Molly's "revenge" [LONG]

[guzuguzu]

No: HPFGUIDX 174935

I want to respond to these posts, especially since I think there was
some misinterpretation of what I was saying. But first, here is the
duel scene from canon. 

(DH UK version) Pages 589-590:

[guzu's note: Harry is walking wearing his invisibility cloak]
 
"Voldemort was now dueling McGonagall, Slughorn and Kingsley all at
once, and there was cold hatred in his face as they wove and ducked
around him, unable to finish him - 

Bellatrix was still fighting too, fifty yards away from Voldemort, and
like her master, she duelled three at once: Hermione, Ginny and Luna,
all battling their hardest, but Bellatrix was equal to them, and
Harry's attention was diverted as a Killing Curse shot so close to
Ginny that she missed death by an inch - 

He changed course, running at Bellatrix rather than Voldemort, but
before he had gone a few steps he was knocked sideways. 

'NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!'

Mrs Weasley threw off her cloak as she ran, freeing her arms.
Bellatrix spun on the spot, roaring with laughter at the sight of her
new challenger. 

'OUT OF MY WAY!' shouted Mrs Weasley to the three girls, and with a
swipe of her wand she began to duel. Harry watched with terror and
elation as Molly Weasley's wand slashed and twirled, and Bellatrix
Lestrange's smile faltered, and became a snarl. Jets of light flew
from both wands, the floor around the witches' feet became hot and
cracked; both women were fighting to kill. 

'No!' Mrs Weasley cried, as a few students ran forwards, trying to
come to her aid. 'Get back! Get back! She is mine!'

Hundreds of people now lined the walls, watching the two fights,
Voldemort and his three opponents, Bellatrix and Molly, and Harry
stood, invisible, unable to be sure that he would not hit the innocent. 

'What will happen to your children when I've killed you?' taunted
Bellatrix, as mad as her master, capering as Molly's curses danced
around her. 'When Mummy's gone the same way as Freddie?'

'You - will - never- touch- our - children - again' screamed Mrs Weasley. 

Bellatrix laughed, the same exhilarated laugh her cousin Sirius had
given as he toppled backwards through the veil, and suddenly Harry
knew what was going to happen before it did. 

Molly's curse soared beneath Bellatrix's outstretched arm and hit her
squarely in the chest, directly over her heart. 

Bellatrix's gloating smile froze, her eyes seemed to bulge: for the
tiniest space of time she knew what had happened, and then she
toppled, and the watching crowd roared, and Voldemort screamed." (snip)  


Whew... okay, first of all: 

Lisa:

I wasn't fond of the portrayal of blinded-by-love Tonks, either --
but do you honestly believe that Tonks was just popping in to check
on her dear hubby?? You seriously don't think that she was fighting
alongside him? 

guzu: 

Unfortunately, that is exactly what Tonks says. Granny Longbottom says
she is there to assist Neville. Ginny wants to fight. Tonks says,
"Have you seen Remus?" I'm sure she fights after she's found him (or
found him dead), but if she was really there to fight, she should have
just said so-- she's an auror. Believe me, I wish the text was written
differently, because Tonks was one of my top 5 favorite characters
before DH. My top five are: Snape, Ron, Molly, Neville and
pre-DH-Tonks. Yes, Molly is one of my favorite characters, which is
why I am taking the time to post about her.  

guzu:

> Well, it was in character for Molly, yes, I should have wrote that
> clearer. I don't think it's in character for hundreds of people,
> including Harry and Ginny, to stand around and watch this duel and
do nothing to help. Why would they assume that Molly would win when
Bella has been killing people left and right?

Lisa:

I believe that was explained, too. Through Harry's eyes, we see that
as the duelers (Bella & Molly and Voldie and the gang fighting him)
fight, they are flying about, and to aim a spell in the direction of
the duelers would be to place "the good guys" in danger of being hit.

guzu: 

It does say that but it doesn't ring true to me-- it seems like a plot
point created to make the scene work. First of all, Harry is running
to help out Ginny when he's knocked out of the way by Molly-- why
didn't Harry have that fear of aiming properly when Ginny, Hermione
and Luna were dueling? Why didn't Ginny, Hermione and Luna run back
beside Molly and fight as a team (as they were doing 10 seconds
earlier)? Hundreds of people independently came to the conclusion that
they might accidentally stun the wrong person? I'm not suggesting that
people should have thrown AK at them, but how about Expelliarmus? If
they hit them both, then both of them would be disarmed. How about a
nice jellylegs or bat bogey curse? 

