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?

Agree with this.

'The knowledge that hand me down wands aren't a good idea for learning isn't generally available (only mr Olivander and Dumbledoor seems to have it in Harry's circles)'- does seem unfair that most don't know this- shouldn't teachers at Hogwarts say, for one thing?

Agree re Ron being the centre of that- also he does moan a bit which emphasises it, though I do sympathise with him for other reasons.

Thanks for the info- and yes, that does make sense re Ginny...Poor Ron.

I always assumed the fact that nothing more than snogging ever happens in the books was because younger children were also be reading, but that's a good point : there' probably also spells to stop that happening.

I think their lifestlye is presented as a contrast to the Malfoys. The Weasleys are single-income, Arthur has an OK job but is not ambitious, Molly is at home. She knits, cooks, makes stuff, mends. Is frugal and careful about what she spends. The Weasleys love their kids, are secure in their own skins and have nothing to prove.
The Malfoys are much more about image and keeping up with the Voldemort-Joneses, their sense of worth is tied up in buying stuff, having stuff, impressing people.

Re the wands - Neville also had a secondhand wand. It doesn’t seem to have been very widespread knowledge that wands have allegiances.

It seems to me that a big advantage of being muggle-born is the better chance of getting a brand new wand!

but even then they sent him to school with a second hand wand, when it's established that's never going to work as well as one that is specific to you.
I agree they are just very shit with money and not particularly great parents to their younger kids.

It just wasn't generally understood it wouldn't work well for him (*). We learn the details in part 7 from Mr Olivander when Harry needs to understand some wandlore to correctly bet on the Elder wand "being his".

Hermione had no idea - so it wasn't explained in any part of school curriculum. Majority of wizards seems to never try using someone else's wand, and if they do, they just attribute it to wrong reason.

Neville has his father's old wand, which his grandma sees as a fitting tribute, but she wouldn't knowingly hinder him had she understood the consequences.

* if I have to speculate why it isn't that well known, I'd guess that they don't want to advertise much the overpowering someone aspect in acquiring a wand, and they don't want people to dig too much into it, wand is something you buy in specialist shop and a few kids with inherited one kind of fall through cracks.

But Ollivander says it to Harry in the first book, so I would say that it is well known enough, especially to a pure blood family like the Weasleys.

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense.

Ollivander says “the wand chooses the wizard, that much has always been clear to those of us who study wand lore” so I think that defines it as being more of a niche bit of knowledge limited to only those who are curious and passionate about learning these things? I’m going back to my previous point that wizards seem to have very little knowledge of magic that isn’t their special interest or skill, like Lupin not mastering the wolfsbane potion or Harry not bothering to learn how to heal wounds. There seems to be so little wonder or curiosity from many of them, I’d be reading every book in the library cover to cover and asking questions incessantly. I’d be annoying like Hermione, basically!

I think in the past lots of dc would indicate you were poor wheras today 4 dc often means wealth

I assumed Lupin was too busy/distracted to make the portion while working in a school. Whereas Snape has the ingredients, tools and the opportunity. Assuming Lupin has managed it in the past and just needs help right now.

Just done some googling and it seems that the Wolfbane Potion is highly complex, restricted and fatal if you get it wrong. Not something I would risk if I wasnt a potions expert, which Lupin isnt.

https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Wolfsbane_Potion

Yes, I think him not wanting to try makes sense.

But I wonder if Tonks could do it. Harry needs to takes a NEWT in potions to be an Auror so Tonks would have needed to do it too, so I wonder if she could make it for him.

I don't think he says that to everyone who goes to his shop. And even if he did, the consequences aren't clear.

Wand lore is seen as very niche area, Olivander says so in part 7 when Harry asks him about related stuff.

Majority of the wizzards just don't think about it and it isn't encouraged. At part 7 we see Harry with the wand Ron got from the Snatcher and Hermione doesn't see why it should not work for him. That means there is no mention anywhere whatsoever at 6 years of magical education.
Maybe the school doesn't want students to have their wands /their wands' aligience taken away.

Not quite true, she knows but feels guilty for destroying Harrys want so tries to convince him it doesnt matter, he just needs to try harder. She has the same problem with Bellatrixes wand but Harry decides to not mention what she said to him when she complains about it.

They can also afford to send all
tbeir children to boarding school.

Its a "state" school, so no fees to pay.

well if they don’t have to feed all their children in term time that must be a big help financially.

Definitely!

Agree with these...

.' I don’t think any mother in HP works?'-Re this : Hermione's is a dentist, but she's a Muggle. Do any others? It's strange: JKR clearly doesn't disapprove of mothers working, so there must be some other reason why we don't see any wizarding mothers working.

Maybe the need to homeschool kids before Hogwarts is one reason? Which makes me wonder, why is there no primary option?

Maybe...I'm not fully convinced but it' an interesting idea. You might like this blog post.

https://www.carrotsformichaelmas.com/2016/01/25/9-reasons-the-weasleys-are-probably-a-catholic-family/

I don't personally think there's textual evidence to support the Weasleys being ant birth control though...I think it's more likely they were trying for a girl.

I like to think that Neville’s father’s wand might have switched allegiances to Neville. One of the biggest themes is the power of love. Perhaps the wand knew what had happened to Frank and wanted to be owned by his son? It certainly never held him back in the fifth book in the DA.

There used to be an excellent set of essays by someone called Red Hen who theorised that Neville didn’t do well his first few years because he didn’t want magic at all, having seen what it had done to his parents. But when Voldemort returned (and Bellatrix escaped Azkaban) he realised he had to get over that if he was to be of any help in the coming war.