Percy

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 166116

> a_svirn:
> But if wasn't not about facts what *was* it about? Yes, Percy is not Arthur's favourite
> child, but even so, it's really unforgivable to accuse your son in spying without even
>meaning it. Arthur is a decent and level-headed man; I can't imagine him being this
> unjust. What I can imagine is him trying to recruit his son for the Order. As one of
> the top ministry officials Percy could have been of service to Dumbledore.  I think Arthur
> took it for granted that he would side with the rest of the family. But Percy must have
> taken a very dim view on Dumbledore's secret activities and refused. At least, that's
> what looks to me like a plausible scenario.


I think it is fruitful to look at this in the context of another breakdown in OOTP, the breakdown in communication between Harry and Dumbledore.  As DD says in his infamous end-of-OOTP speech, the old sometimes don't remember what it is like to be young, and the young can't understand how the old think.  Arthur isn't as old as DD and Percy isn't as young as Harry, but nevertheless it is impossible for a nineteen year old just into his first real job to understand how a fifty year old father and veteran bureaucrat thinks.  Now, Arthur should have been able to remember what it was like to be nineteen,
but that he did not is a failure all too common among even the best of fathers.

Both Arthur and Dumbledore faced a situation where a beloved "child" was in danger in ways readily evident to them but invisible to the child in question.  Now there the analogy breaks down, as DD was deliberately witholding information from Harry and Percy's ignorance is a matter of perspective and experience.  Nevertheless, both "father" figureswere faced with protecting a "child" from danger while also dealing with large external crises.  Given that, they fell back on the parent's ultimate line of defense -- "because I say so."  That is, they both moved automatically to take actions that they believed were clearly in the best interest of the child in question, neglecting to consider how said child might percieve their words and/or actions.  Once again, the analogy breaks down somewhat as DD is worried about Harry's Voldy connection whereas Arthur's actions seem more to be motivated by an attitude of "Listen, son, when you're older you'll understand these things, but right now listen to me and quit being such a big dummy."  Once again, not the best of tacks to take, but one even the best of fathers find themselves using in moments of stress and frustration.

Thus does raise an interesting possibility -- one which I very much doubt Rowling would use, but interesting nonetheless.  It provides a way where Harry could be an agent in reconciling Percy with his family, Arthur in particular.  As both had experience of problems with their "father" figures at about the same time for broadly similar reasons, Harry might be able to help Percy understand that Arthur only meant to protect him, however badly it turned out.

Or maybe (probably in fact) not.


Lupinlore