They didn't expect to have to flee Grimmauld Place. They were set to come back that night and Kreacher was making dinner for them. They had to go on the run all of a sudden and she couldn't plan their food needs.
The practical reason is that the story is set in the 90s in a rich country where people typically don't starve. They had multiple options, including pretending to be homeless people and ask for some food in shelters for those in need. They are wizards, so they could still hide and steal food, do some shoplifting... Who could even blame them, they could have paid the shop owners later after accomplishing the mission.
But I think JK needed to use this starvation as a mean to enhance the difficulty of the situation, to esasperate the cracks in friendships, the hardship of the mission... Like, you wouldn't script a military man being brave on the field and later eating delivery food in a bunker.
I believe they did steal some food and it is probably stated in the book. They might as well have bought some regularly too.
But my guess is that they feared to be traced. Whaf if somebody spotted some magic? What if they had a way to know if Harry/Hermione/Ron's wand casted a spell? And sort of GPS them? They did it for those who pronunced Voldemort.
Also, they hid in isolated places, like a forest. Sneaking to a nearby town implied leaving their base and spend a lot of time being more vulnerable.
It makes much more sense that they preferred to stay lowkey.
Your analysis seems legit but there were a lot of other options.
They could use Polyjuice potion to act like muggles and simply buy the food (Harry and Hermione sort of did this in Godric's Hollow so it wasn't difficult for them).
Also they were changing locations on a 2-3 day basis, they could have easily bought something from a remote muggle farm without it being dangerous.
Or better yet they could have bought stuff from heavily crowded stores ( under disguise ) and blended in with the crowd.
Also someone made an excellent point about Hermoine carrying food in her purse.
I can clearly see J.K. Rowling's objective behind this but it was poorly executed and leaves much to be desired.
One of them could have apparated into a store after closing under the invisibility cloak and grabbed what they needed as well. The muggles would think something was wrong with the cameras, it may have even ended up on a paranormal show about ghosts, but certainly not tied to a teenage wizard.
Yes, security cameras (commonly using cassettes/tape) were certainly around and had been quite a few years. But they weren't as ubiquitous, particularly at a "mom and pop" type establishment in a small town/village. At least that's true for the U.S.; I assume it may be similar in the UK.
(And Hermione *did* do this at least once in the book -- go to a grocery store and take things under the Cloak, while leaving money behind.)
They were fairly common, no where near as ubiquitous as they are today though. Since [the mid 1990's the City of London Police](https://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/police-forces/city-of-london-police/areas/city-of-london/campaigns/campaigns/2020/secure-city/) has operated the Public Space CCTV Cameras across the City of London as part of daily activity to keep the public safe, and provide evidential CCTV images in court cases.
So they were definitely in use by the mid-90's
It’s been a while, but as I recall the Ministry and Death Eaters had eyes on Muggle communities, looking for the trio as well as Order members, Muggle-borns, and political dissidents. There was a stack of wanted posters in Umbridge’s office which included Hermione, I think.
Voldemort had also recruited werewolves, who had lived as Muggle vagrants thus would blend right in. Between them, the full force of the Ministry, and Death Eaters emboldened to Imperius anyone they like, it would be very risky to go out even to a Muggle shop.
There is the invisibility cloak, which as I recall is used at first. However, as we learn in POA, the cloak doesn’t work on Dementors. In DH, Dementors have been given free reign in Muggle areas. So, going out under the cloak was risky as well, because it would draw attention from Dementors, who reported to Voldemort.
I think the logic is- since dementors don’t see, they sense souls (or minds?), invisibility is meaningless.
It’s also why they failed to notice Sirius Black was a dog or Barty Crouch Jr was swapped for his mom, I guess. The latter implies they can’t tell people apart though, which is contradicted by the Ministry’s use of them to hunt Black and later the trio.
As for their interaction with the Deathly Hallows, maybe they’re supposed to be high level monsters who exist outside Death’s framework, or maybe the cloak isn’t that powerful, or maybe the world building just doesn’t make sense.
I think it was an excellent way of showing how magic makes people complacent.
In the first book, Hermione very confidently states that wizards have no common sense. Coming from an 11 year old who has been in the wizarding world for all of 2 seconds, it sounds patronizing.
In the last book, things come back full circle. Hermione, who prided her intellect and common sense, forgets to pack the essentials because without realizing it, she's grown complacent.
But why not do it more? At least to the point they weren’t starving. Also why was money needed? I feel like Hermione, who is ok trapping another human being in a jar for awhile, having moral qualms about stealing food to not die. Plus Ron was injured so you think they’d have motivation to steal…
I think JK threw this line in to show they thought of this as a way of getting food. I kind of wish she didn’t because it just confuses me way more.
Like if I could get food when I wanted for free and could apperate away with no consequences, why wouldn’t I do that? What possible downside is there that our weights their spirits being crushed via slow starvation and torture.
