![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pauraque_bkATTN ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
lizbee and chresimos: I got bumped off AIM, and when I came back, you were both gone. I am not shunning you. -_-
semirhage527 made re-read icons! Like this one! Whee!
In Chapter 4, we discussed how James became Head Boy and what the Killing Curse does/requires, and we couldn't figure out why Hagrid cursed Dudley.
sistermagpie has also made a long post about Petunia, jumping off from our discussion here. This is the best and most in-depth analysis of Petunia I've seen, and I agree heartily with the conclusions. The thoughts on how wizards view family are also superb.
PS 5: Diagon Alley
Another problem is that in this universe, there's very little evidence that magicians were successfully persecuted by Muggles. In PoA we learn that witches only pretended to die from being burnt at the stake... Doesn't that leave a gaping hole in the logic here? If HP wizards have nothing to fear from Muggles, what do they have to lose by helping them?
By the way, Sirius dies on page 711 of the UK edition of OotP. Probably a coincidence. I digress again.
Draco is very chatty in this scene. He spontaneously initiates a conversation with Harry, having no idea who Harry is. This is our only view of Draco interacting alone with someone he thinks is, or might be, a friendly equal.
This also resolves the question of whether V was generally thought to have been a Slytherin.
Past re-read posts are here.
lizbee and chresimos: I got bumped off AIM, and when I came back, you were both gone. I am not shunning you. -_-semirhage527 made re-read icons! Like this one! Whee!In Chapter 4, we discussed how James became Head Boy and what the Killing Curse does/requires, and we couldn't figure out why Hagrid cursed Dudley.
sistermagpie has also made a long post about Petunia, jumping off from our discussion here. This is the best and most in-depth analysis of Petunia I've seen, and I agree heartily with the conclusions. The thoughts on how wizards view family are also superb.PS 5: Diagon Alley
'Wizards have banks?'What's the effect on an economy/society when there's only one bank?
'Just the one. Gringotts. Run by goblins.' (50)
'How did you get here?' Harry asked, looking around for another boat.Er. With what? The umbrella? Mary Poppins!Hagrid.
'Flew,' said Hagrid. (50-51)
'Well, [the Ministry's] main job is to keep it from Muggles that there's still witches an' wizards up an' down the country.'This is... problematic. It seems likely that magic wouldn't just be of minor use to the Muggle world, but could also resolve major issues such as deadly disease and injury. Hagrid doesn't consider that, though -- it's about the wizards' convenience.
'Why?'
'Why? Blimey, Harry, everyone'd be wantin' magical solutions to their problems. Nah, we're best left alone.' (51)
Another problem is that in this universe, there's very little evidence that magicians were successfully persecuted by Muggles. In PoA we learn that witches only pretended to die from being burnt at the stake... Doesn't that leave a gaping hole in the logic here? If HP wizards have nothing to fear from Muggles, what do they have to lose by helping them?
UniformCanonical student dress, in case anyone wanted to know. Costuming is the one area in HP where fic writers seem to feel very free in taking from the movies. I can't say I'm bothered by it -- though it would be nice to see a pointed hat every once in a while.
First-year students will require:
1. Three sets of plain work robes (black)
2. One plain pointed hat (black) for day wear
3. One pair of protective gloves (dragon hide or similar)
4. One winter cloak (black, silver fastenings)
(52)
Students may also bring an owl OR a cat OR a toadRon is allowed to have a rat. This is a clear error on JKR's part, no? Seems like it should have been corrected in later editions.
(53)
[Y]et somehow, even though everything Hagrid had told him so far was unbelievable, Harry couldn't help trusting him. (53)Because Harry's never been treated kindly in his life, I'd imagine, not because Hagrid is inherently trustworthy.
'Is [Quirrell] always that nervous?'It seems plain that Quirrell taught at the school before this year. I don't know why, but I often see people questioning this.
'Oh, yeah. Poor bloke. Brilliant mind. He was fine while he was studyin' outta books but then he took a year off ter get some first-hand experience ... They say he met vampires in the Black Forest and there was a nasty bit o' trouble with a hag -- never been the same since. Scared of the students, scared of his own subject[...]' (55)
'It's about the You-Know-What in vault seven hundred and thirteen.' (57) [That's the vault with the Stone.]Sirius's vault is 711. If they're near each other, then Sirius for some reason has an account waaaay down in the depths of the bank. Then again, this is the Potterverse, so 711 could be anywhere. (Rather like the impossible numbering of the piers in San Francisco. But I digress.)
