Re: CHAPDISC3: HBP 3, WILL AND WON’T

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 142611

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rbookworm46" <rbookworm46 at y...>
wrote:
>
> CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 
> 3, Will and Won't.
> 
> Summary:
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> - - - - -
> 
> Q1:  Does this signal a change in attitude toward Harry? Is this
> a grassroots change or a campaign started by the Ministry? [Re: 
> Harry now being referred to as 'The Chosen One'.]
> 

bboyminn:

Regarding the Ministry, this is not the first time we have seen their
attitude toward Harry shift with the weight of public opinion.
Although, I admit they are usually manipulating that public opinion.
Consequently, I think the Ministry is paving the way for a renewed
favorable attitude toward Harry, and doing so in the hope of Harry's
renewed favorable attitude toward them.

As to the grassroots aspect, I think separate from the Ministry,
Harry's Rita Skeeter interview and the Ministry's acknowledgment that
Voldemort is indeed back have swayed public opinion very much in
Harry's favor. 

But notice how quickly, across the series, public opinion changes; the
students love Harry then they hate him, the Wizard World loves Harry
then they hate him, then they love him, then they hate him. People are
like sheep; they follow the herd. In this there is an important lesson
 for Harry, and that is 'right is right' regardless of public opinion,
even when doing the right thing has the potential for negative
consequences. This is certainly a lesson the Ministry has never learned.


> Q2:  How does knowing that Scrimgeour was the Head Auror change your 
> interpretation of earlier events as they had unfolded in OotP?
> 

Not really, I think Scrimgeour was effectively out of the loop. Plus,
he works for the government, it's his job to do what they say. In a
sense, the head of the FBI might think the President is an ass, but he
is sworn to obey him and follow orders; so he does.


> Q3:  Events later in the book show us that Scrimgeour tries to use 
> Harry to get some positive publicity for the Ministry.  Do you think 
> this is what caused the rift between Scrimgeour and Dumbledore – 
> that Scrimgeour wanted to set up a meeting with Harry and Dumbledore 
> refused?  Or do you think there are some long-standing issues 
> between them?
> 

bboyminn:

In this and previous instances of the Ministry's actions and
attitudes, I am very much reminded of 'The Bartimaeus Trilogy' by
Jonathan Stroud. In Stroud's book, the magicians run the muggle
government in Britian, but they spend so much of their time
backstabbing, shifting blame, and trying to make themselves look good
by making others look bad that no one has time to spend to solve the
immense problems at hand.

Rather than take action that is for the good of the public, even
though it may paint the Ministy in a bad light, the Ministry is
strictly into PR (public relations). They are so busy promoting
/tokens/ of good will and action to the public, and currying their own
public image that no one has time to actually do their job and pursue
Voldemort and the Death Eaters. Their goal isn't to defeat Voldemort,
it's to come out of the whole situation looking good. 

The Ministry's effort to get Harry on board has nothing to do with the
immense problem at hand, it is merely to keep the Ministry in a good
public light.

Notice Scrimgeour doesn't say, 'We will give you access to every
resource at our disposal. We will do anything we can to help you.'
Instead, he wants Harry to put on a show for him. He doesn't even try
to hide the context. It's all about looking good in the public eye.
Never once did Scrimgeour address the real problem at hand. 

Certainly, the continued imprisonment of Stan Shunpike demonstrates
the Ministry's reliance on token efforts rather than real attempts to
solve the problems. 

So, to the central point, I don't think Dumbledore is willing to allow
Harry to be used as a token /Poster Boy/ to placate the public. He is
more interested in positive direct action and real productive work
than time wasting passifying tokens. He is simply not willing to let
Harry be used, or to let his time be wasted.

> Q4:  Is Mrs. Longbottom one of those who "seem reassured" by 
> the new  security measures?  What do you think she said that 
> is hidden from us? 
> 
> Q5:  Do these measures seem reasonable? [Re: Ministry security
> measure pamphlet]
>

bboyminn:

See above. These relatively pointless and useless 'security measures'
to the wizard world at large are not an effort on the part of the
Ministry to actually do something, they are merely an effort to
convince the public that the mostly ineffective government IS doing
something. Again, it's all PR; it's all about looking good, it's all
about appearance over substance.