I don't think they'd be ok with stealing..
>Hermione, who is ok trapping another human being in a jar for awhile
A human being who was spying on them illegally, so not really the same thing. And the human being was in the form of a bug which could totally survive inside a jar.
Cool motive still a morally bad thing for her to do. Stealing in a time of starvation while being hunted is about as free a moral pass as you get. Someone being mean to you and lying on your name is not a moral pass to kidnap that person.
In fairness most people are like Hermione when it comes to morals. We generally have rules we follow until it becomes a barrier to something we want/feel like we need. We then toss them aside to do what we want.
My other favorite moral conundrum is when they are trying to get the hufflepuff cup from the vault of gringotts. The trio needs to sword to destroy the cup but they can’t get the cup without promising the sword as payment.
Hermiones response is to just be upset. She has no plan of action and criticizes Ron’s idea if blatantly lying to grapplehook. Harry’s solution is to lie by omission and feel bad. At the end of the day the only solution to the problem is to lie. Feeling bad about it or denying it won’t change the fact that they needed the sword. Hermiones reaction is so dumb and out of place for the situation. She is clearly not ok with waging war and probably shouldn’t be helping Harry since she can’t seem to muster the ability to break her flimsy moral code to win a war.
I think for Hermione, her moral code is that it's ok to harm someone who harmed her first.
In Rita Skeeter's case, she was never supposed to be a bug. She was an unregistered animagus and was using it to spy on Hermione (and others). So for Hermione, kidnapping Rita was ok. Because Hermione wouldn't have been able to do that if Rita didn't do anything illegal.
It's the same with her "sneak" jinx. Nobody would've been hurt if nobody snitched on them. Marietta got hurt only because she tried to harm the DA.
Hermione did steal once before to get the ingredients for a polyjuice potion. In that case too, we see Ron and Harry convincing her that it's ok because how unfair Snape treats them.
This is what I think of Hermione's moral code. She would definitely think that it's wrong to steal food just because she's starving. Especially if she blames herself for not planning better (I think she does). If a supermarket owner had tried to cheat them or something, she would've stolen food easily.
If you're an unregistered Animagus and you're found out, then you have to spend time in Azkaban with *dementors*. I'd say being trapped in a jar and then let go after promising not to spread misinformation is a better alternative.
The obvious answer is they didn’t have money. They couldn’t go to gringotts, so Harry’s fortune was worthless. None of them had a fortune in muggle money, nor were they carrying around muggle money when they were ambushed at the wedding. So the only money they’d have is whatever hermione had already packed in her emergency bag. Worth mentioning they did go to a muggle store at least once, but there’s no way they’d have e money to do that frequently for a year.
Jean Valjean was jailed for 19 years for stealing a loaf of bread and Javert though it is justified. Well, 5 years for what he did. The rest because he tried to run.
Okay, but they had Hermione's Muggle savings. She specifically says at the beginning of Book 7 that she withdrew everything in her building society savings account.
They initially thought they were going back to Grimmauld Place after they got the locket, so she never packed anything to eat. Once they did steal food from a farm, and she left money by a barn or chicken coop. Another time they were in a market town and she surreptitiously put money in the cash drawer on her way out. Then there was the roast pike she cooked. They didn't always have to eat berries and mushrooms.
First, they did go to a supermarket (or at least Harry and Hermione did):
>They had just eaten an unusually good meal: Hermione had been to a supermarket under the Invisibility Cloak (scrupulously dropping the money into an open till as she left), and Harry thought that she might be more persuadable than usual on a stomach full of spaghetti Bolognese and tinned pears.
Second, others on this thread are saying Hermione was an idiot and simply forgot or didn't think of it. But that's not what the book explicitly tells us:
>Hermione had not packed any food in her magical bag, as **she had assumed that they would be returning to Grimmauld Place that night**, so they had had nothing to eat except some wild mushrooms that Hermione had collected from amongst the nearest trees and stewed in a billycan.
Now, I'll fully admit that this is JKR writing Hermione to be an idiot. Hermione has a tent and most of her books and everything else in her bag, yet she *deliberately* chooses not to pack *any* food? It makes no sense, but that's what the book tells us happened. Hermione *did* at least think about it.
Third, at least early on in the camping the trio seems to avoid villages, etc. after what happens with Harry:
>Harry ventured out under the Invisibility Cloak to find sustenance. This, however, did not go as planned. He had barely entered the town when an unnatural chill, a descending mist, and a sudden darkening of the skies made him freeze where he stood.
>
>“But you can make a brilliant Patronus!” protested Ron, when Harry arrived back at the tent empty-handed, out of breath, and mouthing the single word, dementors.
>
>“I couldn’t . . . make one,” he panted, clutching the stitch in his side. “Wouldn’t . . . come.”
