GoF 4

[pauraque_bk]

Highlights from Chapter 3:

-So long, and thanks for all the mice (or, WTF post owls!)

-People we like are "round-faced", people we don't like are "the size of a young killer whale" (or, Sympathetic fat people in HP)


GoF 4: Back to The Burrow

Capitalization hers.

You know what? I think this might be my least favorite chapter in canon. Thankfully, it's also short.

[Harry] had rarely seen Mr or Mrs Weasley wearing anything that the Dursleys would call 'normal'. Their children might don Muggle clothing during the holidays, but Mr and Mrs Weasley usually wore long robes in varying states of shabbiness. (39)

So, I guess we can assume that there's a cultural shift in progress here. In Arthur and Molly's generation, you didn't wear Muggle clothes, ever. In the kids' generation, you do. Am I right that in the generation preceding Arthur and Molly, you didn't even have the first clue what a Muggle might wear? Are they older wizards, the ones we see dressed in nightgowns and so on? I wonder if this has anything to do with Dumbledore becoming Headmaster -- Muggleborns feeling more welcome, wizard children feeling more inclined to emulate them?

Dudley, on the other hand, looked somehow diminished. This was not because the diet was at last taking effect, but due to fright. Dudley had emerged from his last encounter with a fully-grown wizard with a curly pig's tail poking out of the seat of his trousers [...] It wasn't altogether surprising, therefore, that Dudley kept running his hand nervously over his backside, and walking sideways from room to room, so as not to present the same target to the enemy. (40)

There's a lot of this Dudley-being-terrified business in this chapter (which you really can't blame him for), but the key word is diminished. The bully isn't so big anymore, doesn't loom large in Harry's life. As usual, his bad actions are tied to his physical appearance -- the narrative lays the pig connection on pretty thick here, "porky hands" and so on. It's supposed to be funny, I don't know if you guys find it so. Doesn't work for me.

Etc etc, the Dursleys are anxious, they eat dinner, finally the Weasleys try to come in through the fireplace. This is just not smart of Arthur. He knows Muggles don't use the Floo network -- if they did, he wouldn't have had to pull strings to have the Dursleys' fireplace connected -- and he didn't tell anyone, even Harry, that he was going to attempt it. It also seems a bit dim to blast his way into the room instead of... well, anything else. He can fix the room via magic, but he can't take some paneling off without an explosion?

We're supposed to get a laugh out of the Dursleys' reactions, but it falls flat to me. This kind of humor doesn't work unless both parties are behaving reasonably (by their own standards), not idiotically.

'Well ... bye then,' Harry said to the Dursleys.

They didn't say anything at all. Harry moved towards the fire, but just as he reached the edge of the hearth, Mr Weasley put out a hand and held him back. He was looking at the Dursleys in amazement.

'Harry said goodbye to you,' he said. 'Didn't you hear him?'

'It doesn't matter,' Harry muttered to Mr Weasley. 'Honestly, I don't care.'

'You aren't going to see your nephew 'til next summer,' he said to Uncle Vernon in mild indignation. 'Surely you're going to say goodbye?' (46-47)

This is the only thing I kind of like in this chapter. Arthur's defense of Harry reads as sincere (and it would be reasonable too, if the Dursleys' living room hadn't just been blown up). He really can't imagine why they would treat him discourteously. I can't quite put into words why this affects me, but it does.

Harry wheeled around. Dudley was no longer standing behind his parents. He was kneeling beside the coffee table, and he was gagging and spluttering on a foot-long, purple, slimy thing that was protruding from his mouth. One bewildered second later, Harry realised that the foot-long thing was Dudley's tongue -- and that a brightly coloured toffee-wrapper lay on the floor beside him. (47)

There's this perpetual debate in fandom about the Weasley twins -- merry pranksters or sadists? And I tend to come down pretty hard on them, and it's because of things like this. I guess we're supposed to think Dudley deserved it for his mistreatment of Harry, but the fact is that Dudley isn't in a position to mistreat Harry anymore. He doesn't need to be taken down a peg: he's already there. Not to mention, as Arthur rightly points out in the next chapter, it's hardly acceptable or legal to do something like this to a Muggle.

I'll also point out that he's gagging and spluttering. In past discussions, some (myself included) have put a lot of weight on the fact that in OotP 28, James's soap-bubble hex makes Snape gag and choke, noting that cutting off someone's breathing is a pretty violent act.

