Responses to Marietta (was: Misc. responses, some quite old)

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 169205

> > Charles:
> > Last but not least, IMNSHO, Marietta got what she deserved. It 
was
> > not over the top, nor overly cruel. She betrayed the DA. Not 
only was
> > it a broken promise, but she knew that she was going to get many 
of
> > her friends expelled and possibly criminally prosecuted by what 
she
> > knows is an unjust government. AFAIC, having the word "sneak" 
across
> > her face is a light punishment, considering what could have 
happened
> > to the rest of the DA.
> 
> Random832:
> This issue is a key disconnect between people who like Hermione (or
> are indifferent) and people who go out of their way to find a 
reason
> to dislike her. In discussions of this, everyone goes on and on 
about
> how Marietta is "Permanently Disfigured" etc - when really - it's 
just
> a word. on her face. Like how in Snow Crash, Raven has "Poor 
Impulse
> Control" on his face, Marietta has "Sneak" on hers.

Magpie:
I think it's unfair to claim that those who disagree with someone 
else must be "looking for a reason" to dislike Hermione. (I could 
just as easily say that those who think this is okay are just 
looking for a reason to excuse Hermione of anything--and that would 
be just as wrong. You don't know what's in my head and can't say my 
reaction is less honest than yours.) That isn't the case at all, in 
my experience, anyway. It's not a disconnect between people who hate 
Hermione and everyone else, it's a disconnect between those who like 
the SNEAK hex and think it's deserved and those who find it 
disturbing and OTT given the situation.


I am truly disturbed by Marietta still walking around with word on 
her face in pustules--and who cares if it's "just a word??" Who 
wants a word written on their face in oozing pustules? Or even a 
single pustule? As far as we know she is permenantly disfigured. I 
don't think that's an exaggeration. It just seems like the truth. 
Marking people in this way used to be, iirc, a common form of 
barbaric punishment. If it was no big deal there would be no reason 
to do it. It actually is an act I would normally expect to be the 
kind of act that defined the bad guys in a story.


> > Potioncat:
> > Actually, I think it's the other way around. I think JKR is 
saying that
> > some acts are Dark regardless of the intention and that those 
Dark Arts
> > have a negative effect on the person performing them.
> 
> Random832:
> Except that the voice she's saying it with is that of the 
ministry -
> not really the right place to put it if she's actually intending to
> say that this is a position to be agreed with.

Magpie:
Isn't she also saying in with Dumbledore and McGonagall? One of the 
first things she says to him is that he's "too noble" to use the 
same magic as Voldemort, and certainly things like Horcruxes don't 
seem like they'd be considered good in any situation.

-m