The D.A. (Was: Responses to Marietta)

[montavilla47]

No: HPFGUIDX 169318

Magpie:
> I don't see how this is true when the hex hasn't made anything better for
> the good guys in this generation. The trouble, for me, of just recasting
> all the characters into the Nazis and the French Resistance, is, among
> other things, that it always skips over the stuff that led to Marietta
> being a danger in the first place. I suspect the French Resistance didn't
> get together by grabbing people from the library and presenting themselves
> as a group that was just discussing philosophy and btw, those Nazis suck.
> The people admitted into it were committed to the cause and were, I think,
> recruited honestly and honorably. Marietta obviously never was and what's
> better in that case? Giving her less of a chance to be a weak link, or
> getting off on punishing her when she's been one? The intention to defend
> themselves against Voldemort isn't there *clearly*. If it were it wouldn't
> be a study group talking about OWLS. 

Montavilla47:
I'm not sure the Nazi/French Resistance analogy holds up, either.  But when
I try to apply it, what Marietta reminds me of is the ordinary citizen who 
becomes targeted for collaborating with the enemy.  One of the customs 
was to shave a woman's head if she was caught.  The intention being to 
mark and humilate her as a traitor to her people.  Obviously, this would
act as a deterrant to others.

Did it?  I suppose so, since we don't have Zacharias Smith ( for example)
cutting deals with Umbridge to implicate the rest of the group.  

Of course, hair grows back, so a woman with a shaved head can hope 
that she'll eventually be forgiven and taken back into society.  I do 
find it ambiguous as to whether or not Marietta's pustules are getting
better.  Perhaps they are and the lesson we're to take is that Marietta's
actions have long-lasting but not permanent consequences.

I tend to think that JKR's intention is for the lesson to take place exactly
where it is--in discussion.


Magpie:
>The Order actually seems like a pretty tight group even years
> later, as do the DEs. The DA isn't much.

Montavilla47:
This is something I find truly odd about the DA.  It was sold to the other
students partly as a study group (do better on O.W.L.s) and partly 
because of "V-v-v-voldemort" and the need to eventually oppose him.

But, when it comes to actually facing Voldemort, Harry tries to reject
the three DA members who insist on coming.  Then, in HBP, he drops
the group entirely--even though he hates the new D.A.D.A. teacher 
just as much as he hated Umbridge, even though Voldemort is 
*officially* back, and even though their current D.A.D.A. teacher has
voiced no opposition to the idea of extracurricular D.A.D.A. study.

So, was the whole DA created to allow Harry a positive outlet for 
his rebellious anger?  Was the group about Voldemort or was it about
Umbridge?  

Magpie:
> Hermione was a dangerously incompetent organizational
> leader. 

Montavilla47:
We haven't even touched on the most incompetent thing that
Hermione did--which was to leave the parchment tacked up in the
room for Umbridge to find.  Seems like the first rule of organizing
a secret organization is that you don't leave the membership list
lying around--and if you do, the first thing you do before fleeing
the area in a panic is to set the darn thing on fire.

Magpie:
> As I've said, it seems more like a bunch of
> people wanting to play at having a resistance group to actually having one,
> which is why the only time they're held to that standard is when it comes
> to defending Marietta walking around with purple pustules on her face when
> the rest of the group's moved on to more important things like who they're
> going to ask to the dance. This maybe also goes back to the whole
> "development of the good guys" thing, where it seems like the "bad" guys
> learn a lesson while the good guys pat each other on the back and never
> examine their own actions, and so can't learn anything.

You're right about the double standard here.  Not just with Hermione, but 
about Harry, too.  He did a good thing, teaching his fellow students, but 
I'd be with Ernie--I'd be asking why they're just dropping the group next
year as if it's somehow less important now that Voldemort is really back 
(and killing their families) than it was the year before.  

It's hard not to view Harry as a terrible leader here.  If you're going to ask
people to risk their futures for you, you shouldn't just drop them as soon
as they no longer seem necessary.  At the very least, you should groom and
support a successor.

Of course, none of the "leaders" in the series has considered that.  When 
Voldemort disappeared, there was no one to rally his Death Eaters--even
to await his return.  We have no clear idea about who is going to succeed
Dumbledore with the Order of the Phoenix or even if that group will 
continue.

I'm not sure what lesson we're supposed to draw from Harry's actions
regarding the DA.  

Are we supposed to see it as good--since secret organizations should 
only be formed in response to direct oppression? (Unlike the Death Eaters, 
who were formed to oppose a "good"  government?)  

Or is it a missed opportunity?  (Had the DA continued, Harry would have 
had much more support on the night Dumbledore died.)

Montavilla47