I think Rowling just didn't think things through here. You're not the only one who is thoroughly baffled by why Sirius inherited his house and, also, how he managed to pass it on to Harry.
The person behind Red Hen Publications theorized that Dumbledore was covering up the fact that Sirius's brother was still alive, which of course turned out not to be true (as far as we know... come to think of it, where's the actual proof?), but it was a good theory that at least tried to explain the otherwise silly premise that the house could pass to Bellatrix.
Here's an excerpt:
I’ve been grousing ever since HBP came out over how JKR could overlook such a fundamental point of British common law — which long predates a separate wizarding world — that clearly states that you cannot legally benefit from committing a murder. This is one of the fundamental principles of all murder mysteries, to which the Harry Potter series bears way too close a resemblance in form for JKR to be unaware of. Three quarters of mystery fiction is engaged in finding out who secretly benefits from the murder (or in what way they benefit) in order to figure out who did it.
There were any number of witnesses — on both sides — who watched Bellatrix knock her cousin through the Veil. She killed him. Publicly. She cannot inherit from him! Not if the wizarding world has the slightest expectation of functioning as a just society. You cannot have a just society if your citizens are periodically murdered and society just hands their goods over to the murderer without protest. That is just plain immoral! The ww that we’ve become acquainted with obviously hasn’t got a clue about ethics, but it does seem to have morals.
I like reading Red Hen's stuff. Even the things that didn't turn out to be true in canon are such interesting ideas or at least make you start thinking in a different way.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2009-09-23 12:57 am (UTC)The person behind Red Hen Publications theorized that Dumbledore was covering up the fact that Sirius's brother was still alive, which of course turned out not to be true (as far as we know... come to think of it, where's the actual proof?), but it was a good theory that at least tried to explain the otherwise silly premise that the house could pass to Bellatrix.
Here's an excerpt:
I’ve been grousing ever since HBP came out over how JKR could overlook such a fundamental point of British common law — which long predates a separate wizarding world — that clearly states that you cannot legally benefit from committing a murder. This is one of the fundamental principles of all murder mysteries, to which the Harry Potter series bears way too close a resemblance in form for JKR to be unaware of. Three quarters of mystery fiction is engaged in finding out who secretly benefits from the murder (or in what way they benefit) in order to figure out who did it.
There were any number of witnesses — on both sides — who watched Bellatrix knock her cousin through the Veil. She killed him. Publicly. She cannot inherit from him! Not if the wizarding world has the slightest expectation of functioning as a just society. You cannot have a just society if your citizens are periodically murdered and society just hands their goods over to the murderer without protest. That is just plain immoral! The ww that we’ve become acquainted with obviously hasn’t got a clue about ethics, but it does seem to have morals.
I like reading Red Hen's stuff. Even the things that didn't turn out to be true in canon are such interesting ideas or at least make you start thinking in a different way.