Abus, Scrimgeour, and Harry (WAS: Re: Deathly Hallows reread CH 1 -3)

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 186256


Alla wrote:
> 
> Sorry, but I really do not consider this conversation as the example of Harry and his friends forming **informed** opinion. I do grant you that I thought this conversation happened before bringing Albus' opinion in, but really, Harry's what are they playing at by taking Stan's seriously? Um, Harry, maybe because he deserved to be taking seriously? Just a possibility?
> 
> And note, how Hermione flat out disagrees that Stan was under Imperius curse, since in her opinion he otherwise would not have acted as he did. So, what exactly does it mean? Maybe it was Stan's playing around. Why, I wonder. OR could it be that he was not playing around?
> 
> Interesting how Harry returns to him being under Imperius curse in book 7.
> 
Carol responds:
I agree that the question of whether Stan was under the Imperius Curse is left open, rather like the question of whether Draco has a Dark Mark. Are we supposed to assume that Harry is right in both cases because his view is never contradicted or corrected by the books themselves?

At any rate, Harry has seen Stan as his normal self (or what passes for his normal self given that he's Stan!) in PoA and he's seen him under something similar to the Imperius Curse, the influence of the Veela in GoF. There's some indication that susceptibility to the Veela is tied in with susceptibility to the Imperius Curse (introduced later in the same book): Ron is more susceptible to both forms of mind control than Harry, who can shake them off with an act of will. We also know that the Imperius Curse, unlike, say, Confundus (or any othe curse that we know of, including Crucio) can be sustained longterm (exactly how is unclear). We see Pius Thicknesse (who for some reason is "known to be susceptible" to Imperio controlled throughout DH acting exactly as if he's motivated by his own will (in contrast to Mr. Crouch, who resists it and becomes first ill and then mad). My feeling is that Stan is one of those weak-minded, weak-willed people who can be seduced by dreams of "glory." Whether he was actually under the Imperius Curse when he bragged of his DE connections is unclear (Could his evidence have led to those other two arrests? I don't have the relevant passages at hand), but his behavior is similar enough to that of Pius Thicknesse (except that Thicknesse is much more influential) that I think we can at least consider the possibility that Stan was Imperio'd. Also, he was clearly released with the DEs, so he either willingly went with them or was compelled to. They must have thought that he would prove useful in a small way, and the Snatchers also seem to be familiar with him. Would the young man who feared "You Know 'Oo" in GoF have suddenly, within two years, have started bragging about his connection with DEs? His boast that he was about to become the youngest ever Minister for Magic was made under the influence of the Veela. I was going to ask myself how the DEs might have come in contact with him, but then I realized there's only one Knight Bus. All it would take is one ride on the Knight Bus by a "respectable" DE (one whose identity as a DE is unknown to the Aurors and the general public) to spot a potential recruit for the lower order of DEs. (Stan wouldn't be a member of the inner circle with Snape, Travers, Yaxley, Bellatrix, et al.)

Anyway, I think the question is left open, but overall, his being under the Imperius Curse seems more likely than his seeking out Voldemort or one of his DE connections and deliberately joining up. I'd be interested in hearing reasons and evidence for the other side of the argument, though, as I haven't fully made up my mind.

Zara: 
> > I would also add this is irrelevant. Even if Arthur, his Ministry sources who interviewed Stan and considered him innocent, Albus, Harry, Ron, and Hermione were all wrong, it does not alter the Ministry's poor handling of the case. No trial, like you say. And Stan was not even the only one - see my Arthur quote, there were two others of which Arthur was aware.

Carol:
True, the Ministry handled the case poorly. But the question I'm interested in is whether Stan was recruited willingly or under the influence of the Imperius Curse, and I don't think we know the answer. (And I also think it's odd that Pius Thicknesse is treated as if he were a willing ally of the DEs when he's only their Imperiused tool. At least we do see how dangerous the Imperius Curse can be and why it's illegal, useful to Harry or not.)

> Alla:
> 
> It is irrelevant on disagreeing with Ministry's methods, sure. It is however not irrelevant to me when I am deciding how much weight I should give to Harry's disapproval of the Ministry if that makes sense. <snip>

Carol responds:
Well, yes and no. We know that Stan didn't have a trial and that Scrimgeour is trying to recruit Harry as a mascot, but we don't know what else Scrimgeour is doing. And I have mixed feelings about DD's description of Scrimgeour as an able, decisive, and forceful man who has been fighting Dark Wizards all his adult life would predispose Harry against him. It's interesting that he avoided labeling Scrimgeour as "good" (again, the world apparently isn't divided into good people and Death Eaters if Scrimgeour is neither), but what did DD mean by "good" and why did he avoid using that word to describe Scrimgeour? Certainly, he's on "our side" if that means fighting Voldemort. Maybe DD is remembering Barty Crouch Sr. sentencing Sirius Black to Azkaban without a trial (though there was an investigation, including the Muggles' testimony and DD's) and feeling residual guilt, which he's displacing onto Scrimgeour because of Stan Shunpike? Barty Sr. was another able, forceful man on the right side but using the wrong methods (at least if we ignore *Harry's* confusing use of the same wrong methods in DH--I wish JKR hadn't confused the issue by having him do that!).

At any rate, I think what "poisons" Harry against Scrimgeour is the fact that Umbridge is still in the Ministry. To me, it's obvious that Scrimgeour doesn't know what Harry does about her. He can't possibly know that Umbridge threatened to Crucio Harry (nor would Fudge--"What Cornelius doesn't know won't hurt him") or that she tried to use Veritaserum on the students (thwarted by Snape) or that she had used that horrible quill to punish at least two students, Harry and Lee. Harry seems to expect Scrimgeour to make an impossible connection here and to be leaping to conclusions about him. (Miscommunication and missed opportunities for communication abound in the series.)

I rather like Scrimgeour. His death shows that he was a brave man on the right side. It's too bad that DD's secretiveness and desire to have Harry destroy the remaining Horcruxes with help only from Ron and Hermione (and Snape, also left partially in the dark). I wonder what would have happened if DD had been open with Scrimgeour and allowed him to help. But it wouldn't have been the same story. JKR's need to have the kids on their own in a dangerous world controlled by DEs dictated Scrimgeour's death, whether he was their direct or indirect ally.

Carol, who has a feeling that she forgot to answer some important point but can't remember what it was