Well, I feel like a bit of a wet blanket now. Anyone actually enjoy this chapter? I promise not to get in a snit if you did. :D


Previous GoF posts are saved in memories here.

Comments

[dphearson.livejournal.com]

There's a great deal of hidden anger in this chapter, which is probably why it does not work.

'You aren't going to see your nephew 'til next summer,' he said to Uncle Vernon in mild indignation. 'Surely you're going to say goodbye?'

See, that's real anger- not the ranting and raving. but a very gentle, pointed question- 'Why?'It would have been incredibly moving if JKR went in that vein.

But then, the meanness of this world intrudes.

One bewildered second later, Harry realised that the foot-long thing was Dudley's tongue -- and that a brightly coloured toffee-wrapper lay on the floor beside him. (47)

Now, in a way, it is a continued comment on Dudley's greed- but on the other hand, was that Toffee offered to him? If it was, why poison him?

He doesn't need to be taken down a peg: he's already there.

But that is not this world! It's never enough to just humilate someone; you must crush their spirit completely destroyed them- and in allin the name of fun, or revenge. Look to what happened in PoA with Remus and Sirius- those were diminished bullies taken down so many pegs that were not even on the damn ladder. Yet, that was not enough for Snape.

[pauraque]

It's never enough to just humilate someone; you must crush their spirit completely destroyed them- and in allin the name of fun, or revenge. Look to what happened in PoA with Remus and Sirius- those were diminished bullies taken down so many pegs that were not even on the damn ladder. Yet, that was not enough for Snape.

This is an excellent observation. There's no concept of moderation in punishment. It's like the way all criminals go to Azkaban, even if that kind of psychological torment is vastly out of proportion with their crimes.

[scarah2.livejournal.com]

It's supposed to be funny, I don't know if you guys find it so.

You think it is? I thought it was supposed to be funny in book 1, when Dudley does need to be taken down a notch. I don't know what I thought of it here, maybe just that the pig is Dudley's spirit animal, you know, like Snape's always batlike.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

Even in PS, it bothered me, personally. I found the movie change interesting, where Dudley brings it on himself so to speak by eating Harry's cake (it's like the film-makers couldn't quite justify it the way it was in canon) but Hagrid punishing Vernon by hurting his son seemed, if anything, a Death Eater style vengeance (Moody hurting Draco as well as Voldemort threatening him; Snape's attitude towards Harry; Lucius threatening to curse the families of the governors in CoS.)
I'm probably Rowling's definition of humourless, though! ;)

[pauraque]

Yeah, you know, I don't want to be this big sourpuss who's taking things "too seriously", but it's hard for me to react to this stuff with anything but distaste! I didn't really think it was funny in PS/SS either, but it didn't seem as harsh as it does in GoF, since 1) Dudley hadn't received any comeuppance before, and 2) Hagrid acted impetuously, nothing like the calculated planning of Fred & George.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think Rowling can sometimes rely on the punishment of certain characters (the Slytherins, the Dursleys, whomever Harry particularly dislikes at that moment) as comedy gold, whereas I find it just comes off as more and more mean-spirited, like they're being kicked while they're down.

It's interesting, though, that Hagrid leaves the Dursleys behind, still cursed; like Fred and George were apparently planning to here.

[pauraque]

Well, Harry finds it funny; he's trying not to laugh during the whole scene, and it doesn't read to me like uncomfortable nervous laughter, but like he really just thinks it's funny to watch.

[arclevel.livejournal.com]

The most disturbing thing (of many) about this episode is that the twins did this as they were *leaving*. When Harry came in, they excitedly asked if Dudley had eaten the candy. But honestly, what they were really asking was if he had eaten it *yet* -- and think about that. What if Arthur *hadn't* delayed Harry by insisting on a proper goodbye? And then Dudley had managed to wait the extra thirty seconds for this nutcase to fix their house and get out of it before he ate the candy that one of their guests dropped, which really sounds far more likely, anyway, given how scared he is. This wouldn't have started until after all the wizards were gone. There isn't a spell being used here, it's a magical object. As far as we know, emergency wizarding squads *weren't* called in. Presumably they wouldn't have been if Arthur hadn't been there, either.