What if Molly hadn't been victorious and hundreds of people had stood
around and watched her get killed without trying to help? That would
have been too horrible to contemplate. Of course lucky things happen.
I don't see why the hundreds of bystanders would *think that would be
likely to happen*. 

va32h: 

> Well one thing I'm saying right now is that, IMO, it's pretty silly 
> to complain that hundreds of people just stood around watching Molly 
> and Bella. The same people stood around watching Voldemort duel 
> McGonnagal, Kingsley, and Slughorn and the same people stood around 
> watching Harry and Voldemort walk around in circles and chit-chat. 
> Why aren't you asking why Kingsley Shacklebolt didn't curse Voldemort 
> from behind or why Hagrid didn't tackle Voldemort? 

guzu: 

Well, it was a minor battle (thematically) that went nowhere, but now
that you mention it, I am asking it. Why was everyone just standing
there for that? Why wasn't anyone helping? The good guys outnumbered
the bad guys by several hundred. Why is everyone not kicking butt?

va32h: 

Harry may be Harry - but as every single adult character likes to
point out - he 
> is a barely qualified teenage wizard. It's perfectly reasonable to 
> assume that highly trained Aurors like Kingsley or very experienced 
> professors like McGonnagal are more capable of killing Voldemort than 
> a 17 year old kid. 

guzu: 

Good point. However, Harry is "the chosen one" and we know why no one
but Harry can kill Voldemort-- it's because of the
prophesy/horcruxes/elderwand/hisbloodisinharry'sveins/fishcakes.  :-)
And yes, I really wish that a highly trained auror or experienced
professor had been able to take *someone* down successfully. I found
it so disappointing that with the exception of Kingsley, every auror
we meet gets their butts whupped (Moody, Longbottoms, Tonks, Dawlish,
Scrimgeour). Aurors are supposed to be an elite police force—why are
they so incompetent? Are we meant to think it's Ministry corruption? 

va32h: 

> And yet this is how the story goes, because Deathly Hallows isn't a 
> tactical manual, it's a novel and the set piece of "crowd watches in 
> shocked silence while two characters duke it out" is very commonly 
> used in works of fiction.  

guzu: 

I know, and it works fine for Harry's duel, as it's dramatic and gives
a chance for Harry to give all his plot exposition. *In my opinion* it
was not a successful piece of writing for Molly's duel scene because
it was written like a scene from an action movie-- I found it jarring
and out-of-place. A smaller setting, with only a few people around
fighting (similar to Sirius's death scene), may have worked better. Or
to have her win the duel through cunning or intelligence, and not a
lucky shot.

guzu:

> That is exactly what I meant by "mother love conquers all." Molly
> single-handedly succeeded where many trained aurors and experienced
> duelers had failed.

Lisa:

And when I was 19, I won a contest in which I was a complete,
inexperienced newbie, against people who had been competing and
winning for years. Sometimes it happens.

guzu: 

Of course-- beginner's luck. It does happen. However, it's not logical
nor probable-- it's quite fantastic when it happens. When someone hits
the lotto jackpot, it's always a more interesting story if that's the
first time the winner ever bought a ticket, as opposed to buying them
every day. But it's interesting because it's unexpected.

guzu:

Since there has never been one mention of Molly
> being particularly talented (unlike Ginny or Herminone, who we've
> heard are unusually strong) or even going on missions for the
Order, the only good explanation for this is the "super-mother-magic"
thing.

Lisa:

Why? We haven't been told a LOT of things about a LOT of
characters. I think it's silly to say that if we haven't been
specifically told someone is "particularly talented," then they
simply aren't. 

guzu: 

As Hermione said to Mr. Lovegood, I can't prove a negative, so I can't
prove that Molly was not particularly talented and had no dueling
training or experience. However, if Molly had some training or
experience, or was a talented hex-thrower, that would have been an
interesting and relevant thing for Rowling to mention somewhere. It
would have been quite easy to throw a line about Molly in-- I know
that Flitwick was a dueling champion. I know Snape's mother was
talented at gobstones. I know far too little about Molly.