As to Mrs Longbottom, we have seen before that she is firmly in
Dumbledore's camp and not a big friend of the Ministry. Although, we
must remember that her quote is related to security at the School.
Being a Dumbledore supporter, I'm sure Mrs Longbottom is confident
that Dumbledore will take genuine action to see to it that the
students have the maximum protection possible. She is reassured
because she is placing her faith in Dumbledore, and that is well
placed faith.

 
> Q6:  We later see the inferi that Voldemort left in the cave.  In 
> what way do you think the DEs might *currently* be using inferi?
> 

bboyminn:

I think, or suspect, that Inferi are very primitive zombie-like
creatures. Dead bodies may be reanimated, but they can't be brought
back to life and can't be made to think.  I believe that within
certain limits they are like puppets. They can be made to do the will
of their master, but only in simple primitive ways. As a consequence,
other than general mayhem, and straight forward murder; I don't think
they are very effective at anything other than creating general panic
in the wizard world.


> Q7:  Is Harry's pessimism justified?  Do you think he has reason to 
> believe that Dumbledore will not do as he says he will? 
> 

bboyminn:

I'm not so sure Harry lack of action is based on a lack of faith in
Dumbledore. I think it is more a general low psychological state of
mind. He is miserable; terrible things have happened to him. He lost
Sirius. He simply can't take any more pain or disappointment. So he
doesn't pack up his gear, he doesn't prepare for Dumbledore's arrival,
because he simply can't take the pain and misery of getting himself
all worked up only to be disappointed. There could be very legitimate
reason for Dumbledore to have to delay coming for Harry. He is a busy
man, and circumstances change quickly. But overal, Harry simply can't
take the risk. He can't risk getting his hopes up, then having them
dashed. So, he doesn't prepare, he doesn't anticipate, he doesn't
believe because he can't handle the let-down.

But notice that Harry is waiting at the window and has been at the
window waiting for a significant period of time. In fact, he has been
sitting at the window for four hours. He reads Dumbledore's letter
over and over despite having it memorized. That tells me that whether
he is willing to admit it to himself or not, he is eagerly awaiting
and expecting Dumbledore's arrival, but he simply can't admit it to
himself consciously. 

In a sense, we have a blend of resignation and anticipation. Harry is
resigned to 'what ever will be, will be' because that's what he need
to protect himself, Yet, at the same time, we see great anticipation
that indeed it 'will be'.

> Q8:  What do you think of Dumbledore's behavior here? 
> [re: Dumbledore interaction at the Dursley's]
>
> Q11:  Is this just Vernon's normal reaction, or is it something
> more significant? [re: Vernon's reaction to hearing of Harry's 
> inheritance]
> 

bboyminn:

Greedy little piggy that he is, Vernon would certainly perk up when
the mention of money and property are involved. Perhaps he is thinking
of being repaid for oh-so-generously taking Harry into his home. Fat
chance!


> Q13: Why does Dumbledore say this now?  Why not 5 years ago?  At 
> this point, why say it at all?  
>
> Q14:  Will there be consequences for either Harry or Dudley in 
> Dumbledore's having done this?  
> 
> Q15:  What is significant about Harry turning 17 or "coming of age" 
> that would cause the protection to end?  
> 
> Q16: Why was Petunia "oddly flushed"?
> 
> Q17: Do you think Harry will be allowed to return to Privet Drive?
> 
bboyminn:

Dumbledore is nearing the end. Harry will soon be an adult, and the
Dursley's /services/ will no longer be needed. Consequently, I think
Dumbledore is much less restrained in his tollerance of the Dursleys.
They were the best he had to protect Harry, miserable as they were.
But now, Harry will soon be on his own.

So, now is the time to have his say. Now is the time to point out to
the Dursleys that Dumbledore assigned them a simple task, to care for
Harry, and that they failed miserable. Not only have they miserably
failed to care for Harry, but they have irrepairably damaged their own
child. Despite the fact that they can't see it. 

As parents and guardians go, they are as miserable and failed a lot as
there ever was, and it's high time someone pointed this out to them.

