[HPforGrownups] Re: Marietta, was Slytherin's Reputation

[k12listmomma]

No: HPFGUIDX 185656

Carol wrote:
I don't want to get into the ethics of casting that spell or whether 
Marietta deserved it. Suffice it to say that it's one of those points that 
Shelley and I don't agree on and I don't want to get into another ping pong 
match.
and
Then why are we arguing? I think the same thing.

Shelley responds:
First, I would like to say that I was commented about Marietta's 
disfigurement, and not debating "anyone in particular" as to what they 
think. Secondly, I didn't think I was arguing, but discussing a book (wasn't 
that the purpose of this list?)

Carol, I disappointed that you first set me up as being in disagreement with 
you, and then ask why are we arguing with you when you agree with what I 
said. Please stick to discussing the books, and any point at the moment, 
because I certainly am not arguing any points from the prospective of 
"aligning" with anyone else's opinion, nor setting myself up in "opposition" 
to anyone. I'm discussing a book. It's my opinion that I could both agree 
and disagree with the same person, depending on the point that we were 
discussing at the moment, and I would never open a dialog by saying "I've 
disagreed with so-and-so in the past". It's totally irrelevant to the points 
we are making now.

That being said, I would like to clarify the timeline that I was discussing- 
Marietta's pimples (pustules) were there months later, and those "months 
later" occurred during the school year. Thus, I assumed that Madame Pomfrey 
was still (incorrectly) working on them, and that her parents hadn't been 
alerted that she needed St. Mungo's treatment. Now, if she sought treatment 
at St. Mungo's over the summer, we don't know. Someone can correct me if I 
have that timeline wrong- since my kids also read my books, I don't have 
them to look up exactly which passages show the original pustules, and the 
further passages that said she still had them to check for sure that it was 
the same school year.

Montavilla47:
I don't think it really matters why Marietta's disfigurement isn't cured. 
The fact remains that the disfigurement is there months afterwards.  It may 
be marginally better (since she's graduated from a balaclava to heavy 
makeup), but it's still there, and we never see her completely cured.  For 
all intents and purposes, the disfigurement is permanent.

Shelley:
No, I don't think that I can agree with that statement. I am thinking of 
Hermione's teeth that got shrunk back to (less than) their normal size. If 
the healer at the time immediately after the incident didn't shrink her 
teeth back (what if she was away for several days?), does that mean that 
Hermione was forever "doomed" of having such large teeth? What if the healer 
finally got around to shrinking her teeth months later? Would the proper 
treatment still work? I think it would have. Therefore, I don't think it 
matters when the correct remedy is applied, only that it IS applied. I still 
think Marietta had the chance to have the curse removed, and any pustules 
with it, once those adults in her life realized that they were dealing with 
a curse. I think the book was telling us that it merely hadn't happened YET.

I just think there are two issues here: her initial punishment of pustules 
and the word Sneak from her breaking of a contract; and the secondary 
punishment she received when the healer she sought failed to know the 
correct antidote. Blame the first on Hermione, yes, but the 2nd punishment 
wouldn't have happened if the people in the story had recognized it as a 
curse, and for that, I don't blame Hermione. Thus, in my way of thinking, 
Hermione is no less "bad" than any other child in that school who hexed or 
jinxed their classmates and the victim had to seek the school nurse to get 
her to correct it- they all had their "fates" of being normal again (or not) 
resting on Madame Pomfrey's ability to "fix them". Some even benefited from 
being hexed- look at Hermione's smaller teeth for example- she won out in 
the end because her new teeth were smaller than the originals, and nicer 
looking too! It only makes sense to me that if some won out, then others 
might have been disappointed in Madame Pomfrey. What if she hadn't been so 
sensitive to Hermione and shrunk her teeth, but not enough that they looked 
so good? Wouldn't she also be punished continually from the original hex 
that caused her teeth to enlarge, if after the "shrinking" the end result 
was large teeth that looked even worse than before? Wouldn't we also feel 
bad for her and hate the person who sent the original spell that did this to 
her? It strikes me that authors have various ways of making us loath a 
character or feel sorry for them, as we do Marietta, or celebrate with them, 
as we do with Hermione and her teeth.

Now, if the timeline included summer, and the pustules were still there, AND 
we had some PROOF that she had been to St. Mungo's with no solution, then I 
might agree that the pustules were permanent.

Alla:
Sure, but as one of the readers who has no problem with Marietta's 
punishment whatsoever just wanted to note that I certainly do not find 
Marietta's punishment amusing. I never felt that it was a prank or anything 
like that.

I think it was deserved, sure, but I was not laughing.

Shelley:
I echo that sentiment. She deserved whatever happened to her when the 
contract she signed was broken, as she did this to herself, but I also did 
not laugh at her. I could only imagine the continued and enduring shame that 
such pustules would bring (especially on a girl, who tend to value the 
beauty of their faces), and the resulting teasing from the others, and 
punishment like that is not a laughing matter.