[HPforGrownups] Re: Chapter Fourteen of HBP; aka Lupinlore's Big OOPS

[Ladi lyndi]

No: HPFGUIDX 128727

greatelderone  wrote:
 
GEO: Thats frankly your intepretation, but the exchange that occured
in my opinion violated certain ethical rules that govern public 
servants like Arthur Weasley especially since he was hired to uphold
the law in relation to muggle artifacts and their enchantments and 
then there is the whole bit about him accepting gifts of such value.
 
Lynn:
 

I'm missing where canon says Arthur did the favour FOR the tickets and exactly what the nature of the favour was.  Arthur states that Bagman got them good tickets and that he did a bit of a favour for Bagman's brother by smoothing things over.  He doesn't say he did it FOR the tickets but my interpretation of it means that Ludo went the extra mile to get good tickets because Arthur had helped his brother.  There are some questions to be raised with this knowledge.  Did Arthur pay for lower priced tickets and Ludo upgraded them?  Did Ludo pay for the tickets out of his own pocket?  Did the tickets even have to be paid for (after all, 3 of the Weasley boys had jobs and thus had their own money)?  What exactly was the nature of the favour?  The implication is not that Arthur made a consequence go away, but rather helped things so there weren’t greater consequences.  Also, is doing these types of favours something Arthur regularly does for people?

 

As for the last question, we know that Arthur rushed to help Moody when he heard there was a problem.  Arthur certainly wasn't considering what favours Moody could do for him but rather how he could help smooth things for Moody.  In this case it is obvious that Arthur wasn’t trying to hide anything, just limit the damage.  So, we know he does smooth things for others without regard to their ability to return the ‘favour’.  

 

As for the tickets, we don’t know whether Arthur tried to get less expensive seats, more in keeping with what he could afford and those were already sold out.  He may have mentioned to those in the office when the World Cup was brought up that he was too late in trying to get the tickets.  Now, I've been able to upgrade tickets for a pittance when those expensive seats just haven't sold.  It's done all the time, not corruption, just good business sense.  This example is one explanation of why it took until a couple of days before the game for Arthur to get those tickets, when the tickets didn’t sell, Ludo told Arthur he could get those seats for the price of the cheaper seats.  Thus, Ludo returns the favour but it certainly isn’t corrupt.  It also discounts that Arthur did the favour FOR the tickets.  Those tickets should have been sold out ages ago.  

 

In situations like this, those seats may have been "Ministry" seats much like seats players on a team get, free seats for family and friends.  Or, more likely to my mind, Ludo just added 10 extra seats for the Weasleys.  We know the Bulgarians wanted 10 extra seats for themselves which may because they found that England had the 10 extra seats that Ludo just put there for the Weasleys.  This again would explain why Arthur got those tickets very late.  Let's face it, we learned that Bagman didn't have any money so how could he have paid for high priced tickets?

 

While I understand in the reading why you may choose to interpret the situation the way you do, it seems to me that if Arthur was corrupt, he would have done favours to get out of trouble in COS for the Ford Anglia which was of greater consequence and seriousness than upgrades for some tickets.  We don't know the full situation with Bagman's brother but if Arthur wasn't going to cover for himself, I doubt he would have covered for some other very serious offence.  Besides, Arthur says he smoothed things over, not that he got Otto off the hook, there is a difference.  McGonagall did the same for Harry and Ron in COS - they paid the price but not with the added penalty of being expelled.  Arthur may have helped to limit the extent of the consequences, not eliminate them.

 

Arthur did a favour for the brother of a co-worker.  That co-worker saw that it was in his power to return the favour.  That's not corruption, that's helping one another.  This situation must be viewed not individually but as a whole with Arthur's behaviour in other situations in order to interpret the actions in an honest light.

 

As I've said before, I'd much rather live in a world where friends and co-workers can help each other out than in one where no one helps because that help will be viewed by others as corruption.

 
Lynn


 

test'; ">
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]