Lisa: 

And frankly, now I think you're being purposely snide about
your "super-mother-magic" comments, as you have been told that they
are offensive, yet you continue to make them. The grand majority of
this list is beyond that sort of continual thing.

guzu: 

I believe you are being unfair to me-- I made that statement *once*
and exactly one person told me they were offended by my comments, and
I don't even think that's the comment that they were talking about-- I
think they were offended by my use of the word housewife. Anyway, It
was supposed to be a joke, the joke being that it doesn't actually
exist. I am a mother (I have a four year old daughter) and a former
full-time housewife and I am sorry to say I have no special
butt-kicking abilities. 

Lisa:

I must've missed them. I read about three teenagers --
Hermione, Luna, and Ginny -- battling Bella, while Kingsley and
others were battling Voldemort. And while the three of them have
certainly escaped dangerous situations before, I think as far
as "actual battle" goes, they, too, have little experience. So Molly
should have, what, just allowed Bella to toy with the teens while she
watched from the sidelines? Are you a mother? No mother would allow
that, trust me.

guzu: 

Actually, I am a mother, but that is beside the point-- if I saw *any*
children in a dangerous situation 5 years ago, 10 years ago, 20 years
ago-- I would have tried to help them. As I think most people would,
whether they had children, or whether the children in danger were
their own children.  I work at a school-- many people protect children
other than their own parents. My point is-- there is something in
between watching from the sidelines and going it alone. Would Ginny
have let Bella toy with her mother while she watched from the
sidelines? My opinion is no. I don't think it fits her character. I
don't know who the hundreds of people on the sidelines were, but I'm
betting there was at least one more Weasley there.  

va32h: 

> There are plenty of people engaged in the Battle of Hogwarts who are 
> neither soliders or policemen. There are students, teachers, 
> shopkeepers, the residents of Hogsmeade, government workers. Since 
> only 50 or so of them died, I think it's safe to conclude that they 
> handled themselves pretty well. Percy Weasley seems to be doing quite 
> well in battle, for someone whose job consists of fretting over the 
> thickness of cauldron bottoms. 

> In the magical world, there is no indication that one's skills as a 
> witch or wizard are entirely determined by one's occupation. Bill 
> Weasley is a banker, Arthur Weasley is in administration, Fred and 
> George own a joke shop (and it wasn't a DE that killed Fred, it was
a collapsing wall). 

guzu:
 
The soldiers and policeman I am talking about are all of the Aurors,
Order Members and other people who were killed, kidnapped, tortured
and imperiused  in books 4, 5, 6, 7 (prior to the final battle) and in
also Voldemort's first reign of terror (Moody, Emmaline Vance, Sirius,
Scrimgeour, the Longbottoms, the Potters, Fabien and Gideon Prewitt,
the entire Bones family, etc.) The Death Eaters have been killing,
kidnapping and torturing people for years-- many more than 50 people
died.  And I agree, as you pointed out, it does seem to be the most
unlikely people who are actually successful in battle. I believe that
to be improbable. Not impossible, but not a logical assumption. I need
to be given a reason in the text if I'm supposed to believe that. I
know why Harry is successful. Not so sure about everyone else. 

I contrast the character arc of Molly with the character arc of
Neville. Both are third-tier characters who did not start off strong,
but throughout the books Rowling slowly but surely shows
us Neville's growth as a dueler and warrior. I thought Neville's
scenes were some of the best written in DH. I found Molly's dueling
scene to be poorly written —I felt like there were several things
missing for it to be fully believable. And I would have felt exactly
the same way had it been *Mr. Weasley* or Bill in that scene. It had
absolutely nothing to do with Molly or her occupation. If the duel had
been Bella versus Bill and everyone had stood around and watched
without helping, I would have argued that it was improbable that
everyone would believe a banker would be a better fighter than an
auror and why wasn't anyone helping Bill? Nothing against bankers, of
course! :-)

va32h: 