So the most *likely* result here, leaving out narrative necessities, is that Dudley's got a several foot-long tongue, which is also apparently getting wider, and there is absolutely no one who can stop it. It's not like the Dursley's can catch the Knight Bus and rush to St. Mungo's, or fire-call the Weasleys and make them come fix it. They would probably go to a Muggle emergency room, but the doctors wouldn't be able to help, and the things they'd try would probably have other harmful effects on Dudley's health. The Canary Creams reversed themselves in a few seconds, but after a couple minutes or so in this chapter, there was no indication that this would, and the twins didn't say that it would while "defending" themselves. So does it eventually? And has Dudley choked to death by that point? And what on *earth* happens to all the victims of these caused by the WWW sales?

I'm also rather horrified by the heartlessness in that, in this chapter, we *know* exactly why Dudley is terrified. Harry knows it, too, and the narrator spells out his extremely good reason for being terrified. Yet his terror is still supposed to be really funny and is presented as "look how stupid Dudley is,being scared by the Weasleys". Looks like he was certainly right to be.

Uh, so no, this wasn't one of my better-liked chapters.

[pauraque]

All I can say is that I hope JKR just didn't think this episode out very well.

Omitting this chapter

[amythis.livejournal.com]

I think the new movie isn't even going to bother with this chapter, or any of the stuff with the Dursleys. Doesn't it start right at the Burrow, or on their way to the Cup? (I don't know what they'll do about Harry's dream of Frank Bryce.)

The main image I retain from this chapter is Petunia wrestling with Dudley's deformed tongue, which is wrong on so many levels.

Re: Omitting this chapter

[pauraque]

From what I've heard, you're correct. I like the actors who play the Dursleys, so it's a bit sad not to see them, but if you have to pick a movie to leave them out of, GoF is a really good choice.

The dream of Frank Bryce, if they're including it, could happen at any time, I guess.

Re: Omitting this chapter

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

The dream of Frank Bryce is in, there's a promo of the actor cast as in.

I'd be fascinated to see how the films deal with the Dursleys in OotP. I like the cast there, too, though.

Re: Omitting this chapter

[pauraque]

It'd be too bad if we didn't get the Dursleys in OotP, because that's such a great sequence, the collision of magic and Muggle. I wouldn't be surprised if they left it out, though, since it's a long book and a lot of cuts will be necessary.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I had a lot of trouble with this chapter too. The Toffee incident is perfectly symbolic of it. As you said, Dudley's already taken down a peg, but then so are the Dursleys. People have tried to say that what the twins do isn't Muggle-baiting because they're not picking on him *because* he's a Muggle, but I think that's nonsense. Muggle-baiting refers to playing magical tricks on Muggles, because Muggles can't do and don't understand magic. Doing this to Dudley is Muggle-baiting. It's like, if you knew a blind person who was really obnoxious would you play mean tricks on him by using his lack of sight against him? You could, but it would still cross the line.

That, unfortunately, is just all through this chapter. The Dursleys are helpless whether they're behaving badly or not. They're not really given any say over whether Harry goes or not, Arthur busts right into their house the way he wouldn't with a wizard. Even Arthur's anger at them for being rude to Harry falls flat to me, which is weird. Last night I was re-reading Jane Eyre and thinking how I'd love to have an outsider come in and yell at the Reeds to make them treat Jane properly. The problem here is that the Dursleys are so terrified I think I can't imagine them saying good-bye to Harry even if they weren't being rude. In fact, I almost think they'd have played nice simply out of fear. The fact that they continue to be rude seems almost brave.

It's just really...this is the essence of bullying that drives the whole series. As was said above, it's not enough for Snape that Sirius and Remus have been beaten down by life, he needs to bully them. The Dursleys were taken care of back in book 1 when Harry got to be a wizard.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

The fact that they continue to be rude seems almost brave.

Vernon's shielding Petunia here, also. Vernon - another example of the nastier side of Gryffindor/it's ethos, perhaps? ;)

[pauraque]

It's like, if you knew a blind person who was really obnoxious would you play mean tricks on him by using his lack of sight against him? You could, but it would still cross the line.

Exactly! Thank you.

The problem here is that the Dursleys are so terrified I think I can't imagine them saying good-bye to Harry even if they weren't being rude. In fact, I almost think they'd have played nice simply out of fear. The fact that they continue to be rude seems almost brave.