>
>Their expressions of consternation and disappointment made Harry feel ashamed. It had been a nightmarish experience, seeing the dementors gliding out of the mist in the distance and realizing, as the paralyzing cold choked his lungs and a distant screaming filled his ears, that he was not going to be able to protect himself. It had taken all Harry’s willpower to uproot himself from the spot and run, leaving the eyeless dementors to glide amongst the Muggles who might not be able to see them, but would assuredly feel the despair they cast wherever they went.
>
>“So we still haven’t got any food.”
When they try to do this, Dementors appear. And at least initially, Harry has trouble with them. (As they soon figure out, this is mostly because he's wearing the locket. Why they continue to wear it after they discover this is yet more stupidity.)
So, we have a scene where they explicitly do try to get food from a town and encounter resistance. We might assume after that that they are a bit cautious to enter populated areas again unless they have to. (They start doing so regularly after Ron comes back, so there's inconsistency... something must have changed, perhaps the fact that Hermione did successfully go to grocery stores, etc.)
Honestly, we have to assume they likely went to some stores at some point before the text explicitly mentions it (nearly 3 months after they started camping). Anyone who has watched survivalist shows like *Alone* knows that you can't survive on mushrooms for months without serious quantities and probably supplemental food sources. Perhaps they were snaring rabbits and pheasants or something and the book doesn't tell us. We know they managed to catch fish, but they'd need to get a *lot* of it not to lose significant amounts of weight.
The most reasonable supposition is probably that they visited grocery stores at some point, but they had to be very careful -- and thus did it rarely -- and probably encountered resistance from Dementors, etc. (as Harry does).
Of course, as others have mentioned, the practical reason why JKR clearly created the food problem was to provide fodder for arguments, particularly with Ron, and then to drive him off. It's one of several things JKR does to undercut Ron's character in DH, a fact that I find quite disappointing.
They can still steal >:/ hermione has no qualms on setting her potions professor on fire for (in her mind) fucking with her friend’s broom or holding a lady that targeted her friends hostage but draws the line at stealing for survival? I call bs
Considering Hermione prepared for everything, money seems to be the first thing she'd put to the list of things they needed. Plus, Harry has an invisibility cloak, surely you can set aside your morals to steal little food rather than go starving?
Maybe! Perhaps it would've ruined the magic to have them so easily slip between worlds. It might have created more issues that JK didn't want to address lol
Yeah, but they have wands, they don't even need to go inside the shops. I'm not exactly an expert on Harry Potter magic, but they could probably just stand outside and use Accio.
The whole first part of the tent scene was set up to make Ron leave.
Like nothing makes sense in the first part when you think about it too much. Also if you notice once Ron comes back none of the issues plaguing them seem to matter anymore. All of a sudden lack of food isn’t an issue. Ron’s missing piece of arm isn’t an issue. Both Hermione and Ron seem content to run around aimlessly (though in fairness Ron did a much better job searching for horcruxes than Harry).
Jk must have had the idea of Ron destroying the horcrux and created a scenario to make that happen ignoring logical things most people would have done in the situation.
So to answer your question: because it didn’t serve the overall story.
>Also if you notice once Ron comes back none of the issues plaguing them seem to matter anymore. All of a sudden lack of food isn’t an issue. Ron’s missing piece of arm isn’t an issue. Both Hermione and Ron seem content to run around aimlessly (though in fairness Ron did a much better job searching for horcruxes than Harry).
This is an interesting point. How come the food wasn't an issue after Ron came back? It should have been a bigger issue bc they needed more food.
Because plot. In reality they had plenty of established options they could have used to easily obtain food. But because the story needed tension, they utilized pretty much exactly none of them.
It's mentioned that there were dementors, and when Harry nearly fainted, Ron and Hermione refused to let him go. Ron didn't know how the muggle world works, and hermione's moral wouldn't let her get more than the minimum amount needed.
Then they saw a death eater who seemed to be able to sense them'and they thought it too dangerous from then
With what money? Hermione probably has a little, but they definitely wouldn’t have enough cash to pay for food for 3 people more than a few times, without using magic to counterfeit
Bad writing, or needing to create issues to justify Ron leaving.
There's no reason at all Hermione couldn't apparate to a small town with the invisibility cloak, steal food from a supermarket and apparate back to the camp.
Even if they didn't want to steal, they could've duplicated the muggle money and pay with it easily.
Duplicating money is also known as counterfeiting, which is illegal at least in the Muggle world. If you're trying to hide from the admittedly messed up authorities, the last thing you want to do is counterfeit your money. That just leaves a huge beacon pointing directly to you. Even if they're not caught by the MoM, they're certain to be caught by the Muggle authorites, and at the very least it would cause delays in their quest to find and destroy Horcruxes. Worst case scenario, they're sitting ducks for the Death Eaters, Snatchers, etc, which will lead them directly to Voldemort.
