CHAPDISC: DH31, The Battle of Hogwarts

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 184651

Potioncat wrote:
> <snip>
> But I would like to respond to your summary. You wrote:
> "numerous  Ravenclaws, even more Hufflepuffs and half of the 
Gryffindors remain seated,  determined to help fight."
> 
> I bring this up because the wording in canon is a little different
and I can clearly remember my gut reaction to it.  JKR wrote, "The 
Slytherin table was completely deserted, but a number of older 
Ravenclaws remained seated ¡Keven more Hufflepuffs stayed behind, and
half of Gryffindor remained in their seats¡K"
> 
> It seems JKR is indicating the Slytherins chose to leave. Deserted
is very telling. I read 'a number' as 'a few' Ravenclaws. I inferred 
that JKR was saying something very important about Slytherins and 
Ravenclaws. Maybe she wasn't. But from a character standpoint, it
seems clear JKR values courage and loyalty and dismisses wit and ambition.

Carol responds:
Well, "deserted" in this sense just means empty, like a deserted
classroom at the end of the schoolday (or a "desert island" in the
sense of uninhabited). I'm not sure whether the implication that
Slytherin has deserted the school is intentional or not, but, if so,
its Harry's perception that the narrator is presenting. The Slytherins
didn't "desert." They followed McGonagall's order to leave. (I agree
that having wands pointed at you accusingly is no incentive to join
your fellow students in defending the school, and I hate the fact that
they were given no alternative. (If Snape had been there to explain
where he really stood, I'll bet that many of them would have followed
his lead. Just my opinion--or hope.)

As for "a number," it's a vague phrase, but it doesn't generally mean
"a few." (If she'd meant "a few" or "a handful," she'd have used the
phrases that exist in the English language to convey that idea.
Merriam-Webster defines "a number" in this sense as "an indefinite,
usually large, numbber." That being the case, I don't think she's
making any disparaging insinuations about intellect. Of course, "even
more" (an even larger large indefinite number) loyal, hardworking
Hufflepuffs stayed behind. As for "half the Gryffindors," either
that's an exaggeration or McGonagall had her hands full with underage
Gryffindors.

Let's say that the usual number of Gryffindors is seventy (ten per
year) and that one quarter are Muggle-borns and consequently absent.
That would mean about 52 Gryffindors still in school, half of which
would be 26. Of those, only ten would be seventh years (counting HRH
and Dean, who had returned), and about eight would be sixth years, one
or two of whom (including the returned DA member Colin Creevey if
McGonagall has her facts right) are underage. So of those 26 or so
Gryffindors who supposedly remained to fight, only about 16 would be
allowed to do so.

So "a number" of Ravenclaws means something less all than the seventh
years and of age sixth years still at Hogwarts--something under 16 and
probably closer to 12. "Even more" Hufflepuffs means at most all the
of-age Hufflepuffs except Zacharias Smith--something like 15 people.
It's not as if 70 people from each House, or even half that number,
are volunteering to fight. Some 37 or so underage students from the
three Houses whose numbers have been reduced through the absence of
Muggleborns have been ordered out, along with 50 underage Slytherins
and the 20 Slytherin upperclassmen (three of whom later drop out of
the line).  There are more Slytherins to begin with because Slytherin
has no Muggle-borns, and none stay because McGonagall orders them out.
It seems like desertion by one fourth of the school, but only the
of-age students should be counted, and McG has given them no choice in
the matter. (Of course, Pansy Parkinson bears her share of the blame,
but who's to say that she spoke for all the Slytherins any more than
Crabbe did?)

At any rate, I think that JKR forgets sometimes that the students of
whatever age Harry happens to be do not represent the majority of
students in the school. (Nor does Neville's experience necesarily
reflect that of younger students in Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, or
Hufflepuff. What the younger Slytherins experienced can't even be
guessed, except that Slytherin as a whole seems to appreciate its
missing Headmaster, whose lead they can no longer follow.)

Potioncat:
> <snip> Here's a question from me. Did anyone else have a reaction to
seeing Thicknesse in the battle? We know he's under the Imperius, but
no one else knows. Every time we saw Stan, he seemed to be under a
spell--or maybe the blank look was his norm. But both Thicknesse and
Crouch seemed to be well controlled in ways that weren't obvious to
those who should have wondered. I felt bad for Thicknesse because
while we don't really know his leanings, and if he had to be placed
under Imperius, he must not have supported LV.

Carol responds:

I had a reaction, too, but not quite the same one. I was inclined at
first to think that he was a misunderstood victim treated as guilty.
(He's actually wearing a DE mask, but, then so was Stan.)

However, I'm not so sure that the Imperius Curse (assuming that it can
be proven) is all that legitimate an excuse (except over the short
term for a single incident--cf. travers, who actually does nothing
wrong but is certainly controlled, or the Goblin Bogrod, who thinks
he's doing his usual job for a legitimate customer). If Thicknesse is
under an expertly administered Imperius Curse (and you're right to
contrast him with Stan, who appears to be Confunded rather than
Imperioed if we look at the usual effects of those curses), he's
certainly not fighting it as Crouch did. Either he's weaker, both in
terms of will and power, or he was not entirely averse to Voldemort in
the first place. He may have been like Runcorn or Umbridge, in favor
of the Pure-Blood supremacy agenda but not actually a DE (which
explains how someone like Yaxley could get near enough to Imperio
him). it also explains how he could persuade other MoM employees to go
along with his agenda, paving the way for the DE takeover: it can't be
that different from what he supported in the first place or the MoM
crowd would become suspicious. Contrast Scrimgeour: The DEs don't even
try to place him under the Imperius Curse. They kill him, and planned
to do so from the outset, putting their puppet in his place.

Obviously, Pius Thicknesse isn't as guilty as a person who was
operating of his own free will would be, but I'm not entirely sure
that he's as innocent as, say, Mr. Weasley would be in his place. (Or
Stan Shunpike as the youngest ever Minister for Magic, his own boast
to the Veela having come true. I'm still not sure what to think of
Stan, who may be more like Dawlish than Thickness in terms of the
spell or spells that he's under.) The name Pius Thicknesse is
interesting: Pious Thickness? Surely, he's not genuinely pious. Is he
a thick-headed hypocrite? Any infamous popes named Pius that JKR may
be referencing here? And his appearance isn't very prepossessing,
either, an indication in JKR's world (I'm sorry to say) that he may be
a Slytherin with undesirable tendencies. Cf. Umbridge (probably
Slytherin and certainly with Slytherin affinities) and Millicent
Bulstrode, for example. Sorry I can't recall the details except for a
Neanderthal-like brow ridge and don't have time to look them up.

Carol, who has a deadline coming up and company coming Thursday but
feels entitled to a few posts before bedtime!

I do think that JKR hasn't entirely sorted out the differences between
Confundus and Imperius, either in terms of effects or in terms of when
each is necessary.