That's true. Arthur doesn't mean to, but he's grinding Vernon even deeper into the mud than he already is, essentially forcing him to play nice after the godawful way he's been treated.

[amythis.livejournal.com]

That's true. Arthur doesn't mean to, but he's grinding Vernon even deeper into the mud than he already is, essentially forcing him to play nice after the godawful way he's been treated.

Dumbledore treats the Dursleys similarly in HBP.

[likethemodel.livejournal.com]

It seems like DD is playing to Harry when he berates the Dursleys. He's doing exactly what Harry's always wanted ... perhaps to get him to forgive what happened in OotP?

[amythis.livejournal.com]

Perhaps but I think he also genuinely resents how the Dursleys have treated Harry. I'm curious to see what happens in the beginning of Book 7, because there's got to be some pay-off to it being the last summer Harry has to spend there.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_hannelore/]

I think a lot of "they're just merry prankster" apologists for the Weasleys tend to look at Fred and George's antics like we would old Bugs Bunny and Roadrunner cartoons. Falling anvils and foot-long tongues aside, it is an act of bullying and violence, not to mention they do it specifically because of the "Dudley will eat anything" sort of thing. Harry, of course, is beside himself with glee. Then again, if Harry's been beat up by Dudley and the Big D's, anyone who's been bullied might give a big shout-out for the payback.

And yeah, I like that Arthur is all indignant, because he wants Harry like a lover son and doesn't like the thought that he's mistreated back at home.

[pauraque]

The PoA movie gave me very naughty Harry/Arthur thoughts. Just so you know.

[pilly2009.livejournal.com]

Re the twins: I say they are both. And yeah, it's no secret that I'm a twin fan, but they still can be sadists.

However, there is an important distinction in many of their attacks. When people claim that the twins are "merely pranksters", this argument often turns around to the fact that pranksters are the worst sort of bullies, because when they are bullying people, it's covered up as being "all in the name of fun", and everyone should see it that way.

It's a little hard to say whether or not this would characterise the twins, because to this date, we've only seen them actually prank their family, fellow Gryffindor students, or just for a general laugh; no one whom they hold a grudge toward, or actively set out to bully. When they are being bullies, especially when picking on people significantly younger or weaker than they are, it's very forthright. They hiss openly at Malcolm Baddock. They shove Montague into a Vanishing Cabinet. When Percy becomes an "enemy", they hurl parsnips at him. They don't do these things to gain a laugh, and they never do (gain a laugh, that is). Bullying people they don't like and covering it up as a prank is not the Weasley twins' forte.

Yet even this case becomes shady when taking the Dudley scenario and pre-OotP!Percy into account. The Dudley case wasn't covered up in a "can't you take a joke?" sort of way, the way many of Percy-related pranks were, but it was still covered up. And there is no excuse for the Percy-pranks, but there is a lot of debate about whether or not the twins actually feel affection for Percy or not.

Meh. This chapter didn't really do much for me, either.

*delurks*

[(Anonymous)]

That's a good point about the dual function of the twins. It's true that when they dislike someone they usually respond with straightforward thuggishness, not pranks. But they're also capable of covert hostility. I think the twins have resented Percy for years for getting more positive attention and praise from their mother than they do, when to them he's just a big nerd. Before he broke with his family they had no excuse for open aggression against him. So they pranked him instead. They seem to have felt affection for him originally, but by the time of GoF they seem pretty solidly anti-Percy.
As for Dudley, maybe the twins were angry because he used to bully Harry (as they claimed). Or maybe they chose a Muggle to test their dangerous product on because they think Muggles = chimps, and the fact that that particular Muggle has been mean to Harry was just a bonus. I dunno.
/relurks

Re: *delurks*

[pauraque]

I have to agree that the twins were resentful of Percy; Molly is constantly comparing them unfavorably to him.

[ook.livejournal.com]

However, there is an important distinction in many of their attacks. When people claim that the twins are "merely pranksters", this argument often turns around to the fact that pranksters are the worst sort of bullies, because when they are bullying people, it's covered up as being "all in the name of fun", and everyone should see it that way.

It's a little hard to say whether or not this would characterise the twins, because to this date, we've only seen them actually prank their family, fellow Gryffindor students, or just for a general laugh; no one whom they hold a grudge toward, or actively set out to bully. When they are being bullies, especially when picking on people significantly younger or weaker than they are, it's very forthright.