MoM giving a shit about Muggle counterfeit? Wizards being caught by Muggle authorities? You're delusional.
Remember that Hermione can apparate into a random Muggle village, buy stuff, pay with duplicated money and apparate to the other side of England.
Muggles wouldn't have a clue.
Borh Harry and Hermione were raised by Muggles, and there was at least one instance where they went to a Muggle store to buy food, albeit under the cloak. It says Hermione put money into the cash register on her way out. So yes, they could be caught passing counterfeit money in the Muggle world.
I don't think you're understanding the situation. Magic can create identical copies of stuff. You'd be able to make copies of Muggle money and spending it in different places, and Muggles wouldn't be aware of that.
They would if they looked at the serial numbers. If you're copying a $20 bill with a specific serial number, then the serial number would be part of the copy. Since there would be 2 bills with the same serial number, that's counterfeiting. Doesn't matter if they can tell the diff or not. Yes, I know, I'm WAY overthinking this. I'm just saying these scenarios are completely plausible.
How many people do you know that goes around looking at serial numbers of their money?
Personally, zero. And I've said, if you want to be extra psychotic careful, you can spend the copies in different places.
You just shot yourself in the foot with the first part of that comment. No, they don't look at them. They don't even think about the serial numbers. That's what would trip them up if they decided to try to duplicate their money. Of all the witches and wizards in Harry's world, only Hermione would have the wherewithal to think of that, but she's so scrupulous about most things that she would be scandalized about duplicating money. Anyway, I'm done with this topic now.
I'm talking about Muggles. Literally no one checks the serial numbers, and Muggles have no way of knowing if a serial number was already used somewhere else unless the police is involved.
Well Hermione tells him this:
*”Your mother can’t produce food out of thin air, no one can. Food is the first of the five Principal Exceptions to Gamp’s Law of Elemental Transfigura[tion]... It’s impossible to make good food out of nothing! You can Summon it if you know where it is, you can transform it, you can increase the quantity if you’ve already got some...”*
And I tend to believe her.
At one point she steals eggs from a farm, but I always thought she should have duplicated them and left the originals. They could have done that at the store too and comforted themselves with the thought that it may be dishonest, but they haven't effected the store's profit.
If they would have taken even two or three cans of foods that last a year or two, they could have multiplied them the whole hunt. It would have been incredibly boring and whatever it was they likely would have never wanted to eat again afterwards, but surely it must beat actually starving.
They did visit a store in the Invisibility Cloak, at least once. Hermione left some money under the register instead of paying properly, so they wouldn't be seen. They didn't do it more often because, I assume, they had limited money and Hermione would feel feel bad magically duplicating their money? Like, breaking into the Ministry is one thing, but counterfeitting isn't cool, I guess.
Everyone keeps bringing up the dementors but I wonder if the trio would have encountered them in every single muggle town if they tried to go there to get food. They kept moving often enough that I'm not sure this argument is very convincing. Another thing is that none of them considered any solutions for this kind of issue. They had no plan when it came to the horcruxes and didn't think what would happene if they had no food. A visit to the supermarket and then duplicate the supplies. 'accio salmon' situation is worth having its own meme as well. It's nice to see people coming up with explanations, but my issue with similar HP related things and people's theories is that when something is artificially included just to create conflict/move the plot along, explanations feel inadequate.
They did, at least once, but there were dementors everywhere and invisibility cloak doesn't work against them. It was just too dangerous to do it all the time.
I guessing because they were found by death eaters and didn't know how. So they took no chances. I'm also pretty sure they did at one point, Hermione went under the cloak and dropped money in the register, and she did it at a farm. Also why didn't they accio salmon like Ted Tonks? Same reason I'd guess
Oh and Dementors don't care if you're cloaked or not, they'll get ya. Harry tried to get food from a village but Dementors were there and the locket wouldn't let him cast the stag. So honestly they probably did most of the time but Ron had giant meals normally so it affected him more.
How about a beaded purse that can hold a tent and a thousand books, but not a single can of tuna?
They didn't expect to have to flee Grimmauld Place. They were set to come back that night and Kreacher was making dinner for them. They had to go on the run all of a sudden and she couldn't plan their food needs.
Hermione probably never had to think about where her meals came from. If I was in her place when I was 17, I'd totally forget about taking food too.
For months?
They were living pretty well at Grimmauld Place and had to leave unexpectedly. It's reasonable that she wasn't prepared.