I think it is critical that the Dursleys acknowledge that they will
allow Harry to return. If they deny it on the spot, then Harry
protection is treminated /on the spot/. If they agree to allow him to
return, that ensures that the protection will last another year.

When Harry turns 17, he is no longer under the Dursley's protection;
they are no longer his guardians. That ends the Blood protection even
if Harry lives at the Dursley. 

So, Harry will certainly return to the Dursley's one last time, and if
Ron's words at the end of HBP can be taken as true, the Ron and
Hermione will be with him. Come on now, you must see the comic
potential of that. I can't wait to see what happens.

Plus, I think there are some things that Petunia needs to tell Harry.
Perhaps she will show him Dumbledore's letter. Then there is the
matter of someone showing magic later in life. Most of us are betting
on it being Petunia. That implies that something drastic happens at
the Dursleys for Petunia to be so provoke that she performs magic. So,
I'm convinnced we haven't seen last of number 4 Privet Drive.

In closing this section, I see no significants to Petunia's odd flush.
I think it is simply a matter of anger and embarassment at being
address so bluntly by Dumbledore.

> Q9:  Do you believe that the Order will ever move back to 12 
> Grimmauld Place?  Why not move someplace friendlier?  Do they 
> secretly enjoy irritating Mrs. Black?  <g>  Is it because Phineas's 
> portrait, or something else that is significant, is in the house?
> 
> Q10:  Do you think *anything* will bring Harry back to the house?  
> Do you think pleasant memories could ever change the atmosphere of 
> the house?
> 

bboyminn:

Where else does Harry have to go? Miserable as it is, Grimmauld Place
is Harry's. There he can be free and independant. Some might suggest
he could live at the Burrow with the Weasleys, but Molly will never
let Harry have the freedom he needs to accomplish the task at hand.
Hogwarts is likewise restritive but for other reasons.

So, at some point Harry will realize that in order to do what he must
do, he must have a free, independant, and unresticted home base, and
12 Grimmauld Place fits the bill.

I don't see the Order in real good shape. They will certainly hold
together in word, but far less so in deed. The Order has lost its
center, its driving focus, when it lost Dumbledore. They will continue
to try without him, but they will be far less effective. 

I do believe that Harry will enlist their help. Maybe not as a group,
but as individuals. Harry's task is far too much for him to handle
alone, so he has no choice but to realize he needs help and to ask for
it. 

Further, asking for help doesn't necessarily mean revealing every
secret he knows to everyone he meets. He can discretely and
selectively reveal only what in necessary. 

Also, I can imagine Order meetings at the Black house, and despite
someone else being officially in charge (Lupin, Moody, McGonagall),
the Order member are constantly looking in Harry's direction expecting
/hoping/anticipating some meaning, direction, and purpose from Harry.
In a sense, they know that regardless of who is in charge, it's really
Harry that is leading the fight against Voldemort.


> Q12:  Harry does not give Kreacher any orders about discussing the 
> Order.  Was this an error by Harry and Dumbledore?  Or do Sirius's 
> orders to Kreacher still apply?
> 

bboyminn:

If you think back to Harry meeting Dobby in the Hogwart's kitchens in
GoF, we hear Dobby say that keeping their master's secrets is part of
a house-elves enslavement. In a sense, by taking on their charge, the
elves are sworn to secrecy. Notice, that even after years of freedom,
Dobby is not real forthcoming about Malfoy's secrets.
 
>
> And to repeat the Potioncat's question from Chapter 2:
> Ch2-Q10. Here's a question to think about when we move into chapter 
> 3: "The Other Minister" begins with a Muggle receiving two 
> visitors.  It's an informative, yet humorous chapter. The 
> dreary "Spinners End" begins with two visitors coming to a very 
> different Muggle location. "Will and Won't" begins with someone 
> waiting for a visitor and returns us to a more humorous mood. How do 
> these three chapters work together?
> 
> Ravenclaw Bookworm


bboyminn:

I think they work very nicely together, especially since there is the
preception of overlapping time. In these three short chapters a great
deal of backstory is cleared up (perhaps a little too quickly), and
the stage is set for the story to move forward. 

Just a few thoughts.

Steve/bboyminn