#Weasleys are poor but they will not be treated like charity

[remusawoooo]

it's wild cause the books are from his pov and very very clear on how kind, sweet and loyal he is! he is so empathetic too! I mean at 11 him and Ron were traumabonding 5 minutes after meeting 😭😭 his character is set in stone when he has money for the first time, and he buys something to share. but importantly, he didn't want to embarrass Ron!!!! he gave him his chocolate by swapping for Molly's sandwich! and once Ron got more comfortable, he was able to pick up more candy without a trade. idk why this scene is sooo important to me!!

no bc why are all of the harry antis just dumb and lack media literacy 😭

"he was disappointed when ron was made a prefect" BECAUSE VOLDEMORT WAS IN HIS HEAD??? AFFECTING HIS THOUGHTS??? HARRY LITERALLY FELT GUILTY??? HES LITERALLY JUST HAVING MAGICAL INTRUSIVE THOUGHTS???

"he never gave the weasleys money" yes he did? its said multiple times throughout the series the weasleys were proud people who wouldn't accept his money. instead of giving it straight out to molly and arthur he bought their kids things and literally gave 1,000 galleons to fred and george?? that they only took after they were threatened?? because they're proud people??

the fact that yall are misunderstanding a CHILDRENS book this much is wild

[funkymbtifiction]

Harry Potter: Ron Weasley [ESFP]

OFFICIAL TYPING by Charity / The Mod

(Based on the books, but using movie pictures.)

Functional Order: Se-Fi-Te-Ni

Perceiving Functional Axis:

Extroverted Sensing (Se) / Introverted Intuition (Ni)

Ron tends to take things at face value and reach singular conclusions – he judges things by what he sees with his own eyes and draws larger implications from it, such as when his rat disappeared and he blamed Hermione’s cat. He, like Harry, wants to take the broom out for a spin without thinking about the potential pitfalls involved (that it may be a trap, jinxed, or cursed). Ron tends to want the best things out of life, and feel somewhat thwarted by his poverty in not being able to have them. Ron loves to seize exciting opportunities – such as stealing his father’s car and flying it to Hogwarts. He reacts as things happen, which sometimes gets him into trouble (forgetting his place, and trying to hex Snape after Snape insults Hermione). He doesn’t read between the lines very well – he’s  baffled whenever Hermione gets jealous and treats him meanly, shaking his head and attributing it to “girls.” He loves the excitement of Quidditch and gets bored easily in the traditional school environment. He likes to be doing things, instead of studying. He’s adventurous and not really interested in understanding the world or the people in it so much as simply having a good time. He doesn’t show decent insights into people, or over-think things, but his inferior Ni helps him when he needs it most -- Ron uses it when trusting the deluminator to take him to Harry and Hermione (he just “knows” it will take him there).

Judging Functional Axis:

Introverted Feeling (Fi) / Extroverted Thinking (Te)

He has intense personal feelings, which can make him unable to relate to or fully understand other people’s emotions unless he’s been through them; he often shares Harry’s feelings (like when Hermione gets Harry’s broom confiscated) but isn’t good at understanding abstract emotions (like why Cho cries when she snogs Harry). Ron evaluates things according to his own personal standards and beliefs. His disinterest in school means Ron would rather let Hermione come up with workable plans, but he can take charge when he needs to; Ron is very good at chess, a game of strategy and organization and he implements those skills in real life (obtaining basilisk fangs, helping Hermione pull things off, etc) when he needs to.

Hogwarts House: Gryffindor

House Traits: daring, nerve, and chivalry.

Even though Ron sometimes runs away from his friends, he always comes back to them. He shows courage when it most matters, and has a good heart. He wants to be successful and admired, but will put that aside to be there for his loved ones.

Enneagram Core: 3w2 so/sp

Tritype: 379 The Ambassador [3w2 7w6 9w8]

Ron wants more than anything to be able to impress others; it shames him that his family is poor, he cannot afford new robes, and his brothers are far more popular and successful than he is. He wants to come across as admirable in the eyes of others. He can be aggressive and competitive, jealous whenever Harry receives attention. He wants success / achievement, which is why the Mirror shows him victorious and praised for being a winner. He has intense emotions and doesn’t shy away from them. His 2 wing makes him want to be liked by others and willing to show them kindness, even when he’s not sure how to get out of it. He can be manipulative and accusatory, trying to guilt-trip his friends at times (problems of a 2). As an so/sp, Ron really wants above all to be seen as successful by everyone and has a lot of trouble facing up to his family’s poverty; it’s a tremendous blow to his ego when he has to wear tattered robes or carry around a broken wand.

