The Dursleys: the missing piece?/The Prank in DH/Responsibility for Sirius'

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 167360

 Bart:
> 
> When the first Star Wars movies came out, a film professor pointed 
out to what was either not spotted by many film historians, or, 
probably more likely, film historians were afraid to write about in 
the open. It was about the character, C3P0. Although he was given 
gold "skin", and a British accent, he was modeled after a different 
sort of character that used to be much more common in the movies: 
the wide-eyed always fearful black servant. Of course, if he used 
lines like "Don' go in thar Artoo! You get us both in a heap 
o'trubba!" the movie would have been, well, blacklisted. By making 
him British and a bit over-refined, it made the character less 
offensive to the audiences.

Magpie:
I think it more likely that film historians didn't spot it because 
there's just no evidence for it. C3PO is not always fearful in the 
way you're describing. He's not afraid of ghosts and doesn't jump at 
shadows. C3PO was, I believe, originally intended to be more 
modelled after a used car salesman in terms of being slick, and then 
they later decided to make him more a more propor protocol droid. I 
think the film historian was projecting (and seriously stretching) 
to make C3PO the stereotype he wanted to see there. The English 
Butler is its own type and can't, imo, just be grafted on top of teh 
racist one. There's a difference between a character who prefers 
things to be orderly and follow the rules (and also, err, a bit 
effeminate by some standards?) and the fearful (and ignorant, which 
C3PO is not) black servant stereotype.

Bart: 
> I have been puzzled by the Dursleys. A materialistic family like 
that would not be so dead set against magic; if anything, they would 
want to use it to their advantage. Their behavior towards Harry goes 
way beyond wanting to be "normal". Yet, there is an stereotype that 
WOULD behave the way the Dursleys would: the hypocritical pseudo-
fundamentalist Christian, who act in very un-Christian manners 
themselves, but expect everybody else to toe the line defined by 
their faith. They would consider magic to be Satanic, and would 
absolutely punish a child for showing signs of difference that were 
not of the child's making, considering the child to be one of Satan.
> 
> I suggest thinking through the novels again, thinking about the 
actions of the Dursleys, and seeing if their behavior towards Harry 
makes more or less sense based on my surmise of the personality 
traits that were removed as an afterthought.

Magpie:
Are you saying they're really fundamentalists the way C3PO 
is "really" a black stereotype? Because there's nothing strange 
about an aspirational, conservative middle-class person wanting 
their family to be "normal." An artistic child might ultimately earn 
a lot of money for his family, but that wouldn't necessarily stop a 
family like the Dursleys from preferring him to be "normal" instead 
of creative. They wouldn't have to be fundamentalists to think that 
way. In the Dursleys case, they seem to be a charicature of a 
specific British type that isn't religious in that way. If the story 
were set in America I think the Dursleys might be more likely to be 
religious that way, and that it would be overt. There's no hint that 
they're worried about the devil.

Pippin:
I think you are forgetting that the Marauders were wizards.
To paraphrase Dumbledore, can you think of any measure
that the Marauders might have taken to make Snape forgetful
of school rules and his own safety, and pursue Lupin into the
willow?

Magpie:
Or perhaps there was just more at stake for Snape in whatever he 
thought he was catching them doing, or in catching them at doing 
something (and of course Sirius knew that).

katmandu_85219 wrote:
> I was reading the prank topic, and someone stated that
> Snape was responsible for Sirius' death. Why would
> Snape be responsible for his death? <snip>

George:
He is resposible to the death of Sirius. Because he was a
spy of LV plants. If he was doing his job Sirius would be
alive.

Magpie:
I don't understand what you mean. Are you suggesting that Snape is 
responsible because he's supposed to know *all* of LV's plans, so he 
should have told everybody what was going on? That doesn't hold up, 
imo. There's no reason to think that Snape knew what LV's plans were-
-he's not expected to know everything that LV is planning. As it is 
Snape actually did his job anyway--he made sure Sirius was all right 
and later alerted the Order that Harry seemed to have gone to the 
MoM to "rescue" Sirius. At this point Sirius isn't in danger at all. 
The only reason he was ever in danger was because he went to the MoM 
to fight Bellatrix, which he did pretty much knowing what he was 
getting into. There's nothing more Snape could have told him or 
anyone that would have changed things in that context that I can 
see. Sirius knew by that point what LV's plan was.

-m