than one. I think McGonagall assumes
that the students will have the standard wizarding pets and doesn't
bother to list other, remoter possibilities, like Lee Jordan's
tarantula (which, as far as we know, he's allowed to keep, just as Ron
is allowed to keep his rat). It's possible, of course, that Lee kept
the tarantula a secret, but I doubt that it could have escaped the
combined notice of McGonagall, Dumbledore, and DD's network of
portrait spies. The same applies to Scabbers, who was at Hogwarts with
Percy before he was with Ron. I think DD knew about the rat from the
first and either tacitly or specifically okayed him because of the
Weasley family's (relative) poverty. It would be unfair to send home
little Percy's )or little Ron's) pet and ask the family to buy one
from the approved list.

I do think that the Hogwarts administration (DD and the heads of
houses) would have objected if a student brought a dog, which would
stir up trouble among the cats (and doesn't fit the WW image, if that
matters)--or a wolf or a porcupine or any number of other large or
troublesome animals. But a rat? Rats are small, quiet, relatively
clean, and intelligent for their size--or at least lab rats are. Maybe
DD assumed that Scabbers was a magical rat like the ones in the pet
shop in PoA--harmless, amusing, and intelligent. If I were DD or even
the usually rule-enforcing McGonagall, I'd have let the matter go.
After all, she *gave* first-year Harry a broom, and that was a larger
breach of the rules than letting a child from a poor family keep a pet
that's not specifically listed in the welcome letter.

Carol