I see the bullying behavior of the Twins as a direct parallel to the behavior of James and Sirius when they were also students at Hogwarts. It sounds like Jame/Sirius (with the help of the Marauders) were quite cruel to a number of students but probably managed to get away with it a lot of the time (even then, they seemed to have left a rather impressive dossier...and their Map shows that they clearly intended to keep the jolly Mischief going, even after their departure as students). It sounds almost like bullying by the Gryffindor jocks is some sort of tradition at Hogwarts. And woe to those without the appropriate sense of humor.

Remember that in book six, Snape points out to Harry that Snape was repeatedly attacked and humiliated/hurt by the four Marauders. Even Sirius admitted to picking on Snape for no good reason. I can't really blame Snape for relishing the downfall of Sirius and Remus in book three.

[pilly2009.livejournal.com]

It sounds almost like bullying by the Gryffindor jocks is some sort of tradition at Hogwarts. And woe to those without the appropriate sense of humor.


Huh. I got quite a different distinction between the Marauders and the Twins. We hear in HBP that the majority of Sirius and James's detentions had to do with hexing random students (sort of contradicts their managing to get away with it, right?). Whereas the times we've seen or heard of the twins getting into trouble (with the school), it usually has to do with things along the lines of blowing up a toilet (PS) or setting off Dungbombs (PoA).

As for this alleged bullying ritual...like I mentioned before, if the twins are nasty to Slytherins or other students they don't like, they do it without concealing their intentions. They hex from behind. They beat up kids. Shove people into dangerous cabinets and threaten other kids with metal prongs. They're arses, but they don't cover it up. There is no question about "not being able to take a joke".

Whereas the time we see the Marauders picking on a student, they are surrounded by other students who are openly laughing, and there is a very heavy air of "this is all a joke, can't you take it, hahaha?" which is used to conceal malice.

[ook.livejournal.com]

Huh. I got quite a different distinction between the Marauders and the Twins. We hear in HBP that the majority of Sirius and James's detentions had to do with hexing random students (sort of contradicts their managing to get away with it, right?). Whereas the times we've seen or heard of the twins getting into trouble (with the school), it usually has to do with things along the lines of blowing up a toilet (PS) or setting off Dungbombs (PoA).

I suspect that the Marauders got away with a great deal during their school career (the notecards Harry had to transcribe may have been just the tip of the iceberg of their mischief). The existance of the Marauders Map was never discovered and the secret of the Invisibility Cloak probably did not come out until Seventh Year or later. Nor did anyone ever realize that three of the Marauders were Animagi (I wonder how many times Pettigrew changed into a rat to avoid capture...which might explain why the names of James and Sirius appeared most often in the notecards of punishments). Oh...I think the Marauders got away with murder (Sirius even attempted this literally but failed). I don't think that Fred and George ever tried to kill anyone on purpose though. ;)

Whereas the time we see the Marauders picking on a student, they are surrounded by other students who are openly laughing, and there is a very heavy air of "this is all a joke, can't you take it, hahaha?" which is used to conceal malice.

A great deal of the Marauders activities were done in secret (the Map, Cloak, Animagus forms), including the attempt by Sirius to harm Snape, so I don't think that an audience cheering them on was required by the Marauders. Perhaps, like ramped-up sense of Wizarding vengeance, the Wizarding sense of humor might also be severely out of whack?

[alya1989262.livejournal.com]

I think the main distinction between the Twins and the Marauders resides in whom they were picking on: the Twins hex people who seriously annoy them (like Zacharias Smith), and play pranks on the general public (or even for the general public's relish - cf. OotP!) and Professors. There isn't one particular person they persecute (apart from Percy, but we all know siblings are fair game!). Whereas the Marauders used Snape as, basically, a punching-ball! And that is what makes them guilty, in my eyes - the persecution of that one particular person, who, however disliked or an "oddball" he was, had never deserved it! (I also have strong issues with the description of Snape as an oddball by Sirius, primarily because I have always enjoyed being called 'weird' and 'odd'... Maybe I don't understand the English language perspective, but I don't see why "oddball"=nasty!) (I do, though, understand that Snape was nasty, but because he was "up to his eyes in the Dark Arts", not because he was "thaT little oddball")
For the record, I am by no means a Snape fan, I love Sirius and Remus (I have less sympathy for james, though), and I thouroughly enjoy the Twins.
~Alya~

[lycoris.livejournal.com]

Well, after flicking through the comments, I'd better be brave and say that I like the chapter. There's no chapter I particually dislike in the whole canon so it never occured to me to dislike it. After reading all this, I've got my copy of GoF and re-read the chapter specially to bring it forward into my mind.

