AIBU to think the Weasleys were not actually poor?

[Jane379]

With the HBO show coming up I've been rereading the books and on several forums discussing them I've noted people describing the Weasleys as poor, saying they're a good portrayal of a poor family etc
I'd seen this before and assumed I must have missed those details but rereading (although not fully finished the series yet), they don't strike me as particularly poor. They have 7 kids which means money is tighter, Ron has hand me downs etc but overall they seem comfortable. Arthur has a steady job, Molly is a SAHM - presumably if they were really in financial trouble she would get a paid job too. A lot of families might find 7 kids financially tricky, rely on hand me downs etc, not holiday abroad much but is that necessarily poor?

I will say my own experience growing up with a single mother in fairly low-paid work was that we did scrimp on various things including holidays (which we never did when I was a child), but we could always afford good enough food, necessary clothes, had a warm house & books etc that I wanted (living in a place with good libraries and various cheaper services helped). A bit like Ron, I went to a school where a lot of people were much more well-off, but I'd never have considered myself poor. That would have felt insulting given far too many people (even more now) lack money for essentials or have enough for basics but not much else.

AIBU?

I agree overall but re this : manage with a broken wand for nearly a whole year

• again I need to check but I think when he told his parents about the wand they did replace it. Wasn't the problem that he didn't want to say?

Oh I hadn't seen this one! Would love to read..

Good point. But the only reason Ron wouldn't admit to breaking his wand would be because he knew they couldn't afford to buy him a new one (I think he gets a new one when they win the lottery money). So he feels guilty that he broke something that they couldn't afford to replace. So yes, you're right, but he wouldn't have got a new wand at all, presumably, if they hadn't won the lottery!

I agree they don’t seem poor at all. Most people can’t afford a massive house in the countryside but maybe if you are a wizard you can just magic one up. I’m not sure what the wizard planning permission laws are like .

they’d had their dcs very young- that's a good point, I forgot that. I wonder why? I suppose maybe Molly wanted to start their family early?

Re fees, in 2015 JKR said the Ministry of Magic pays all the fees, so that wouldn't be an issue.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-reveals-that-hogwarts-has-no-tuition-fee-and-uncle-vernon-loves-top-gear-in-latest-harry-potter-twitter-chat-10400874.html

That's a good point : they are poor in relation to others at Hogwarts. Like the Ballet Shoes comparison..

It’s all class, snobbishness and eccentricity. I don’t think any mother in HP works? Weasleys could use magic to tidy things up, but don’t care enough to do so - different priorities and a contrast to Malfoys. You can’t conjure up food, but you can improve it. You can repair clothing and probably transform it (poor Ron’s dress robes).

I am re reading the ballet shoes now actually, and it has always annoyed me that they are poor but keep Cook and Clara as domestic staff! Surely Sylvia and Nana could do it between them?

What are you on about?! I was born in 1982 and went abroad on holiday every year from the age of 5 - Yugoslavia was my first holiday when it existed. We were not rich - small 3 bed semi, dad worked, mum sahm until I was older and she went part time. Travel was very very normal in the 1990s 🤣

I think in wizard terms, compared to the Malfoys, they were poor but largely due to many dc. We’re probably similar in having 3 dc but good income yet compared to friends on lower incomes with 2 dc, we have similar cash available despite our careers. Older teens are expensive. Anyway, in wizard terms, they were poor compared to others.

They are Irish Catholic coded and fulfilling those stereotypes. It can't make more sense than a stereotype does.

I grew up in the 1970s/80s, the 80s were the hey day of the relatively affordable package holiday to the Med! EasyJet started flying internationally in 1996. It wasn’t the dark ages!

I grew up in family of 4 kids. We did leave the country occasionally, admittedly usually by car ferry.

lol at not travelling aboard in the late 90s. Perhaps it's because we couldn't get the penny farthing or the horse and carriage onto the plane.

They didn’t have muggle money - they were interested in Harry’s. No Tesco - where did they buy food and clothes?
They were implausibly poor given that Molly did absolutely nothing to generate any extra income. Who doesn’t work when you can’t afford new robes or to replace a broken wand? Hogwarts were arseholes with the new book list every year for every student.

They only survive because they use magic to make a single chicken feed the whole family for a week.

And they could earn more but they are obviously too busy having sex to churn out all those kids.

They're a family of witches and wizards so could have done that themselves.

I know the 90s were 30 years ago but...but really. Are you thinking of holiday-norms from the 1890s....

The Weasleys being poor was more a function of the plot than actual reality. None of it makes sense when you consider the realities of magic/kids being out of the house. Especially before the OOP started ramping up again.

This!

Also we’re all a lot poorer now so they dont really seem poor. But they get described as poor in the books.

But that coding just doesn’t really work at all if they’re an old English wizarding family. They read more to me in some ways as well-born, charming, eccentric, but cash-poor bohemians, apart from the fact that Arthur is a fairly lowly Ministry drone and Molly appears to be a household drudge. And Ron is embarrassed by his handmedowns rather than sneering at nouveau riche Malfoy with his brand-new everything and obvious social insecurity. At a certain kind of public school it would be the other way round. His ancient stuff would code him as being from generations of the Right Type.

ETA Having thought, I think JKR is doing a lot of work (poverty, handmedowns, red hair etc) to make it look as if Harry is befriending a fellow-outsider in Ron, rather than a thoroughly Establishment figure.

But then the Malfoys are equally oddly coded — in some ways they seem the ultimate nouveau riches. Or at least as though Lucius married up by bagging old-money Narcissa.

I’m not sure JKR had much of a handle on social class.

It's one of many unexplained inconsistencies in the Potter universe. It appears to be possible to just conjure what you need from nowhere, so why any form of poverty exists in the wizarding world is a mystery.

I quite enjoyed the books and films, but to be honest, Rowling isn't a fantastic writer.

@Jane379 - you’ll have to forgive those of us who were there for finding your observation on holidays abroad not being common in the 90s wildly hilarious. 😂

My brain is melting but here’s the gist:

Yeah, my family weren't well off and my dad wasn't a fan of the heat, but my first trip abroad was in 1979. Before my sister was born, my parents travelled around Italy and Germany quite extensively, in the early 60s.

How do you read books if you don’t try to understand the characters?

Red hair, poor, hospitable, many children, lots of hearty food, good at sports, fierce matriarch...

The coding is there. The HP world is not a consistent match with ours.

Yes, I agree Lucius 'married up'. The Blacks are proper posh.