[dukeofriven]

Wait, I don't pay any attention to the Harry Potter EU, but are the American Wizards that awful?

All wizards are awful. The wizarding community is isolationist, xenophobic, and cruel - with or without Voldemort, with or without Grindewald. At best they are patronizingly indifferent, with the same supercilious air that let the rest of the UK brutalize Africa and Asia for several centuries. At best the tone around Muggles is always ‘poor, helpless dears who don’t have magic like we do.’ I find this most striking in the fields of healing and food scarcity - the amount that wizards withhold from the rest of the world is astounding, all in the name of preserving their own way of life. It is driven home in the first book when Hagrid tells Harry that wizards hide their magic from muggles because if they didn’t then muggles would always be asking wizards to use magic to help them solve their problems - and in seven books, two spin-off guides, nine movies thus-far, and one utterly gonzo play nobody ever says ‘But Hagrid, we literally do nothing other than solve all of our problems with magic.” In Terry Pratchett’s Discworld series, the Wizards of the Discworld are very powerful indeed - and they almost never do anything with magic, because they know that the most important lesson about magic is when not to use it. Yes you could solve all your problems by expending vast amounts of power, but if you do that once you’re going to have to do it every time, and where does that end? It is understood that constant displays of power - that total reliance on magic - has led to some of the worst, most-destructive periods in their world’s history. In Diane Duane’s incredible, underrated, deserves-to-be-Harry-Potter-far-more-than-Harry-Potter series Young Wizards, those with magic are servants of life, servants of the universe, servants of all. In exchange for unimaginable power they take an oath to use it the service of others:In Life’s name and for Life’s sake,I assert that I will employ the Art which is its gift in Life’s service alone, rejecting all other usages. I will guard growth and ease pain. I will fight to preserve what grows and lives well in its own way; and I will change no object or creature unless its growth and life, or that of the system of which it is part, are threatened. To these ends, in the practice of my Art, I will put aside fear for courage, and death for life, when it is right to do so —till Universe’s end.Such respect for wizardry - a respect for the sobering responsibility of magic, recurs again and again in fiction. Tolkien’s Istari are cast down when they use magic for their own ends. Ursula Le Guin’s wizards of Earthsea are, like Diane Duane’s, servants of the people. Robert Jordan’s Aes Sedai were once an entire class of people devoted to the benefits of others.The Harry Potter Wizarding World uses magic solely for its own benefit - and in ways that are downright quotidian. “Magic makes [[coffee]] perfect every time” Ron Weasley exclaims at one point in book seven - appalled that savage muggles must live in a  world where perfection is not instantly at one fingertips. Like every libertarian fantasy come to life magic is for your own use, and your own benefit, and the laws that surround it almost always protect nothing other than wizardly privilege. Those muggles who find themselves with magic are either swiftly absorbed into wizarding culture or persecuted to death, depending on the time. The books never cover what happens to muggle wizards who reject being inducted into a community they never wanted to join, but w all know what happens - a muggle who wanted to go public with magic is arrested and jailed, or memory wiped, and so on. Magic Is Might. Magic Makes Right.There’s a line from a wizarding history book about the Salem witch trials that notes that wizards were never in any danger from the burning because they jsut used a spell that made the fire tickle. It notes that they laughed and pretend to scream.People died in those trials. Wizards’ neighbours were were burned alive - accused of wizardry - and the wizarding world treats it as funny historical trivia. No, don’t worry students - the wizards were all fine! Nobody who mattered died. The wizarding world’s response to the Salem trials was to do nothing. Their response is always protect themselves first regardless of circumstance - the wizarding world is without charity, and is without compassion for those outside its clique.There’s a rebuttal you could make that it’s not like we muggles are all that great on the charity front - wealthy nations could solve world hunger in a day if they chose to, and that’s true. But I’d counter that counter with a  point that plenty of people in wealthy countries do try. It’s often not the elite but the downtrodden who do their best to change an unfair system. Poor people give a higher percentage of their income to charity than the wealthy do. Plenty of people protest against the status quo, and demand change for how globalism is bing applied so unevenly.But the wizarding world is monolithic - Hermione, a muggle, never talks of muggle rights. Ron Weasley, allegedly ‘poor,’ never shows solidarity with the destitute. The one goddamn person in the whole serious who seems to care about Muggles - Arthur Weasley - is a buffoon who treats his fellow human beings like aliens. (He also doesn’t study very hard - it’s supposed to be funny when he asks Harry about mundane muggle shit but dude, there’s nothing