Re: CHAPDISC3: HBP 3, WILL AND WON’T

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 142638

CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 
> 3, Will and Won't.> 
<snip summary> 
> 
> Q1:  Does this [the reference to Harry as "The Chosen One"] signal a
change in attitude toward Harry?  Is this a grassroots change or a
campaign started by the Ministry?

Carol:
I think that, as always, the Daily Prophet is a mouthpiece for the
MoM, influenced by its policies. (Any freedom of the press it
experienced took the form of sensationalism and distortion courtesy of
Rita Skeeter, who is now apparently out of the picture.) It's
convenient for the MoM, now under a new minister, to acknowledge
Harry's existence and play up his celbrity status. Now, given the
battle at the MoM, they have slightly more to work with than his
miraculous survival as an infant. I doubt that there's a grassroots
campaign, only the fickle public clinging to an old hope revived. At
least now, in contrast to his first encounter with his celebrity
status in SS/PS, Harry knows that the best way to deal with both fame
and infamy is to ignore them.


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

Carol:
As Collin mentioned, we first encounter Scrimgeour in OoP apparently
regarding Tonks and Shacklebolt with suspicion regarding the
whereabouts of Sirius Black (which they're concealing by pretending
that he's hiding in Tibet). Now that Black has been revealed (to Fudge
by Dumbledore) as a member of the Order, and is also conveniently
dead, Scrimgeour seems to have set aside his suspicions, giving
Shacklebolt the seemingly important undercover job of working as a
secretary to the Muggle PM. (Tonks is sent by the new head of the
Aurors as one of the guards at Hogwarts.) It remains to be seen
whether he still mistrusts them (or they him). Dumbledore refers to
Scrimgeour in the next chapter as "able" but does not directly answer
Harry's question as to whether he's "good," which raises questions as
to how Scrimgeour might choose to fight Voldemort and the Death Eaters
(setting aside token arrests and propaganda). If he was one of the
Aurors who used Unforgiveable Curses under Crouch's authorization, the
WW could be in for an ugly war or the WW equivalent of a police state.
I don't think that Scrimgeour is incompetent like Fudge or evil like
the Death Eaters, but I think he could be very dangerous. Crouch
wasn't evil, either, but he became more and more authoritarian and was
corrupted and finally destroyed by resorting to using evil to fight
evil. Scrimgeour is "a man of action" (DD's description in the next
chapter). He's like a police captain promoted to prime minister, who
conceives his new role in military as well as political terms. If he
were a Muggle, he'd be a general instituting military rule. Watch for
the guidelines in the pamphlets about staying home at night to become
curfews and a network of spies adding to the general air of mistrust
in Book 7. 
> 

> 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?

Carol:
Hard to say. I don't think he had any part in DD's being sacked from
the Wizengamot, but maybe he has links to Umbridge? Could he have had
anything to do with the Dementors on Privet Drive in OoP? Or at least
with the Dementors at Hogwarts in PoA? As I said, Dumbledore is
careful to distinguish between his abilities and his "goodness." As I
said, I don't think he's evil, but I doubt that he's scrupulous in the
methods that he uses to fight evil--or run the government. (BTW, I
wonder if he still controls the Aurors and whether they'll
specifically target Snape.) The "rift" between DD and Hogwarts could
concern the new security measures if DD prefers to handle such matters
himself. (Not that either of them succeeded in the end. . . .)

> 
> Q4:  Is Mrs. Longbottom one of those who "seem reassured" by the new 
> security measures [at Hogwarts]?  What do you think she said that is
hidden from us [under Hedwig's cage]?

Carol:
Well, the lead-in to the quote suggests that she's one of those
people. But the quote itself is cut off before we see her stand (if
any) on that issue. What she seems interested in, for the first time
in the HP books, is praising her grandson an pointing out that he
fought alongside Harry Potter against the Death Eaters at the MoM. So
Neville's fear that his gran would "kill him" for breaking his
father's wand is unjustified; she's proud of him instead (seeing Frank
in him, presumably). I hope the whole point in including her wasn't
merely to placate readers who have been critical of Mrs. Longbottom,
but that was my impression as I read it. (But also, we know that she
supports Dumbledore, so it's odd that she would be quoted as a
supporter of the MoM's safety measures unless she's unaware of a rift
between DD and Scrimgeour. And of course, he main concern would be
Neville's safety.) I'm assuming that she's fairly well-known in the
British WW given her pureblood status, her age, and her connection
with the Crucio'd Frank and Alice, so maybe the MoM wants to be
associated with her as well as with Harry. (Whether the publicity for
Neville is a good thing is another matter, but Bellatrix, at least,
already knew he was at the MoM.)

