[ SECRET POST #2296 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2296 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 056 secrets from Secret Submission Post #328.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[philstar22]

I do think the sentiment is there. I disagree that McGonagall is part of it because she is awesome. But the whole Bellatrix v. Molly, childlessness v. motherhood random showdown that made no sense did have the feeling that motherhood trumps everything to it.

[(Anonymous)]

wait, wait, wait? Random? Didn't Molly just lose a child? And didn't Bellatrix nearly kill another child of hers? How was it a random showdown?

And I don't think it was "motherhood trumps everything", I think it was "a mother kicked evil's ass". Can't mothers have that? Considering how many times in other stories we take a backseat?

[philstar22]

Random from a literary sense because there were better choices (Neville, Harry, Remus, Augusta Longbottom, etc.). And there is no way Molly should have been able to beat Bellatrix. I could have believed it if she sent a spell at her that managed to hit. But a duel? No. Bellatrix was Voldemort's best, and we have no evidence that Molly has any fighting experience. It makes no sense apart from JKR trying to convey the idea that motherhood conveys some special power that no one else can possibly possess.

[(Anonymous)]

It makes no sense apart from JKR trying to convey the idea that motherhood conveys some special power that no one else can possibly possess.

Motherhood isn't some special designation given by the gods. BUT. When a child is threatened, a mother WILL react even if it seems out of character. This isn't some mystical shit, it's natural. Bears will tear you a new asshole if you go near their cubs. Molly had just lost one child and Bellatrix had nearly just killed her only daughter, while laughing if I remember right. Call it whatever you want, but that would give Molly that extra whatever she needed to kick that witch's ass. It's no different than Neville suddenly going bad-ass with a sword or wand, and standing up to Voldemorte over past crimes against his family.

[philstar22]

I could buy a sudden burst of power where she threw a spell at Bellatrix and hit her. But that doesn't explain her winning a duel. And it certainly doesn't explain why the people around her allowed her to duel Bellatrix alone. That was just stupid.

[fuchsiascreams]

I don't understand all of the conclusions people are drawing up and down this thread. The fact that it happened does not mean that she's making a fucking implication, holy shit. Like the person upthread who said that J. K. Rowling was "implying" that children who come from loveless relationships (Voldemort, who was conceived because his unmarried mother used a Love Potion on his father) turned out badly. What? HER WRITING IT INTO THE BOOKS DOES NOT MEAN THAT SHE IS DRAWING AN IMPLICATION. Correlation =/= causation.

[(Anonymous)]

Don't fucking throw around science terms incorrectly like that. It's not even remotely relevant to what your saying. Passages in her book either imply certain things or they don't. That's not correlation or causation.

You clearly don't understand what an implication is. Almost everything people say, do or write has implications. The most of the exceptions being when people are being *explicit* instead.

Also, JKR *explicitly* stated in an interview that Voldemort couldn't love because he was conceived while his father was under a love potion. Now, if you're a believe in Death to the Author you can ignore that as "not canon", but that doesn't mean people are wrong to question *why* she decided that and shared it in an interview.

[fuchsiascreams]

..Yes, and Bellatrix also went after some of those characters, if you read the series. She went after Harry and Neville. She went after Lupin and Tonks. So I'm not really sure what your point is here.

[(Anonymous)]

Why do you assume that Molly wasn't always a badass but didn't feel the need to act?

Granted I haven't read the books in a while but I don't recall there being a time that it was said that Molly was not skilled. People can wield great power and not use it or be afraid to stand up.

And now I've invented a headcanon where Molly was an assassin. Thanks.

[(Anonymous)]

If Molly really was badass enough to match Bellatrix for *skill* (even augmented by grief/protective instincts) - as demonstrated via a *duel* instead of a single "lucky" hit then that should of been forshadowed earlier in the series.

Otherwise that's shitty writing.