stopping you from walking to a muggle library and picking up a muggle encyclopedia. What’s an electric plug? Oh look, an entire fourteen pages on electricity. There’s fifty public libraries in Devon and, in the time this book takes place, over five hundred in London where Mr. Weasley worked. I think his befuddlement is supposed to be charming, but as a muggle it’s frankly offensive  - he’s the wizarding world equivalent of a weeaboo who thinks he knows Japan because he can tell you every plot point in Bleach but if you ask him about the Diet he’ll tell you he isn’t on one. ARTHUR WEASLEY IS A CULTURE TOURIST AND IT”S OFFENSIVE.Most works of fiction argue that great power brings with it great responsibility, but that isn’t true of Harry Potter. I’ve said this before but it bears repeating: the series single biggest moral failing is that Voldemort’s philosophy is never disproven. He believes Magic Is Might, and Magic Makes Right, He’s correct - forget whatever bafflegab Dumbledore drones on about Harry’s bravery and courage, or the importance of love. Turn on the news, flip to Syria, read about dead children, and your response shouldn’t be ‘well Syrian mothers don’t love their children as much as Lilly Potter did” because it’ nonsense. Lilly Potter loved her son - and also could use magic and had as pell. The series argues that Voldemort underestimated love - but while that’s true, it also disingenuous. He didn’t know there was a goddamn super-crazy-powerful-spell that could use love. I think if he’d known before-hand he’d have been a lot more cautious. I underestimate the power of laughter as a literally fatal weapon, for example, but if it turns out that you can power a cannon with it I’m sure as heck going to reconsider that stance. It’s sounds poetic and meaningful to say that HArry was saved by love - but he was really saved by a spell. The closest the series comes to making good on it power of love is when Narcissa lies about Harry’s death to Voldemort - out of a love for her son - but if some other random Death had done the deed love wouldn’t have meant squat. (That scene always feels so contrived. I love in TLJ when Kylo Ren has his army fire repeatedly on a hated enemy - and he keeps them firing and firing and firing and firing until he’s damn-sure he’s got a corpse on his hand. I think Voldy really should have just been dumping spells on Harry’s prone body - really give into his rage.)For Harry to beat Voldemort, he would have had to prove that Voldemort that he was wrong - that there is a force more powerful than magic. But there isn’t. All the mothers’ love in the world didn’t stop one of the Creevy’s from dying, or one of the Weasleys, and so on. Add magic, though, and shit suddenly love is more than jsut an abstract concept - but what makes it so is magic. Voldemort claim that magic makes wizard’s superior to muggles - and nothing ever proves him wrong. (I don’t want to get into here because this is too long already, but Squibs and social ostracism also feed into that - if you’re a squib, you’re equally inferior. Nobody ever says “Filch is a squib, no wonder he despises the privilege class he has to look over all the time and that all his years here have made him very bitter’ but god damn.)The Second Wizarding War is about a war between two belief systems - not good and evil, but violence and the status quo. Voldemort believes that magic is powerful and that it gives its users the right to rule over the rest of the world. Dumbledor, the Order of the Phoenix, and everyone else who fights for returning the Wizarding World to the status quo believe that magic is powerful and that its gives it users the right to ignore the rest of the world. If you’re a farm child and you got your arm caught in a combine harvester and you lost it, the wizarding world wouldn’t care. It doesn’t matter that, unlike most other fiction, magic doesn’t seem to have any sort of equivalent exchange most of the time - magic doesn’t seem to cost wizards anything other than the few seconds it takes to cast a spell. Wizards can regrow the bones of an arm - probably the whole arm - but do they share it? No. They don’t even capitalize on it - selling it, demanding trade for it. They hide away completely, helping no-on ever.So when I say American Wizards would be Trump supporters if they were paying attention, I don’t say it because I believe that American Wizards canonically denounce Muslims or are big supporters of sexual harassment. I say it because what Trump stands for is what they stand for - isolationism, selfishness, self-absorption, a cutting off of the world and helping only your own. A morality system that treats altruism as morally indefensible. There’s a Bioshock AU out there where Rapture was populated entirely by Potter wizards - is a wizard’s not entitled to the sweat of his brow?Harry Potter is a wizarding hero, but is he everyone’s hero? Is his support for the Wizarding World’s status quo much more laudable that support for Voldemort - or is it a case of lesser evil, of choosing the uncaring over the actively aggressive? Why are wizards any better than Jeff Bezos, say - unimaginably powerful, utterly self-serving. ‘Muggles would want wizards to use magic to make their lives better’ - why is that a bad thing? Why is magic only for the benefit of those born into magical privilege?In conclusion, Arthur Weasley needs to check his privileged wizardboo ass and not treat my magic-less culture like its goddamn quaint and charming.