> I think you also give too much credit to Bellatrix. She's Voldemort's 
> best lieutenant, but that doesn't make her the be-all and end-all of 
> evil magical ability. We've seen her in battle one other time, at the 
> Ministry, where she managed to kill one person. And this is the basis 
> for her characterization as an unbeatable master duellist?

guzu: 

This is a good point-- we don't know much about what Bella has done
specifically. However, the Death Eaters have been on a rampage for 2
years, and for some time during Voldemort's first reign as well--
killing, kidnapping, torturing. I'm sure many if not all of those
victims fought back, including ones that were aurors and order
members, but they were unsuccessful. My point is that it doesn't
matter which Death Eater Molly was up against-- she was up against
someone who had viciously attacked many people-- a particularly
dangerous person. And I figure that Voldemort's best lieutenant would
be an extra-specially dangerous person.

va32h: 

> If you are going to question why "just a housewife" could win a duel 
> with a Death Eater, then you are going to have to question why the 
> Death Eaters lost at all. The "Hogwartians", as they are so 
> interestingly called in the book, were outclassed from the get go. 

guzu: 

I never questioned whether she could win it-- she won it. I said it
was not a logical assumption that she would definitely win it, and
therefore I was horrified by the hundreds of people standing around as
if they were watching a K1 fight instead of helping (Molly *and*
Kingsley). And I *thought* that the reason that the Hogwartians won
was teamwork-- the different houses working together with the alumi,
the order members, the teachers, the centaurs, the house elves... the
whole being the greater than the sum of the parts. I thought that was
a major theme throughout the series, starting in PS when Harry, Ron
and Herminone had to work together to get to get to the Mirror of
Erised.  As I mentioned up thread there something in between standing
aside and going alone. 

Lisa: 

And like I said before, it wasn't personal for any of the other aurors
or policemen and soldiers you seem to have discovered -- but it was
for Molly.

guzu: 

It wasn't personal for the Longbottoms? For the Potters? The Bones
family? Gideon and Fabien Prewitt? Tonks-- they killed her father?
Anyway, it was personal for Molly since before Harry was born-- the
Death Eaters killed her two brothers. 

guzu:

> If Molly had used intelligence or ingenuity (as per Hermione),
> instead of straight-out might to win, I might have bought it more
> easily.


Lisa:

Oh, my, how on earth could stupid little housewife Molly conjure up
any intellignce or ingenuity? All she's fit for is household cleaning
spells, and she's apparently not good at those, either, since Fleur's
mother came in and cleaned up the house in a jiffy.
Poor Molly -- what a waste of wizarding breathing space.

guzu: 

That is the *EXACT OPPOSITE* of my point. My point was that I would
think that Molly, as an intelligent, rational person, would be *more
likely* to use intelligence, logic  and cunning against an opponent
instead of a straight-on duel like Sirius did. Molly was much smarter
and more rational than Sirius, and had a lot more to lose so it would
be more believable to me to have her use cunning and ingenuity instead
of shooting spells. We often see Herminone use logic and cunning to
much success-- why not Molly? To me this would have been a more
believable way to have her defeat Bella, and just as in-character,
instead of the cage match scene that we got. In my opinion, Molly won
by getting a lucky shot in-- I wish I could have seen more from her
than that.  

Lisa: 

Lisa, who is DONE with this topic, as there is no point in trying to
convince anyone who obviously thinks little of stay-at-home-mothers
that said stay-at-home-mothers have any intelligence, ingenuity or
talent whatsoever -- although my previous employers would take issue
with that concept.

guzu: 

I am sorry that the way I wrote my argument led you to taking the
opposite meaning from my intention. As a former stay-at-home mother, I
think my current employers would also take issue with that.   

va32h: 

> But oh look - when your cause is just and your heart is in the right 
> place, you can indeed triumph, even when the odds are against you. At 
> least that's what the English thought at the Battle of Agincourt. 
> (just to throw out the notion that unexpected victories need not only 
> occur in novels).

I agree with you-- and that has been the case in all the books of the
series. However, I wish that some *expected* victories had come along
with the unexpected ones. If the underdog always wins and the powerful
guy always loses, it's not believable anymore.  I didn't believe that
scene in DH.