[HPforGrownups] Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think)

[elfundeb]

No: HPFGUIDX 164346

Caspen:
Certainly
the earliest post on this subject (sorry, I don't have a ref. for you
at the moment, but I believe it's outlined in T-bay) demonstrates how
her behavior in her first scene at the opening of Book I (SS/PS) can
be very convincingly interpreted in more than one way.

Debbie:
Easy answers first.  Here's Elkins' original ESE! McGonagall post:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39470

I have long had a great fondness for this theory, and valiantly defended it
post-OOP after it was declared to have been sunk.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83852


Julie deserves credit for very creative thorising. But I do have some
problems with the nature and effect of this *enchantment*.

Julie:
Admittedly I haven't thought much about the exact nature of this
Enchantment/ultraImperius spell (though I have wondered if it could
be the spell whose title JKR was having trouble naming). Clearly it
would have to be focused on specific types of information McGonagall
might hear, or maybe on a certain object or even place that would be
enchanted to elicit information from her, maybe at set times...

Debbie:
The only "enchantment" we've seen is Riddle's possession of Ginny in CoS.
That wasn't really a spell, though; it's one of Voldemort's powers.  And
while Riddle could make Ginny do specific things under his control,
including (presumably) make her talk, it's hard for me to see Riddle using
this spell to make her talk, unless he gives her Veritaserum at the same
time.

Julie:
I think it's
possible
Dumbledore *knew* Voldemort hadn't died at Godric's Hollow because he
realized McGonagall was still under the enchantment, which Dumbledore
detected at some point before Godric's Hollow--perhaps long before--and
was able to monitor in some way.

Debbie:
I'm struggling a bit with this aspect, too.  When Riddle didn't need Ginny,
she wasn't being controlled.  The diary was a lure, but she eventually
gained the will to resist it, and threw it away (I believe she stole it back
merely to keep Harry from reading her secrets).  Likewise, McGonagall hardly
seems under anyone's control throughout the story.  Thus, I have a hard time
seeing the enchantment as continuing.

Caspen:
And, as Julie
asks, if she's so loyal, why doesn't Albus trust her more, and why
doesn't he confide in her? It really doesn't make sense to me,
regardless whether she's secretly a hot-head or not.

Debbie:
That trust issue looms large, doesn't it?  The reason I continue to be
enamored of ESE! McGonagall is that the only other reason I can come up with
for McGonagall to be so out of the loop is very unpleasant -- it's that
McGonagall (like most of the other women in the story) doesn't really have a
narrative function except to serve as a stereotype spinster schoolteacher.
And it does fit -- she's stern, no-nonsense, competent and efficient,
but underneath has a soft spot for her 'children'.  She's a stock character
in fiction, the type who provides atmosphere -- she gets no action, no
mystery, and no growth.  (Well, except for the mystery of why she gets no
action.)  Julie's theory would provide some explanation, but leave her an
innocent dupe like the 11-year-old Ginny.

On days when ESE! McGonagall seems too heavyhanded, I lean toward the
still-carrying-the-torch-after-all-these-years theory, in which McGonagall
could not cleanse her mind of the pre-Voldemort, handsome brilliant young
Tom.  Instead of avoiding taking McGonagall in confidence because she was
under an enchantment, Dumbledore feared that Riddle would attempt to possess
her, and that McGonagall remained particularly susceptible to his charms.

Caspen:
Finally, it strikes me that Minerva's and Tom's respective timelines
do seem to parallell each other closely. Minerva's been teaching at
Hogwarts for approximately 40 years as of HBP (OOTP, P.321, American
hard-cover ed.), which means she returned to Hogwarts as a teacher
approximately 10 years after she left. Tom would have graduated two
years after Minerva. He asked for a teaching position immediately,
but was turned down (HBP). We know that he then waited 10 years to
attempt to return to Hogwarts from his pensieve recounted interview
with Dumbledore (HBP). That would have been only a couple years, at
most after Minerva had taken up her own teaching position.

Debbie:
IIRC, the timeline is that Riddle graduated in 1945 and returned in 1955 to
request the DADA job.  McGonagall began teaching at Hogwarts shortly
thereafter (my calculation is that it was 1956 as OOP covers 1995-96).  The
odd thing is that she seems to have started mid-term, in December.  Why?
Perhaps the DADA curse had just claimed its first victim and the existing
transfiguration teacher took over.  But that doesn't answer the question why
McGonagall was suddenly available.

Well, how about this?  McGonagall did have periodic contact with Riddle
during those ten years.  While he was steeping himself in the Dark Arts,
and experimenting with magical transformation, McGonagall was engaged in her
own experiments, whereby she became an Animagus.  Perhaps he possessed her,
maybe even while she was in cat form.  In any event, she began to distrust
Riddle and sought a position at Hogwarts to escape him.  She did not confide
in Dumbledore, though Dumbledore was aware of what was going on.  Thinking
young Minerva was too close to Riddle and not certain of her ability to
resist Voldemort's charms, Dumbledore chose to protect her by hiring her to
teach but thought she was too great a security risk to join the Order (just
like he does later with Trelawney).

Ok, with a few tweaks of Julie's theory, I think I've come up with a
credible backstory.  I can't remember how much of this I've spelled out
before.

blitz:
 think that McGonagall's weakest trait is also her best - she is
intensely loyal, to a fault. She is willing to take on the Minister
until DD tells her to stand down. She reminds me a bit of Sirius
Black, though a bit more dilute - a bit of a hothead, stands behind
her friends though hell and back, and stubborn as sin.

Debbie:
I find your comment about loyalty interesting, because I think the weakest
point in my backstory is why McGonagall would not tell Dumbledore of any
concerns about Riddle.  But if she found it very difficult to set aside her
loyalty to Riddle -- fellow prefect (I'm assuming here) and [apparent]
friend, she might have been unwilling to voice what to her could not be more
than barely believable suspicions.

Ok, I think I've gotten into enough mischief tonight.

Debbie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]