[decanthrope]

@froekenpest (is it working now?) and I are talking about Draco’s characterization, specifically having lots of life history and dealing with it.

Every now and then, Draco stumbles with his feelings. It's shitty and he's the worst person to be around ever because he's moody and cruel and nasty and self-destructive, but he's the type to disappear when that happens. He doesn't want to be around anybody, and he doesn't want anyone to see him--for vulnerability reasons, but also because he knows it's not fair to lash out at people, even if he wants to (and he does).

I have this scene of Draco with his back to Harry. Harry trying to get Draco to talk about it, but the more he tries, the more infuriated Draco gets.

Harry just doesn't get it. He couldn't possibly understand the things Draco's grappling with, because their lives have just been too different. He wouldn't understand the way Draco needs to push at the bruises he's harbouring until they hurt and feel like they're bursting open, because that's his catharsis: remembering every single mistake he's made, every fucking choice that has led him to being where he is today, every cursed, wretched thing he's ever done that make him this ugly amalgamation that's more beast than human sometimes.

Harry couldn't possibly understand, and that infuriates him even more. Harry, the perfect human. Harry, who is lauded as amazing, who saved the world and is treated like a hero, Harry who can do no wrong.

He's so angry and bitter, and the next time Harry opens his mouth to say something, Draco jumps down his throat.

"Don't treat me like your charity case, Potter," he snarls, and behind him, Harry's mouth clicks shut in surprise. There's a second of silence, and then he exhales sharply, sounding angrier than Draco expects when he speaks next.

"Is that what you think this is--what you are? Charity?"

Draco smiles cruelly to himself, feeling the bitter words crawl up his throat and spill out of his mouth.

"That's what you do, isn't it, Potter?" he sneers Harry's surname acrimoniously, and doesn't have to be facing the man to see how he flinches at the animosity. "You take in the strays, people who can't get by without your help. Isn't that what you did with the  Weasleys? Pathetic and contemptible, too poor to even feed their children but too stupid to stop having more."

Harry's silence speaks louder than any words he could have said then. Draco feels the shame creeping up his neck, making his cheeks burn like he's standing in front of a blazing fire.

See? He wants to shout into the silence. See what I am? Not so eager to help now, are you?

The quiet continues, and Draco tenses and relaxes at the same time, waiting for Harry to explode, to shout abuse at him, to hit him, assault him, call him exactly what he is and what he deserves.

Harry doesn't do any of that. What he does is breathe, raggedly at first, and Draco counts the inhales, synchs up their breathing without really noticing.

Then, after what feels like a lifetime, Harry says:

"I won't be here if you're going to behave like this. When you've calmed down, I'll be in the living room."

He leaves, then: leaves Draco to his miserable desolation, and Draco triumphs in having driven him away. He's fiercely glad that Harry's left and incandescently angry at him at the same time. How dare he leave--how dare he not get angry--how dare he walk away?

He's so bitter and angry and resentful in that moment, because Harry is supposed to be different. Harry isn't supposed to give up on him, isn't supposed to leave him alone: that's just not what Harry does, and Draco is incensed.

How dare he be like everyone else? But then... of course. Of course he is. That's what Draco wanted: he wants to be alone. He wants to push people away, because that means he's right, that Draco is as big of a mess as he feels--that he isn't worth staying for, and the thought burns and burns at him, making him even more furious.

Draco feels like a volcano is about to erupt inside him. It's hot and angry and bubbling dangerously like if he so much as twitches, he's going to burst and breathe fire more savage than fiendfyre, and he wants to let it--good god does he want to just let it out and let it consume him and burn the whole world to the ground.

It won't come, he knows, because it never does, even when he's burning brightest and wants it most, it refuses to manifest and Draco is trapped with it simmering just under his skin, zinging through his veins until he wants to tear at his own flesh to make it stop. But he can't, because this is what he is. This is who he is--and that thought winds him higher.

(Of course, when he does come back down and regain sense of himself, he goes out and stiffly, unhappily apologises. He knows he's wrong, he knows what he said is terrible and not true, but apologising still hurts, even if Harry--and the Weasleys--deserves it.)

I think that's how Harry would handle Draco’s self-hating episodes. After the first couple times of them winding each other up and blowing up together, Harry would get smart and not engage when Draco was like that--just walk away and talk when he was less awful about things. And Draco would learn (conditioning, Harry is absolutely treating him like a dog, haha) that responding like that isn't appropriate or even a good way to handle things, and they'd end up doing better together. And that's how Harry helps.