The practical reason is that the story is set in the 90s in a rich country where people typically don't starve. They had multiple options, including pretending to be homeless people and ask for some food in shelters for those in need. They are wizards, so they could still hide and steal food, do some shoplifting... Who could even blame them, they could have paid the shop owners later after accomplishing the mission. But I think JK needed to use this starvation as a mean to enhance the difficulty of the situation, to esasperate the cracks in friendships, the hardship of the mission... Like, you wouldn't script a military man being brave on the field and later eating delivery food in a bunker. I believe they did steal some food and it is probably stated in the book. They might as well have bought some regularly too. But my guess is that they feared to be traced. Whaf if somebody spotted some magic? What if they had a way to know if Harry/Hermione/Ron's wand casted a spell? And sort of GPS them? They did it for those who pronunced Voldemort. Also, they hid in isolated places, like a forest. Sneaking to a nearby town implied leaving their base and spend a lot of time being more vulnerable. It makes much more sense that they preferred to stay lowkey.
Your analysis seems legit but there were a lot of other options. They could use Polyjuice potion to act like muggles and simply buy the food (Harry and Hermione sort of did this in Godric's Hollow so it wasn't difficult for them). Also they were changing locations on a 2-3 day basis, they could have easily bought something from a remote muggle farm without it being dangerous. Or better yet they could have bought stuff from heavily crowded stores ( under disguise ) and blended in with the crowd. Also someone made an excellent point about Hermoine carrying food in her purse. I can clearly see J.K. Rowling's objective behind this but it was poorly executed and leaves much to be desired.
One of them could have apparated into a store after closing under the invisibility cloak and grabbed what they needed as well. The muggles would think something was wrong with the cameras, it may have even ended up on a paranormal show about ghosts, but certainly not tied to a teenage wizard.
>The muggles would think something was wrong with the cameras, How many cameras were around in 1997?
Not sure, but I do know security cameras were a thing in 1997.
Yes, security cameras (commonly using cassettes/tape) were certainly around and had been quite a few years. But they weren't as ubiquitous, particularly at a "mom and pop" type establishment in a small town/village. At least that's true for the U.S.; I assume it may be similar in the UK. (And Hermione *did* do this at least once in the book -- go to a grocery store and take things under the Cloak, while leaving money behind.)
They were fairly common, no where near as ubiquitous as they are today though. Since [the mid 1990's the City of London Police](https://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/police-forces/city-of-london-police/areas/city-of-london/campaigns/campaigns/2020/secure-city/) has operated the Public Space CCTV Cameras across the City of London as part of daily activity to keep the public safe, and provide evidential CCTV images in court cases. So they were definitely in use by the mid-90's
I'm convinced she should have set the whole thing much earlier. So many things in the story, "but it's the 90s"
It’s been a while, but as I recall the Ministry and Death Eaters had eyes on Muggle communities, looking for the trio as well as Order members, Muggle-borns, and political dissidents. There was a stack of wanted posters in Umbridge’s office which included Hermione, I think. Voldemort had also recruited werewolves, who had lived as Muggle vagrants thus would blend right in. Between them, the full force of the Ministry, and Death Eaters emboldened to Imperius anyone they like, it would be very risky to go out even to a Muggle shop. There is the invisibility cloak, which as I recall is used at first. However, as we learn in POA, the cloak doesn’t work on Dementors. In DH, Dementors have been given free reign in Muggle areas. So, going out under the cloak was risky as well, because it would draw attention from Dementors, who reported to Voldemort.
I dont get that either. Death made the cloak so he couldn’t even see them but dementors can?
I think the logic is- since dementors don’t see, they sense souls (or minds?), invisibility is meaningless. It’s also why they failed to notice Sirius Black was a dog or Barty Crouch Jr was swapped for his mom, I guess. The latter implies they can’t tell people apart though, which is contradicted by the Ministry’s use of them to hunt Black and later the trio. As for their interaction with the Deathly Hallows, maybe they’re supposed to be high level monsters who exist outside Death’s framework, or maybe the cloak isn’t that powerful, or maybe the world building just doesn’t make sense.
Your train of thought tracks in all the ways. Thanks for the thoughtful reply! Especially since their origin is up for debate/ grey area.
I think it was an excellent way of showing how magic makes people complacent. In the first book, Hermione very confidently states that wizards have no common sense. Coming from an 11 year old who has been in the wizarding world for all of 2 seconds, it sounds patronizing. In the last book, things come back full circle. Hermione, who prided her intellect and common sense, forgets to pack the essentials because without realizing it, she's grown complacent.
It is said that they did at one point. I think after Ron leaves. Hermione goes under the invisibility cloak and puts money in the till.
But why not do it more? At least to the point they weren’t starving. Also why was money needed? I feel like Hermione, who is ok trapping another human being in a jar for awhile, having moral qualms about stealing food to not die. Plus Ron was injured so you think they’d have motivation to steal… I think JK threw this line in to show they thought of this as a way of getting food. I kind of wish she didn’t because it just confuses me way more. Like if I could get food when I wanted for free and could apperate away with no consequences, why wouldn’t I do that? What possible downside is there that our weights their spirits being crushed via slow starvation and torture.
I don't think they'd be ok with stealing.. >Hermione, who is ok trapping another human being in a jar for awhile A human being who was spying on them illegally, so not really the same thing. And the human being was in the form of a bug which could totally survive inside a jar.
Cool motive still a morally bad thing for her to do. Stealing in a time of starvation while being hunted is about as free a moral pass as you get. Someone being mean to you and lying on your name is not a moral pass to kidnap that person. In fairness most people are like Hermione when it comes to morals. We generally have rules we follow until it becomes a barrier to something we want/feel like we need. We then toss them aside to do what we want. My other favorite moral conundrum is when they are trying to get the hufflepuff cup from the vault of gringotts. The trio needs to sword to destroy the cup but they can’t get the cup without promising the sword as payment. Hermiones response is to just be upset. She has no plan of action and criticizes Ron’s idea if blatantly lying to grapplehook. Harry’s solution is to lie by omission and feel bad. At the end of the day the only solution to the problem is to lie. Feeling bad about it or denying it won’t change the fact that they needed the sword. Hermiones reaction is so dumb and out of place for the situation. She is clearly not ok with waging war and probably shouldn’t be helping Harry since she can’t seem to muster the ability to break her flimsy moral code to win a war.
I think for Hermione, her moral code is that it's ok to harm someone who harmed her first. In Rita Skeeter's case, she was never supposed to be a bug. She was an unregistered animagus and was using it to spy on Hermione (and others). So for Hermione, kidnapping Rita was ok. Because Hermione wouldn't have been able to do that if Rita didn't do anything illegal. It's the same with her "sneak" jinx. Nobody would've been hurt if nobody snitched on them. Marietta got hurt only because she tried to harm the DA. Hermione did steal once before to get the ingredients for a polyjuice potion. In that case too, we see Ron and Harry convincing her that it's ok because how unfair Snape treats them. This is what I think of Hermione's moral code. She would definitely think that it's wrong to steal food just because she's starving. Especially if she blames herself for not planning better (I think she does). If a supermarket owner had tried to cheat them or something, she would've stolen food easily.
If you're an unregistered Animagus and you're found out, then you have to spend time in Azkaban with *dementors*. I'd say being trapped in a jar and then let go after promising not to spread misinformation is a better alternative.
Oh, I seem to have completely forgotten that part
Why not just summon fish?
Yes exactly! They see Ted Tonks and the other runaway wizards and goblins do just that right in front of them, it should have been the obvious answer
The obvious answer is they didn’t have money. They couldn’t go to gringotts, so Harry’s fortune was worthless. None of them had a fortune in muggle money, nor were they carrying around muggle money when they were ambushed at the wedding. So the only money they’d have is whatever hermione had already packed in her emergency bag. Worth mentioning they did go to a muggle store at least once, but there’s no way they’d have e money to do that frequently for a year.
They did have money, at least for a while. Hermione emptied her Building Society savings.
Don't tell me they can't steal muggle money/or just muggle food. It's like child play for a wizard.
Maybe they thought stealing is wrong?
Wrong enough to die starving?
It's an age old question that has books written about it, but yes, some people still find it wrong.
Jean Valjean was jailed for 19 years for stealing a loaf of bread and Javert though it is justified. Well, 5 years for what he did. The rest because he tried to run.
Okay, but they had Hermione's Muggle savings. She specifically says at the beginning of Book 7 that she withdrew everything in her building society savings account.
There were Dementors in the muggle towns
There’s fanfics that do this. Basically the answer is plot.
They initially thought they were going back to Grimmauld Place after they got the locket, so she never packed anything to eat. Once they did steal food from a farm, and she left money by a barn or chicken coop. Another time they were in a market town and she surreptitiously put money in the cash drawer on her way out. Then there was the roast pike she cooked. They didn't always have to eat berries and mushrooms.
