Evil Hermione

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 154936

 
> Renee:
> And I don't understand this comment. "These things don't happen" - 
you
> mean, kids aren't interrogated before the Wizengamot? Harry was. 
Which
> shows what the Ministery is capable of.

Magpie:
No, it means you're not talking about the book if you're talking 
about what might have happened even though it's not brought up on 
the page.  There's lots of "what ifs" we can imagine in the books, 
but they're not canon as potential consequences.

Eggplant:
If Marietta was so morally tone deaf that she didn't know that
Umbridge was a very evil woman then I have no sympathy for her; if 
she didn't understand how serious things were she damn well should 
have.

Magpie:
Yes, you've made it clear you have no sympathy for her and so she 
deserves to be disfigured, period.  

> Alla:

>
> Just as in case with Marietta, I disagree strongly that nothing
> serious occurred **because** her actions were not serious enough,
but
> **only** because Hermione's ginx and Dumbledore and Kingsley quick
> wit
> helped to neutralise Marietta fast and still Dumbledore was forced
> to leave and leave Hogwarts in the hands of abusive sadist, IMO.
>
> **That** is the relevance to me - that Marietta's actions could
have
> led
> to horrible consequences and did not do so **not** thanks to
anything
> Marietta did, quite the contrary, IMO.

Magpie:
I didn't say nothing serious happened, I said the things you brought 
up hadn't happened.  In the other examples you gave they were all 
things that were brought up as possible consequences in the text. 
The text itself makes it a threat that someone could get the stone 
or the prophecy. (Even though, ironically, doesn't Harry put the 
stone in danger by going after it? And isn't his going to the MoM 
actually part of Voldemort's plan?) Likewise Draco's actions are 
presented as putting people in danger of being murdered. With 
Marietta I'm looking at the consequences that are in the book. The 
book never brings up any danger of the kids going to Azkaban or 
before a court of law. Not that it changes the fact that Marietta 
ratted on them, obviously, and I'd consider the consequences 
serious. They're not anything we can imagine as happening.  This is 
what happened due to the actions of a lot of people, including 
Marietta.  She's responsible for her part.


> > Magpie:
> > The adult/child was probably the least of my problems with the
> parallel. In
> > fact, I think Peter could have been more of an anti-Marietta at
> his age in
> > significant ways. The Potters might have ultimately been a lot
> safer if
> > Marietta had been the fourth Marauder.
>
> Alla:
>
> Do you mind clarifying how Potters could have been safer?
>
> Is your meaning that Marietta would not have betrayed them?

Magpie:
What I meant was that we're looking at the DA as being a mini-Order,
which makes Marietta Peter and Harry and Hermione James and Lily
etc. But although both Marietta and Peter both give up other
peoples' secrets to the people they don't want to have them, they
are actually very different in some ways. Marietta, I think, is the
tattletale at school--I think that's what she sees herself as doing. 
She's disapproving of the DA and ultimately goes to the official 
adult authority and tells on the group, making her a school snitch.

That's something Peter himself is not. Peter kept lots of secrets
at school. Nobody knew he and his friends were illegal animagi,
that Remus was a werewolf, that they were running around with the
full moon. Had James started the DA at school I have no doubt that
Peter would have kept the secret. There would be no danger from him
the way there was with Marietta. He earned James' trust for years
doing stuff like that. He wasn't a snitch who ran to the teacher or
the principal or the headmistress. Going to Voldemort was a
different thing. Snitching is really not what he's doing. We do have 
consistent, if vague, explanations of the motivations of the two, 
and they are different, even if they both lead to secret-telling.

What I meant in saying the Potters would have been safer was that if
Marietta had told on them in school, which is what I think the
direct parallel would be, she would have been telling Dumbledore or
a teacher about their transformations and running with the
werewolf. They would have gotten in trouble, but in a much safer
way than what happened with Peter.  

Ceridwen:
If it's in the
Prophet, believe it because the MoM wouldn't allow them to print
lies, now, would they? And believe the Ministry, they're only there
to help. *roll eyes*

Magpie:
The press is a complicated thing in the books.  We're always hearing 
how stupid people are for believing things written there that aren't 
true, but we're also usually in the pov of people who know the 
truth.  The Prophet gives us news, but prints that Harry is lying 
and people should know that.  The Quibbler is rubbish, but everyone 
should believe Harry's interview in it.  We know false information 
is being leaked about Sirius as well.  You have to hope you have the 
right gut instinct.

-m