Yes, I do find it funny. It's difficult to explain why - I've never been good at explaining why I find anything funny. I adore the fact that they all end up stuck behind the fireplace and make such a mess of the living room and Mr Weasley talking about how Mrs Weasley thinks he's mad because he collects plugs and batteries delights me.

I suppose I'm also amused by the fact that the Dursleys are being so stupid. That's probably unsympathetic of me - after all, people DO have irrational fears and when things go wrong around Harry and his magic, they really, really go wrong. But I suppose I come from the same place that JKR probably comes from - the Dursleys are pretty horrible and very prejudiced and it can be really, REALLY funny to laugh at idiots. (I feel like a really bad person now - this is the other reason I hate trying to describe what/why I find things funny!) As for Dudley's tongue, it doesn't really bother me one way or the other. I know that if it happened in real life, it would be terrible - as would most things in the HP world. And I do feel sorry for Dudley and it's one of the biggest examples of the Weasley twins taking things too far. The actual tongue-growing doesn't make me laugh - but the reactions of Vernon and Petunia do. It's a horrible thing but if they weren't being so ridiculous, it would be about fifty times LESS horrible and therefore it's funny.

But I guess, most important to me - I just vaguely view this as okay to laugh at because I know it's just a book. I think there are some HP chapters where I just think "Oh hello, I'm reading." even if it's only unconciously. And therefore, it's all right to laugh because I know it's not based on a truth.

I don't think I've done very well here but at least I've tried. :)

[pauraque]

I really don't think the Dursleys are being stupid here, though. They know they can be hurt by wizards -- and then they are. Their behavior is actually far more reasonable than JKR seems to intend.

Naturally it is "just a book", but the way I enjoy fiction is to become emotionally invested in it as though it were real. YMMV.

[slyth-enigma.livejournal.com]

The way the Dursley's are portrayed isn't always amusing, the the physical characterists stuff is rather... annoying. However, I get the feeling that she's trying to ease into the more serious aspects of Harry's childhood, because if immediately presented seriously, it might scare young children... His childhood, and the Dursleys, seem at first rather unpleasant, but also more unrealistic. In the fifth and sixth books, things start to become a little more realistic, on two different levels. The humanisation of the Dursleys, in book 5, with Dudley obviously having real fears,
and Petunia with the 'remember my last' bit. In the 6th however, there's a part where she mentions that Harry knew better than to stay in range of his Uncles fist... with makes things sound a bit more serious than we were originally lead to believe.

[pauraque]

In the 6th however, there's a part where she mentions that Harry knew better than to stay in range of his Uncles fist... with makes things sound a bit more serious than we were originally lead to believe.

Oh, I almost forgot about that. In one of the early books (PS/SS or CoS, I think), Vernon makes a comment that he should have beaten Harry's magic out of him -- should have, never actually did. The HBP line seems to contradict that.

[slinkhard.livejournal.com]

Isn't there that shock thing that occurs the one time he tries?
I always thought Harry was too quick, and so while it was dangerous being in range of him while he's in a rage, he never actually got any serious physical punishments. Just imho, though.

I'm a wibbling 1/2 and 1/2 sort...

[subtle-shades.livejournal.com]

First, the twins. I like them in a I-don't-actually-have-to-deal-with-them way. If I actually knew them when I was a child, I'd have had to fight with them and either made them eat mud (literally) or they would have made me eat mud (more probable if I was stupid enough to attack them head-on -- and I really was more cunning than that as a child). They amuse me - mostly - and I have to admit that most of their antics make me laugh. Although, they make me laugh less and less as time goes by. The twins start off as mostly harmless pranksters in the series - and I laughed a lot. But as events in the series get darker, so do the twins - and my indulgence of them vanishes.

