Marietta

[lizzyben04]

No: HPFGUIDX 169577

> >>Carol:
> <snip>
> So Marietta was up a creek. She was coerced by Cho to to attend a group she wanted no part of, one that was clearly anti-Ministry from its inception and more so as it went along. (She gives Cho a reproachful look before signing the parchment, and certainly would not have done so if she'd been warned about the hex.)
> True, she was breaking her word not to tell anyone by going to Umbridge, but at the time she gave her word, the group was not yet illegal. She should have been given the chance to walk away.
> <snip>

lizzyben04:
I'm wondering if JKR included this whole DA/hex thing as a possible
parallel to the Death Eaters? The "hex" Hermione gives is very
similar to the "Dark Mark" that Death Eaters are given. Both
organizations have a sign that "calls" the members to meet. And both
organizations require the members to pledge eternal secrecy - once
you're in, there's no getting out. Now, one is "good" & one
is "evil", but there are definite similarities in how both are
organized. Hermione even mentioned getting some of the ideas from
the Death Eaters. These parallels have to be there for a reason.

I think we'll find out that there was a "Marietta" in the Death
Eaters, as well - someone who was dragged along by a friend,
pressured into joining without understanding all of the ramifications & later regretted it. Someone who tried to go to the "proper
authorities" and was punished by the Death Eaters - maybe Snape,
Draco, Regulus Black?

By introducing this parallel, it forces readers to see what things are like when "the shoe is on the other foot". Would we still defend the need for loyalty & secrecy, the need to sacrifice an individual for the "greater cause," when that cause is an evil one? If it was wrong for the Death Eaters to hurt this person, doesn't that make it wrong for Hermione to hurt Marietta? I'm hoping the juxtaposition is intentional, to highlight the dangers of these kinds justifications.

lizzyben04