> 
> Q5:  Do these measures [in the MoM security pamphlet] seem reasonable?

Carol responds:
They remind me of the monthly newsletters sent out by the sheriff's
department with tips on protecting yourself from car theft and your
latch-key kids from kidnapping--common sense advice raised a notch to
create a bit of anxiety in the reader (poly-juiced DEs! Inferi!). So,
yes, it's good for people to be on the watch for these things. But,
aside from Side-Along Apparition as an escape mechanism, they really
don't give much practical advice. The part about security questions
comes across almost as a joke in the next chapter). Shield Charms
would be a workable defense against some curses, but I don't think
they work against the Unforgiveables, do they? (If they do, they'd
deflect the Imperios and Crucios back onto the Death Eaters. Hoist
with their own petard!) But still, there must be more they can do. Or
maybe not. If Amelia Bones couldn't defend herself, who can?
> 
> 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?

Carol:
Like Sherry, I thought of "Night of the Living Dead" when I read about
Inferi. (Horrible! I wish I'd never seen that movie!) But *are* Inferi
zombies, who can create others like themselves, or do they only--well,
leave mangled corpses like those in Snape's DADA posters? I don't
think I want to know, actually. Forget I said anything.

> 
> Q7:  Is Harry's pessimism [regarding Dumbledore's arrival and an
early departure from the Dursleys] justified?  Do you think he has
reason to believe that Dumbledore will not do as he says he will? 

Carol responds:
We as readers know that Dumbledore will come through, but after all
that Harry went through in OoP, with Dumbledore so distant for most of
the year, it's understandable that he would have some doubts. But I
think that his pessimism (clearly combined with hope given the cheek
against the window and the often-read note) is a defense mechanism. If
you hope for something and it doesn't happen, you'll be disappointed.
but if you tell yourself it might not happen, you shield yourself
against disappointment. Or at least, that's the way it's supposed to
work. (BTW, did anyone besides me think that Harry resembled a much
younger child waiting hopefully, but ever so slightly skeptically, for
Santa Claus?)

> 
> Q8:  What do you think of Dumbledore's behavior [toward the Dursleys]? 

Carol responds:
I'm wondering whether from the perspective of younger American
readers, Dumbledore's behavior seems rather quaint. Etiquette, like
conversation and letter writing (and penmanship!), is something of a
lost art here. As an older American who laments the loss, I found his
attempts at courtesy in the face of incivility intriguing. I'm sure
that the Durselys felt threatened when he raised his wand, but he only
sends the sofa beneath them and then scoots it back, and then serves
his hosts and himself and Harry his own (conjured) mead. I did find
the glasses knocking against the Dursley's heads rather rude at first,
but then I realized that that wasn't so much DD's doing as the glasses
wanting their contents to be drunk. If the Dursleys had drunk the
mead, they'd have had no problem. As for talking to Harry as if they
weren't there, he needed to inform him of certain matters before he
left, and they could have joined in the conversation if they'd chosen
to do so. And it's understandable, of course, that he didn't explain
his injured hand when Harry asked about it. Bringing Kreacher into
Petunia's clean house? She'll survive.

Regarding the mead, which no one else has discussed: Again, as an
American, I was a bit surprised at how casually DD served two underage
boys an alcoholic drink. (We don't drink mead in America, and I
associate it with Anglo-Saxon mead-halls, so I had to look it up to
see exactly what it is. I gather that it's like a cross between brandy
and ale, but of course, I'm probably quite wrong.) At any rate, I'm
sure that Harry felt quite grown up drinking it, and I'm surprised
that Dudley didn't try. Maybe he thought it would turn him into a pig.
DD serving the Dursleys his *own* mead is a nice contrast to Fudge,
who serves the Muggle PM his own whiskey, but it also introduces
Dumbledore's fondness for Madam Rosmerta's oak-matured mead,
foreshadowing the poisoned mead incident later in the book. (I've
forgotten how Draco discovers DD's fondness for the mead; maybe he
overhears Slughorn ordering it as a Christmas present? And why are the
bottles always dusty, even when they're conjured? How can DD conjure
*Madam Rosmerta's* mead? Well, never mind.)

I was going to answer the remaining questions, but I think I'll make
it a second post as this one is getting too long.

Carol