I NEVER liked the way that they got away with "teasing" Percy - but children do what their adults allow them to do. They frequently tortured Percy in front of Arthur and Molly and Arthur and Molly allowed it! Worse still, Arthur laughs when they "tease" Percy in front of him. And Molly makes things a zillion times worse with her general over-protective-ness of Percy and her frequent comparisons between Percy and the twins. In fact, the scenes with Percy and his family have always chilled me. Percy is the only member of his family to notice that something is wrong with Ginny is CoS, he shows genuine concern for Ron in the lake scene later in this book (oops! Erm...Am I allowed to reference that?), and he always strive to be exactly what his parents (specifically his mother) loudly tout to be their ideal son. In a very real sense, Percy is that kid who tries too hard to be liked, and is smushed by the other kids for being a brown-noser. As parents who supposedly love their children equally, Arthur and Molly should have rained Wrath upon them the first time they "teased" one of their siblings. But Arthur laughs at these antics - and no matter what Molly does after that, he's sent the message that "It's okay...Mummy's just a fuddy-duddy."

That family dynamic makes me want to SCREAM!

But I'll save the rest of that rant for the lake chapter....maybe. Now to focus on this rather heavy-handed, disastrous chapter.

Re: I'm a wibbling 1/2 and 1/2 sort...

[pauraque]

he shows genuine concern for Ron in the lake scene later in this book (oops! Erm...Am I allowed to reference that?)

Yes, you are. This is a re-read, not for people who haven't finished the book yet. :)

Con't...Sorry, It was too long to fit in one comment...

[subtle-shades.livejournal.com]

Even the first time I read this chapter, way back when it was first published, I did not like it. Honestly, I never blamed Dudley for his neurotic behavior concerning his bottom in the presence of wizards b/c, frankly, I'd probably be a bit neurotic myself after the pig-tail bit.

I remember being absolutely horrified by the way Arthur presents himself to the Dursleys in this chapter. He's an "expert" on Muggles but he commits a long series of inexcusable blunders that good manners if nothing else should have prevented. The crowning moment, of course, comes in the form of a Ton-Tongue Toffee. Arthur's only two "shining moments" in this chapter, imo, are the bits where he is indignant over Harry's lack of farewell and the fact that he stayed - despite flying objects and general hysteria - to fix that tongue. Although, I've always suspected that his "kindness" is at least partly based on his desire to protect his own sons from the repercussions of muggle-baiting.

I have to admit that during my first reading, when the twins dropped that candy, I expected it to be something like a canary cream - magical but harmless. I was disturbed when the candy turned out to be life threatening. What chilled me while re-reading was that none of the Weasleys, or even Harry himself, seem to understand just how serious their "prank" was. Nor do they seem to realize what an extreme lack of compassion it shows on the part of the twins that their only regret is that they were caught! They most certainly do not regret nearly killing another child! At that point, I was once again ready to scream at Arthur and Molly for their lack of critical thinking skills.

The Weasley twins are pranksters, yes - good tempered, imaginative, fun, and very amusing. But they're also sadistic bullies - cruel, thoughtless, compassion-less, frighteningly and cunningly efficient - apparently not armed with either a moral compass or any of those mental stop signs most of us come equipped with. That Harry seems to trust them implicitly distresses me. I know and like many somewhat shady/wild people - but I trust none of them. It's called judgment - something that nearly the entirety of the HP cast lacks. To me, this chapter once again illustrates that appalling shortcoming in vivid, technicolored detail.

[aithopa.livejournal.com]

It's supposed to be funny, I don't know if you guys find it so.

I thought the pig thing was rather creepy back in PS. It's like Dahl again! You're not supposed to like, say, the Twits, but their demise doesn't really make you feel good. Eugh.

The Twins, I don't know. A lot of what they do is on the line of pranks/vs malice. I don't dislike them...but there are bits, like when Ron is trying to find out who they're sending mail to, where they seem to suddenly radiate malice and danger for no real reason.

Dursleys. From reading the beginning of PS, they're so...I guess charming is the wrong word, but you know. Before all the Harry-abuse, we're just supposed to dislike them because they hatez imagination like all evil/lame adults in children's books, and shun Lily and don't embrace teh crazy of the owl invasion etc. Their Dursleyish interactions are just cute, though. But if the Dursleys *had* treated Harry like a son, wouldn't he have ended up as coddled and silly as Dudley? Isn't it a good thing for him that he had the three of them as examples of how not to be?