 |
2.5 Speculation/Theory Zone – Life at the Orphanage
|
|
|
|
Everything here is a bit more theorizing on my part, a bit more of a stretch. So if you don’t like my speculation, feel free to think what you want and skip this section.
Kreacher knows the situation, despite everything he’s doing, isn’t great. Conditions are hard, not exactly comfortable, and he still has to work hard to keep everything going each week and ensure the kids are fed. But it is likely Kreacher still sees them all as a family.
10. Even when things are getting worse, you will need to find a way to cheer up.
He likely knows the situation is bad and he likely needs more help, but either for himself or for the kids, he “denies the truth”. He does this by putting up a “Home, sweet home” banner to help make the situation look better than it is. He continues trying to keep everyone happy (including himself).
6. Cooperation
You often need to learn to work with others when living on the streets and here there is no exception. "
A report: The first orphanage on White Sand Street, run by Kreacher Pierson, has officially opened.
Kreacher, as I said earlier, may be having a hard time keeping the orphanage running. Thus, this is why conditions aren’t better. Stealing doesn’t always earn him that much. Sometimes it may not earn more than if he had just begged on the street. It’s not always easy to find a wealthy target nearby and available. This “cooperation” may hint that, to really open the orphanage, he may have been forced to work with someone to open it.
From later deductions, this may have possibly been the church, and may be the reason Kreacher knows and is talking to a “Father Duke” in his character day letter
That may have also been why the kids are hinted at having had to work while at Kreacher’s orphanage from Robbie’s background and deductions.
(Robbie’s background)
In one night, Robbie had lost his spacious house, comfortable bed, delicious food… and his parents. His life is replaced by endless work and his emotionless boss. But with the help from his sister Dolores, he gradually got used to the work in the yard and gardening became his new hobby. Not long, the White Sand Street Orphanage was taken over by the church and the orphans do not need to work for life. Robbie somewhat felt disappointed about that. However, compare to Dolores dose not need to beg on the street and nuns were providing warm food for everyone, Robbie’s little hobby seems less important. After all, his life with his sister was back to the right track.
From Robbie’s background, we see that not all of Kreacher’s orphans started out with a bad life. Some, like Robbie, had it quite nice from the mention of “his spacious house, comfortable bed, delicious food”, until it was all suddenly taken away. Especially as a kid rather than an adult, Robbie likely hadn’t had to work at all before then. So, the sudden change in lifestyle would have come as an unpleasant shock. For anyone who’s had a good life, before suddenly being thrust into a situation where you suddenly have to work when you hadn’t before, no one would be happy with that. That’s why Robbie describes things as “endless work, and his emotionless boss”. Compared to not having to work at all, of course he’d feel like it was endless. With Kreacher, Robbie describes him as “emotionless” because, like any kid or person, he’s unhappy at being told to work as much as he is. But Kreacher’s lived with this sort of lifestyle for a long time, if not all his life. He’d be used to this sort of thing, but he’s also trying to get the kids to realize what it takes to survive. That’s why he may come across as “emotionless”. Not because he is, but more likely because he’s trying to show Robbie (and any others like him) a bit of a lesson in tough love. He may seem stern or harsh, but his intent is to help them in the long run.
|
|
|
The Pioneer skin for Kreacher may hint at this.
This skin also comes with the “purse” accessory.
Kreacher doesn’t “understand” because he learned and had to do all this as a necessity to survive each day. Trying to explain it all to kids that didn’t have to live like he did would of course be tough. No one ever explained this to Kreacher. He had to figure everything out on his own from an early age.
This plus the fact his intentions were to show them the reality of what it takes to survive could be hinted at by the purse. The purse could be referring to how Kreacher steals to survive and fund the orphanage, and the fact that “stealing” was something he was forced to do may be the sort of idea he’s trying to convey. Kreacher isn’t trying to teach these kids to steal in my opinion (Work and beg? Yes. Steal? No. He’s trying to help these kids live a better life than he did. And he wants people’s trust. If he encouraged or told them to steal, the kids’ relationship with Kreacher would be ruined), he’s just simply trying to get across the idea that you do what you need to survive. As I referenced earlier “only the strong survive”, while the weak are “torn apart”. Kreacher wants these kids to live. Thus, he has to show them a bit of tough love. It was necessary for their survival. )
Also, another reason I don’t think Kreacher taught the kids to steal or encouraged them to steal is because I don’t know if they’d be very successful if they tried. With their disabilities, they stand out very easily compared to other normal people, and when stealing that’s one of the last things you want to be. Rather, you want to be able to blend into a crowd if you were to try to commit theft, which isn’t something these kids will be able to do. Also, due to the fact they’re kids, I don’t believe they’d really be capable of stealing from an adult, as they’d probably be suspicious of any of these runts if they were to get that close. They also, unlike Kreacher, don’t have all of his experience, which isn’t exactly something that can really be taught. And unlike being on the streets, if any of these kids were to fail or get caught, it’s doubtful they’d be allowed to stay at the orphanage (if not outright sent somewhere bad like jail or straight to the church’s asylum or some other institution). Then there’s the question of whether they’d be able to survive whatever conditions they’d suffer as a result of getting caught. At that point, Kreacher would be unable to protect them or help them in any way (without getting him and the rest of the orphans in trouble). The simple version is that due to being young kids, street-dwelling orphans, and visibly disabled at that, due to their lack of skill and experience like Kreacher has, along with the danger if they were to get caught red-handed, (as well as my earlier reasons I’ve already covered) I don’t believe Kreacher taught or encouraged them to steal.
|
|
|
One last note about the Pioneer skin. Have you noticed that he’s only wearing one shoe/sandal?
