Why did Harry get a better 17th gift from Molly than Ron?

[PyongyangKipperbang]

Ron got a brand new watch from Molly and ARthur, Harry's was second hand....except that Harrys watch was left by her brother Fabian who was a member of the OotP and killed in the first war.

On paper it looks like Ron got the better gift, but it seems that Harry got the more meaningful one. Molly had 7 children after her brothers died and yet she didnt give any of them this heirloom.

Because he was a poor motherless child and no one had ever fussed over him.

Because they both had different needs. Ron is the sixth son of a poor family, and everything he owned throughout the series was a hand-me-down. The heirloom would have just seemed like another one to him.

Harry has loads of money and it doesn't carry much meaning for him - what he doesn't have is connection to his own family - an heirloom like that connects him to the Weasleys and indicates he is considered as much a part of their family as their own children.

Yes what @SafetyLightsAreForDudes said.

Spot on safety

Also at Xmas - Molly gives Harry a gift (jumper i think) but nothing to Hermione who is staying there too. Or did i miss it?

I think we should assume that she didn’t snub hermione entirely - we never get a list of hermiones presents though because she isn’t the protagonist

safety has nailed it.

I thought so Apple, it just struck me as i've been rewatching with DD.

Safety's explanation makes sense, but why didn't Molly give Fabian and Gideon's watches to Bill and Charlie? They both turned seventeen before the Weasley's met Harry. Bill and Charlie receive far fewer hand me downs as they are the eldest. They were also given presumably brand new gifts for becoming prefects and head boy.

fudge maybe aunt Muriel or another relative had been hanging on to it and passed it to Molly in a clear out. Sounds like what happens with our family heirlooms (hand me downs!).

If we're lucky this thread will turn into the same throat-ripping frenzy of a discussion as one on the Trennels LJ community (Antonia Forest fans) about whether the fictional Mrs Marlow was unreasonable to sell a family heirloom and spend the entire proceeds on a hunter for herself as a beautifully-bred pony for only one of her nine fictional children.

Come to think of it, I'm reading the HP books with my six year old - we're in the early stages of Prisoner of Azkaban -- and he's pointed out that we hear all about what Harry is given for Christmas by other people in first and second year, but never that he reciprocates with presents for other people.

I think Molly hung on to her brother's watch as a keepsake for most of the children's lives, which is why she didn't give it to Bill or Charlie. Then, having set a precedent for buying new watches for the children, it would have seemed uneven (one way or another) to give it to Ron or Ginny, so she gave it to Harry.

By which I mean, if she didn't give it to Bill, she kind of made it impossible to give it to any of the others without it seeming like a standout move, and maybe when Bill turned 17 it was still too soon for her to give it away.

Molly didn't bother knitting fleur a Christmas jumper because she is a horrible person and the mil from hell. She also sent Hermione a chicken sized Easter egg because she believed Rita's stories about her (and is a horrible person).
She also constantly fawns over Harry while snarling at her own children.

We hear all about what Harry is given for Christmas by other people in first and second year, but never that he reciprocates with presents for other people.

We hear about it in later books. I think it's Goblet of Fire where Harry buys Ron a Chudley Cannons hat that "clashed horribly with his hair". No, YOU'VE read the books too many times!

Minesril lolol
i am a bit like that - lovely to other kids then biting my own kids' heads off.
Must do better.