[sideprince]

In the book the Weasleys are poor* but they come from Sacred 28 families ie. they still have class privilege and the marks of it. That's why Arthur stands up to Malfoy as if he were a peer, not as if Arthur was bravely challenging someone above him. It's why Molly is indignant about Fudge never having promoted Arthur. It's not just because they're good, hard working people, but because they have status and they know it. It's hard to see if you don't understand British social culture - class and wealth can be separate things, ie. someone can have lost their intergenerational wealth but be "well bred" ie. bear the marks of belonging to the upper class. The Arthur Weasley of the books has the confidence, paternalism, and self-assurance of someone raised in the most privileged class of British wizards, who chose the life and family he has and feels a noble pride in having done so, despite the lack of wealth.

The Arthur Weasley of the films, in contrast, behaves like a working class British man who musters the courage to stand up to someone like Malfoy because this Arthur behaves like he's inferior. He's a meek, measured man who knows his place based purely on wealth (or lack thereof) and nothing else, and accepts it. When he comes home from work in CoS he sits down at his own table and treats Harry, a stranger and guest, with mild curiosity instead of the genial welcome he gives him in the book as the master of the house (in the book he's also relaxing, yawning - cause he's been working all night - and making himself at home but there's also a lot to unpack in how the sexist harpyfication of Molly Weasley in the films also takes away from Arthur's character and this moment is a great example of it).

Instead of exhibiting the paternalism that comes with his book counterpart's status as a wizard born to a Sacred 28 family, he is merely paternal. His wardrobe, hair, and makeup all echo this, as well as where he's placed in the frame in a lot of shots when he's onscreen. And because he gets so little screen time and most of the moments he develops his relationship with Harry are cut, even the warmth of his character has no chance to leave a mark on the audience.

*The Weasleys aren't really poor, everything about them points to them being a middle class family with a lot of children to provide for. Having to get secondhand books and robes isn't a sign of poverty - young Tom Riddle and Snape are right there to give us an idea of what real poverty means in this world. The Weasleys don't rely on the Hogwarts charity fund to school their children, as far as we can tell. In DH it's even mentioned that Ron has spent his whole life being used to three comfortable meals a day so we know the Weasleys aren't scraping by or starving. They can comfortably accommodate not just one but two houseguests when they host both Harry and Hermione for the summer. They also own property - The Burrow and surrounding land - and have wealthy relatives, as evidenced by Auntie Muriel and her famous tiara. The Weasleys can afford to be "poor" in the ways they are because they have a large extended family as a safety net.

Ngl i’m a bit confused with your problem with Mark Williams playing Arthur Weasley. Are you mad about his physical appearance or the way he was written? Do you think he’s “dopey” because he’s not as skinny as you pictured him?

It isn't to do with his weight - it's to do with his facial expressions, way he portrays key information, lack of importance in the script and general costuming and style. So it is a mix of both his appearance and his writing. But I'm gonna talk about his appearance here. I'm not surprised you're confused about what I say, I rarely make any bloody sense lol my thoughts jump about

Mark Williams, for the scripts he was given, acted. I think he did a decent job at portraying the basic character he was written to be. That's more than I can say for Gary Oldman as Sirius Black lol

But he probably shouldn't have been cast at all, because Arthur's general character design was different to him for reasons.

If he was dressed up to portray something similar to the books tone for the character it would have been okay - his weight and height aren't the biggest deal by themselves. It's everything coming together that bothers me.

It's the colours and clothes they dress him in. The messy thick hair. That 'politely confused' expression he pulls. The fact he is so visually similar to Molly when he is so distinctly different. In the movies he is visually portrayed as 'Molly's soft husband' compared to her 'Fiery but sweet Matriarch'. That isn't who he is.

They didn't even give the intelligent, sharp, quick-witted eccentric nerd his glasses like what

Alan Rickman was overweight. Severus didn't come off as dopey. His character design for the movie was great not because it was accurate - it wasn't accurate - It was just designed well with regards to the sort of man Severus was supposed to be.

[tieitoffinlace]

😭🫶🏽

no bc why are all of the harry antis just dumb and lack media literacy 😭

"he was disappointed when ron was made a prefect" BECAUSE VOLDEMORT WAS IN HIS HEAD??? AFFECTING HIS THOUGHTS??? HARRY LITERALLY FELT GUILTY??? HES LITERALLY JUST HAVING MAGICAL INTRUSIVE THOUGHTS???

"he never gave the weasleys money" yes he did? its said multiple times throughout the series the weasleys were proud people who wouldn't accept his money. instead of giving it straight out to molly and arthur he bought their kids things and literally gave 1,000 galleons to fred and george?? that they only took after they were threatened?? because they're proud people??

the fact that yall are misunderstanding a CHILDRENS book this much is wild