ext_11796: (Default)
[identity profile] lapin-agile.livejournal.com
Is there supposed to have been another Grim Truth post from Sirius? (Arthur tells him he saw his "entry last night.") If so I didn't and can't now see it. I did catch the exchange on Harry's journal where Sirius and Lucius exchanged barbs. Is that all that's meant when Arthur and Bellatrix say that Sirius provoked the attack Lucius led on the Cherwell camp?

Interesting bits and bobs in McGonagall's post tonight, too. (About the book's forgery; mention of Flitwick -- deceased, apparently -- from Molly; about the castle's protections; McG's note that Lucius is not a Legilimens and her clear anxiety about facing someone who IS one.)

ETA. Lucius talks about the provocation as though it was just Sirius' intrusion into Harry's comments thread.

More interestingly, Lucius links the disturbance in the camp with the "robbery" at Gringotts:
After the blackguard (no pun intended) retreated from the journal where he made a nuisance of himself, he apparently decided to incite an attempted break-out at Cheswell. It's all in the papers. He must have accomplices in this country, whom he induced through some method (doubtless an illicit and indecent form of magic) to disrupt the camps. Bella believes, as do I, that these culprits are the same miscreants who corrupted the Goblins enough to gain access to Gringotts and rob the bank last month. It makes sense: Their modus operandi seems to lie more in encouraging - possibly forcing - members of these inferior castes to rise up in revolt, creating chaos and bother for the rest of us.
I take Arthur's account as a truer representation of what happened at Cherwell (Lucius calls it Cheswell), which is to say that Lucius, Bellatrix and others went to the camp and took out their frustration with Sirius on the helpless captives (no uprising, no escape, no initiative on the Muggles's part, just a bit of Death Eater Muggle-baiting like we see canonically at the World Cup match).

I wonder if Lucius' linkage of the Cherwell and Gringotts incidents is more than just a matter of PR spin: perhaps the Gringotts episode was equally a matter of Lucius, Bellatrix, et. al. having done something extra-legal. Perhaps they went to Gringotts with a plan to empty a vault of something of value (the Philosopher's Stone, presumably) only to find that the vault in question (one they did not have legal power to access -- so what would their way around the Goblins have been? maybe I'm wrong) had already been emptied, though they thought that impossible, its rightful owner having been thought to be out of the country. In other words, I'm proposing that the substantial link between the camp riot and the Gringotts "robbery" might be that Lucius and cronies are the active agents in each case and that in each case they've concocted a story of insurgent lawlessness to cover their own dodgy dealing.

Also. It's not lost on me that Lucius hints that Sirius and his insurgent blackguards (a great pun) make use of Imperius to control Muggles.
wintercreek: A stack of books, the top one open. ([misc] addicted to the written word)
[personal profile] wintercreek
Oh, Arthur.

I was totally unprepared for the ways this game would break my heart. Between this and Minerva's having taken the Mark, I'm fairly shattered. We knew early on that it would be rough - early in the game, Minerva posted about "the frustration, the anger, that I am constantly crushing down" - but to know the true sentiment underneath and to see the exterior they must present is awful.

Sirius, of course, has been operating secretly and thumbing his nose at the idea of detection in typical fashion. This is more worrying than crushing, espeically as I suspect he has motivations not tied directly to his own safety - Sirius may be hoping that if he can project enough dash about his sometimes precarious concealment, he can bring some courage and heartening to others in more dangerous and thus more oppressively secret positions.

This raises some interesting questions, I think, about the long-term ramifications of the roles the Order members are having to play. How long can one mouth the positions required for one's cover before they begin to corrode one's soul? Not necessarily in a "You become what you pretend to be" kind of way (although that is a risk too! How long before one of Our Heroes is horrified by the automatic bigoted responses that spring to mind before anger at the injustices?) but more in the wearing, stifling kind of way. Sissela Bok, in her book Secrets: On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation, writes "Scientists working under conditions of intense secrecy have testified to its stifling effect on their judgment and creativity. And those who have written about their undercover work as journalists, police agents, and spies, or about living incognito for political reasons, have described similar effects of prolonged concealment on their capacity to plan and to choose, at times on their sense of identity."

From a literary standpoint, I'm intrigued by the character arcs this is likely to construct. My emotional attachment to the characters, though, means I'm dreading the toll this will likely take on them.
[identity profile] frozen-jelly.livejournal.com
Just was re-checking the friends page and realised Arthur's post has a new comment, which goes someway to explain how Minerva managed to keep such a privileged position despite her previosu close links to Dumbledore etc :
http://alt-arthur.livejournal.com/1372.html?thread=8284#t8284
ext_11796: (book_of_the_hunt)
[identity profile] lapin-agile.livejournal.com
Perhaps one of you pieced this together immediately. I haven't.

In the comments on [livejournal.com profile] alt_mcgonagall's 17 September Order Only post, Molly Weasley asks McGonagall if Lucius Malfoy asked to see "the book" during his visit to the castle. McGonagall responds: "As for the book - no, he did not. I believe we've duped him - at least this year."


Thoughts?




Aside: the question has been raised (on the previous thread) whether to start threads for each separate topic or whether this community risks developing too many simultaneous conversations. My vote is for making new posts for each separate topic (and for fresh rounds of speculation on old topics after they've lain dormant for a while). I find this helps me navigate the community if I want to find what someone said on a particular issue. For what it's worth (and in anticipation of the day when it becomes an issue for us), I also think it's helpful to keep threads from collapsing to outline by starting a new post to continue the ongoing conversation.

Profile

Fans of Alternity

July 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819 202122
23 2425 26272829
3031     

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 18th, 2017 09:53 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios