Siblings are a bit hard as well – I don’t think he could have more than one, unless the others weren’t in close capacity. It’s just not likely we wouldn’t know. I myself have given Remus a younger sister, Artemis, and one plothole I’ve found is that it’s also very unlikely Remus’s parents would have had another child post- The Bite.
My!Remus is an only child, but actually I think it's entirely possible that he could have siblings we wouldn't know about because they're not part of Harry's story. When would he have had occasion to mention them? Not during PoA, because Harry doesn't know anything of his personal life until the end, and he only has a few cameos in OotP and HBP. And he could easily have been six or seven at the time he was bitten, an age when most people already have all the siblings they're ever going to have.
Ron. We already heard of an Aunt Muriel, and it’s possible he has more relatives. But once again, this has to be worked with. Why, if he does, do we never see or hear of them?
I agree that a deceased Weasley sibling is unlikely, but assuming that we're talking about aunts / uncles / cousins / grandparents, I think anything is fair game. (JKR mentioned on her web site that Arthur was one of three brothers, and it's unlikely that Ron's uncles are ALL dead.) The relevant question, I think, isn't "Why do we never see or hear of them?" but "Is there a good reason why we should see or hear of them -- would this information would be relevant to Harry's story?" These are storybooks, not encyclopedias, and they certainly don't recount every conversation Ron and Harry have ever had in their six years of friendship -- just the ones that add something to the characterization or plot. So I'd say fanwriters have a lot of leeway to develop new relatives IF their existence doesn't screw with plot points that are already set in stone (such as Harry being an orphan with no relatives other than the Dursleys).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2005-11-15 05:51 pm (UTC)My!Remus is an only child, but actually I think it's entirely possible that he could have siblings we wouldn't know about because they're not part of Harry's story. When would he have had occasion to mention them? Not during PoA, because Harry doesn't know anything of his personal life until the end, and he only has a few cameos in OotP and HBP. And he could easily have been six or seven at the time he was bitten, an age when most people already have all the siblings they're ever going to have.
Ron. We already heard of an Aunt Muriel, and it’s possible he has more relatives. But once again, this has to be worked with. Why, if he does, do we never see or hear of them?
I agree that a deceased Weasley sibling is unlikely, but assuming that we're talking about aunts / uncles / cousins / grandparents, I think anything is fair game. (JKR mentioned on her web site that Arthur was one of three brothers, and it's unlikely that Ron's uncles are ALL dead.) The relevant question, I think, isn't "Why do we never see or hear of them?" but "Is there a good reason why we should see or hear of them -- would this information would be relevant to Harry's story?" These are storybooks, not encyclopedias, and they certainly don't recount every conversation Ron and Harry have ever had in their six years of friendship -- just the ones that add something to the characterization or plot. So I'd say fanwriters have a lot of leeway to develop new relatives IF their existence doesn't screw with plot points that are already set in stone (such as Harry being an orphan with no relatives other than the Dursleys).