I believe this also has meaning for Kreacher.
This could indicate he has “one foot on the ground”. This means that a person is realistic, practical, down to earth, and able to take care of themself. It could also mean the person is calm, not subject to extreme emotional reactions, or affected by exceptional changes in their situation. As I’ve described before, this is all very true about Kreacher. (Even the part about extreme emotions. If he were to get emotional all the time or act out in front of the upper class, he’d lose all the “trust” he had managed to earn. They could also possibly even do worse things to him, such as sent away or killed. He has no authority, no power, as a simple no-name, lower class thief, so he wouldn’t have the ability to stop them from doing whatever they wanted to him. That’s why we only really hear a lot of Kreacher’s true thoughts at the start and end of each of his diary sections, when we get to see what those thoughts are. )
Crack theory #1: This relates to Kreacher attempting to save kids off the streets and his desire for them to survive. What if part of the reason he’s so motivated and/or why he decides to show some “tough love” is because he had to deal with one of the kids dying recently? Remember those 2 pictures of Kreacher with the orphans? The picture with the “home sweet home” banner shows 5, while the one with the priest (who’s likely Father Duke) only shows 4. Do you know what I’m trying to get at?
One of the kids is missing. The little boy with the toy car (or whatever it is).
What if it’s because he died?
This relies on the picture of the “home sweet home” banner needing to be taken before the one other picture. If not, it would just mean the kid is missing simply due to likely not having arrived at the orphanage yet. This would be a lot less grim and sad than one of the kids dying, but I already brought up that not all the kids make it, and the fact it can’t be confirmed that the priest photo was first means the possibility exists (that the kid did die).
Remember deductions 4, 5, and 6? I believe in deduction 4, the “new child” may refer to this small boy with the toy car, which means the blood-stained sheets mentioned in that deduction would also be his. This boy is missing his “left side”, as he does not have a left arm, so there’s a good chance it may be him. The fact he’s smaller than all the other children could indicate he’s been at the orphanage for less time than the other orphans there. Then there’s the fact he’s so small means he likely isn’t as strong as the other children and as a result is less likely to survive any problems/damage/wounds he may suffer. After deduction 4 is deduction 5, which is when we see the banner mentioned. This could be proof that this picture with the banner is taken before the one with the church man, and I believe deduction 6, where we see the orphanage is now “officially opened”, is when this second picture is taken. So, this would mean the little boy died somewhere between deduction 5 and 6.
It’s really sad, but I wanted to bring up the possibility, as well as possibly see it as why Kreacher is so motivated or willing to act “emotionless” and strict as Robbie’s deduction describes him. He wants them to live, but being nice won’t always save lives. That’s why “tough love” is necessary. He can’t shield them forever. They need to realize what it takes to survive as well as toughen up to better handle the world (which won’t always be kind back to them).
|
|
|
Crack theory #2: What if the reason the orphans begged on the street was because they knew Kreacher didn’t have any money himself (but he still tried to help anyways) and/or even knew Kreacher stole to help them, and they wanted to help him out and/or share some of the burden?
Robbie’s background also hints to something the church is trying to do, which I will get into later, along with the purse, which also involves another subject I will discuss when we get there.
Lastly, regarding the children, I may have a bit more info to help put things into perspective. Simply, the kids may have had a better chance with Kreacher than they would've otherwise. Yea, he made them work, but they would've had to either way. And it would've been a lot worse than what Kreacher likely made them do.
People back then started getting into Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection, which led to eugenics and “selective breeding”. They believed people with impairments “would weaken the gene pool and reduce the nation's competitiveness”. This is likely due to how, during this time, countries were competing with each other to become more industrialized and create empires (show how they were more superior).
It was common for children like we see in Kreacher’s orphanage to be sent to workhouses or asylums. Workhouses were unsanitary, overcrowded, didn't treat the sick, and were no better than a prison. As a result, mortality rates were high. The food was even likened to poison. The “able-bodied” avoided these places if they could, which meant the disabled and mentally ill were the ones that mostly moved in. Speaking of work, children as young as 4 or 5 were expected to work back then (ever seen those images of chimney sweeps? ). Hours were long (14-19 hours every day), safety was pretty much non-existent, and conditions were filthy. Occupational death wasn’t uncommon, but parents made their kids work anyways to have help pay the bills.
Then regarding asylums, it didn’t matter if the disability was physical or cognitive (it was even possible someone completely normal would get classified as “insane” or handicapped). Later on, more people started getting sent here than to workhouses, which of course causes overcrowding. Then there was how some institutions used bars, chains, and handcuffs, as well as how conditions could still be filthy. Treatment got worse when politicians decided the programs cost more than they were willing to spend. This was combined with how society believed giving financial relief to people in their own homes encouraged laziness. So only the truly destitute got helped, but this meant those in workhouses, and no one wanted to be there long (remember Benny? ). Hospital superintendents focused instead on research and new medical treatment, not to mention electroshock therapy and hydrotherapy were a real method they used. Then there were psychiatrists that, despite their initial hope to restore these patients via moral treatment, lost their optimism and eventually came to believe most patients were " incurable". Asylums were seen to contain chronic and/or dangerous cases, and most inmate never left.
|
|
|