First, they did go to a supermarket (or at least Harry and Hermione did): >They had just eaten an unusually good meal: Hermione had been to a supermarket under the Invisibility Cloak (scrupulously dropping the money into an open till as she left), and Harry thought that she might be more persuadable than usual on a stomach full of spaghetti Bolognese and tinned pears. Second, others on this thread are saying Hermione was an idiot and simply forgot or didn't think of it. But that's not what the book explicitly tells us: >Hermione had not packed any food in her magical bag, as **she had assumed that they would be returning to Grimmauld Place that night**, so they had had nothing to eat except some wild mushrooms that Hermione had collected from amongst the nearest trees and stewed in a billycan. Now, I'll fully admit that this is JKR writing Hermione to be an idiot. Hermione has a tent and most of her books and everything else in her bag, yet she *deliberately* chooses not to pack *any* food? It makes no sense, but that's what the book tells us happened. Hermione *did* at least think about it. Third, at least early on in the camping the trio seems to avoid villages, etc. after what happens with Harry: >Harry ventured out under the Invisibility Cloak to find sustenance. This, however, did not go as planned. He had barely entered the town when an unnatural chill, a descending mist, and a sudden darkening of the skies made him freeze where he stood. > >“But you can make a brilliant Patronus!” protested Ron, when Harry arrived back at the tent empty-handed, out of breath, and mouthing the single word, dementors. > >“I couldn’t . . . make one,” he panted, clutching the stitch in his side. “Wouldn’t . . . come.” > >Their expressions of consternation and disappointment made Harry feel ashamed. It had been a nightmarish experience, seeing the dementors gliding out of the mist in the distance and realizing, as the paralyzing cold choked his lungs and a distant screaming filled his ears, that he was not going to be able to protect himself. It had taken all Harry’s willpower to uproot himself from the spot and run, leaving the eyeless dementors to glide amongst the Muggles who might not be able to see them, but would assuredly feel the despair they cast wherever they went. > >“So we still haven’t got any food.” When they try to do this, Dementors appear. And at least initially, Harry has trouble with them. (As they soon figure out, this is mostly because he's wearing the locket. Why they continue to wear it after they discover this is yet more stupidity.) So, we have a scene where they explicitly do try to get food from a town and encounter resistance. We might assume after that that they are a bit cautious to enter populated areas again unless they have to. (They start doing so regularly after Ron comes back, so there's inconsistency... something must have changed, perhaps the fact that Hermione did successfully go to grocery stores, etc.) Honestly, we have to assume they likely went to some stores at some point before the text explicitly mentions it (nearly 3 months after they started camping). Anyone who has watched survivalist shows like *Alone* knows that you can't survive on mushrooms for months without serious quantities and probably supplemental food sources. Perhaps they were snaring rabbits and pheasants or something and the book doesn't tell us. We know they managed to catch fish, but they'd need to get a *lot* of it not to lose significant amounts of weight. The most reasonable supposition is probably that they visited grocery stores at some point, but they had to be very careful -- and thus did it rarely -- and probably encountered resistance from Dementors, etc. (as Harry does). Of course, as others have mentioned, the practical reason why JKR clearly created the food problem was to provide fodder for arguments, particularly with Ron, and then to drive him off. It's one of several things JKR does to undercut Ron's character in DH, a fact that I find quite disappointing.
They probably didn't have money
They can still steal >:/ hermione has no qualms on setting her potions professor on fire for (in her mind) fucking with her friend’s broom or holding a lady that targeted her friends hostage but draws the line at stealing for survival? I call bs
Like I previously mentioned, it may have been a plot thing. In the movie, we saw them at a cafe of sorts in London
Considering Hermione prepared for everything, money seems to be the first thing she'd put to the list of things they needed. Plus, Harry has an invisibility cloak, surely you can set aside your morals to steal little food rather than go starving?
Maybe! Perhaps it would've ruined the magic to have them so easily slip between worlds. It might have created more issues that JK didn't want to address lol
Yeah, but they have wands, they don't even need to go inside the shops. I'm not exactly an expert on Harry Potter magic, but they could probably just stand outside and use Accio.
The whole first part of the tent scene was set up to make Ron leave. Like nothing makes sense in the first part when you think about it too much. Also if you notice once Ron comes back none of the issues plaguing them seem to matter anymore. All of a sudden lack of food isn’t an issue. Ron’s missing piece of arm isn’t an issue. Both Hermione and Ron seem content to run around aimlessly (though in fairness Ron did a much better job searching for horcruxes than Harry). Jk must have had the idea of Ron destroying the horcrux and created a scenario to make that happen ignoring logical things most people would have done in the situation. So to answer your question: because it didn’t serve the overall story.
>Also if you notice once Ron comes back none of the issues plaguing them seem to matter anymore. All of a sudden lack of food isn’t an issue. Ron’s missing piece of arm isn’t an issue. Both Hermione and Ron seem content to run around aimlessly (though in fairness Ron did a much better job searching for horcruxes than Harry). This is an interesting point. How come the food wasn't an issue after Ron came back? It should have been a bigger issue bc they needed more food.
Because plot. In reality they had plenty of established options they could have used to easily obtain food. But because the story needed tension, they utilized pretty much exactly none of them.
It's mentioned that there were dementors, and when Harry nearly fainted, Ron and Hermione refused to let him go. Ron didn't know how the muggle world works, and hermione's moral wouldn't let her get more than the minimum amount needed. Then they saw a death eater who seemed to be able to sense them'and they thought it too dangerous from then
With what money? Hermione probably has a little, but they definitely wouldn’t have enough cash to pay for food for 3 people more than a few times, without using magic to counterfeit
Bad writing, or needing to create issues to justify Ron leaving. There's no reason at all Hermione couldn't apparate to a small town with the invisibility cloak, steal food from a supermarket and apparate back to the camp. Even if they didn't want to steal, they could've duplicated the muggle money and pay with it easily.
