The Weasley's lack of wealth

[sbursztynski]

No: HPFGUIDX 177955

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pamela Rosen <pam_rosen at ...> wrote:
>
> Lorelei said: 
> I have been wondering if there could be a deeper reason for making the 
> Weasley family poor.  My first thought is it was simply a way to 
> separate them from the rest of the elitist pure bloods.  However, it 
> was also written that the fact Harry had money and Ron didn't was a 
> source of conflict or jealously.  It just seemed to me (after rereading 
> COS, POA and especially GOF) that it is mentioned alot to maybe be an 
> important point.
> 
> Am I missing a deeper meaning, or am I overanalyzing  :)
> 
> 
> Pam says:
> 
> I think that they are a counterpoint to the wealthy Potters, Blacks and Malfoys. Without 
the Weasleys, you wouldn't know that all wizards aren't wealthy.  And in truth, the 
Weasleys aren't in bad shape.  They just have a lot of kids, and they're putting seven kids 
through Hogwarts--for a long time, four at once!  One would have to assume that Mr. 
Weasley earns as much as any other Ministry official of his grade, which is a comfortable 
living, they just have to make it stretch further.  Mrs. Weasley doesn't have a paying job, 
and she certainly could, but she represents the stay-at-home mom choice. They have less 
money, but they're happy.  I also wondered why the Weasleys didn't have a house elf.  
House elves are apparently not bought or sold like slaves, and there is no cost associated 
with them, and nobody seemed to have a moral problem with the concept of house elves 
until Hermione came along, so why not?  
> 
> I think the Weasleys represent JKR's vision of the perfect family, and in her world, where 
she's been both poor and wealthy, she knows that perfect and rich are not necessarily 
synonymous.  What family would you rather be a part of, The Blacks or the Weasleys?
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sue:

Good thoughts, Pam. Arthur Weasley is a head of Department. He's not some minor clerk. 
He makes laws. He doesn't get much of an office, mind, and has to share the broom-closet 
he works in, without even a window. Having worked in the Public Service myself, years 
ago, I know you don't get paid a lot, even if you're fairly high up. I am probably paid more 
in my teaching job than some of the people in my old department who have more 
responsibility than I do. Whatever Arthur does get paid, it does indeed have to go further, 
with all those kids and a wife who doesn't have a paying job.

House-elves are another matter. Ron himself says in COS that they go with big, old homes, 
and if you're familiar with folklore, brownies (which house-elves most closely resemble in 
their functions) do seem to be connected with castles and manors and such. They go with 
the house. Can you imagine one having lived in the Burrow for centuries?

Dobby might have enjoyed working there, once free, but the Weasleys wouldn't have been 
willing to pay him, judging by what they say of house-elves.
>