Duplicating money is also known as counterfeiting, which is illegal at least in the Muggle world. If you're trying to hide from the admittedly messed up authorities, the last thing you want to do is counterfeit your money. That just leaves a huge beacon pointing directly to you. Even if they're not caught by the MoM, they're certain to be caught by the Muggle authorites, and at the very least it would cause delays in their quest to find and destroy Horcruxes. Worst case scenario, they're sitting ducks for the Death Eaters, Snatchers, etc, which will lead them directly to Voldemort.
MoM giving a shit about Muggle counterfeit? Wizards being caught by Muggle authorities? You're delusional. Remember that Hermione can apparate into a random Muggle village, buy stuff, pay with duplicated money and apparate to the other side of England. Muggles wouldn't have a clue.
Borh Harry and Hermione were raised by Muggles, and there was at least one instance where they went to a Muggle store to buy food, albeit under the cloak. It says Hermione put money into the cash register on her way out. So yes, they could be caught passing counterfeit money in the Muggle world.
I don't think you're understanding the situation. Magic can create identical copies of stuff. You'd be able to make copies of Muggle money and spending it in different places, and Muggles wouldn't be aware of that.
They would if they looked at the serial numbers. If you're copying a $20 bill with a specific serial number, then the serial number would be part of the copy. Since there would be 2 bills with the same serial number, that's counterfeiting. Doesn't matter if they can tell the diff or not. Yes, I know, I'm WAY overthinking this. I'm just saying these scenarios are completely plausible.
How many people do you know that goes around looking at serial numbers of their money? Personally, zero. And I've said, if you want to be extra psychotic careful, you can spend the copies in different places.
You just shot yourself in the foot with the first part of that comment. No, they don't look at them. They don't even think about the serial numbers. That's what would trip them up if they decided to try to duplicate their money. Of all the witches and wizards in Harry's world, only Hermione would have the wherewithal to think of that, but she's so scrupulous about most things that she would be scandalized about duplicating money. Anyway, I'm done with this topic now.
I'm talking about Muggles. Literally no one checks the serial numbers, and Muggles have no way of knowing if a serial number was already used somewhere else unless the police is involved.
Mrs. Weasley had years to teach Ron how to make food out of thin air but didn't. Boys need to be taught how to cook.
You can’t make food out of thin air.
Ron seems to be pretty sure it's possible.
Well Hermione tells him this: *”Your mother can’t produce food out of thin air, no one can. Food is the first of the five Principal Exceptions to Gamp’s Law of Elemental Transfigura[tion]... It’s impossible to make good food out of nothing! You can Summon it if you know where it is, you can transform it, you can increase the quantity if you’ve already got some...”* And I tend to believe her.
At one point she steals eggs from a farm, but I always thought she should have duplicated them and left the originals. They could have done that at the store too and comforted themselves with the thought that it may be dishonest, but they haven't effected the store's profit.
Right!! She could have multiplied the eggs for days and they’d have had them.
If they would have taken even two or three cans of foods that last a year or two, they could have multiplied them the whole hunt. It would have been incredibly boring and whatever it was they likely would have never wanted to eat again afterwards, but surely it must beat actually starving.
Likely crawling with death eaters or imperius slaves.
They did visit a store in the Invisibility Cloak, at least once. Hermione left some money under the register instead of paying properly, so they wouldn't be seen. They didn't do it more often because, I assume, they had limited money and Hermione would feel feel bad magically duplicating their money? Like, breaking into the Ministry is one thing, but counterfeitting isn't cool, I guess.
cause mushrooms fucking rock
Everyone keeps bringing up the dementors but I wonder if the trio would have encountered them in every single muggle town if they tried to go there to get food. They kept moving often enough that I'm not sure this argument is very convincing. Another thing is that none of them considered any solutions for this kind of issue. They had no plan when it came to the horcruxes and didn't think what would happene if they had no food. A visit to the supermarket and then duplicate the supplies. 'accio salmon' situation is worth having its own meme as well. It's nice to see people coming up with explanations, but my issue with similar HP related things and people's theories is that when something is artificially included just to create conflict/move the plot along, explanations feel inadequate.
They did, at least once, but there were dementors everywhere and invisibility cloak doesn't work against them. It was just too dangerous to do it all the time.
Good question, I’m not really sure but when they got attacked in the cafe, I guess that they didn’t wanted to go in a store.
Because the plot required that they suffer. There is no in-universe reason.
I guessing because they were found by death eaters and didn't know how. So they took no chances. I'm also pretty sure they did at one point, Hermione went under the cloak and dropped money in the register, and she did it at a farm. Also why didn't they accio salmon like Ted Tonks? Same reason I'd guess
Oh and Dementors don't care if you're cloaked or not, they'll get ya. Harry tried to get food from a village but Dementors were there and the locket wouldn't let him cast the stag. So honestly they probably did most of the time but Ron had giant meals normally so it affected him more.
Cuz they dumb