By the way, Sirius dies on page 711 of the UK edition of OotP. Probably a coincidence. I digress again.
Inside were mounds of gold coins. Columns of silver. Heaps of little bronze Knuts.What's the significance of this? Why did the Potters have so much money? What's the narrative purpose of Harry being rich, never having to worry about having enough, being able to give his friends gifts?
'All yours,' smiled Hagrid. (58)
'Hogwarts, dear?' she said, when Harry started to speak. 'Got the lot here[...]' (59)The fact that Madam Malkin says this implies that there's more than one school he could be going to, I think. A moment later, Draco also asks if Harry's going to Hogwarts.
'My father's next door buying my books and mother's up the street looking at wands,' said the boy. He had a bored, drawling voice. 'Then I'm going to drag them off to look at racing brooms. I don't see why first-years can't have their own. I think I'll bully father into getting me one and I'll smuggle it in somehow.'And abusive!Lucius takes a blow. Though Lucius certainly doesn't dote on Draco the way Dudley's parents dote on him, Draco seems to think he can manipulate his parents like Dudley does. Or at the very least, he wants this boy he's just met to think so.
Harry was strongly reminded of Dudley. (60)
Draco is very chatty in this scene. He spontaneously initiates a conversation with Harry, having no idea who Harry is. This is our only view of Draco interacting alone with someone he thinks is, or might be, a friendly equal.
'Yes, exactly. I heard he's a sort of savage -- lives in a hut in the school grounds and every now and then he gets drunk, tries to do magic and ends up setting fire to his bed.' (60)Harry doesn't like this assessment of Hagrid at all, but while Draco may not be charitable, he isn't too far off either.
'I really don't think they should let the other sort in, do you? They're just not the same, they've never been brought up to know our ways. Some of them have never even heard of Hogwarts until they get the letter, imagine. I think they should keep it in the old wizarding families. What's your surname, anyway?' (61)First indication that the _children_ of Muggles are looked down upon, and that blood matters.
'--and he said people from Muggle families shouldn't even be allowed in --'Whoa. Okay. Hagrid's automatic reaction isn't to reassure Harry that it's okay to be Muggleborn, but to say he _isn't_ Muggleborn. He only mentions Lily as an afterthought.
'Yer not from a Muggle family[...] Anyway, what does he know about it, some o' the best I ever saw were the only ones with magic in 'em in a long line o' Muggles -- look at yer mum! Look what she had fer a sister!' (61)
'There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin. You-Know-Who was one.' (60-61)What about the notorious Gryffindor murderer Sirius Black? It amazes me how often I have to stick a post-it on Hagrid's dialogue to point out that he's said something biased or flatly incorrect. I'm not usually too down on Hagrid, but it's really pretty egregious. And this is Harry's first exposure to the magical world!
This also resolves the question of whether V was generally thought to have been a Slytherin.
Past re-read posts are here.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:11 am (UTC)You know, I never even thought of that. Maybe he still had Sirius's motorbike, but if so, did he just leave it there?
This is... problematic. It seems likely that magic wouldn't just be of minor use to the Muggle world, but could also resolve major issues such as deadly disease and injury. Hagrid doesn't consider that, though -- it's about the wizards' convenience.
The main reason, of course, is to explain to people reading how and why this society of people exists alongside the real world without being seen, so I'm willing to allow it a bit of leeway. It's better than, "They're trying to hunt us down and kill us," which would add elements of angst that I don't think the books need.
That said, I suspect Hagrid's is the commoner's view of the situation, but it's a very tricky situation, and wise Muggles might well object to the revelation of the magical world as well. Here you have a group of people who can essentially do anything (not really, but it would seem that way at first) and who can blithely walk into a situation, wave a wand, and make people behave (and so on). This is a recipe for a dominance/submission sort of goverment, in which witches and wizards are the ruling class and Muggles end up enslaved to them, either literally or by virtue of a worshipful attitude toward them. The title of the book Nature's Nobility, which appears in OotP, suggests that there are wizards who would consider this a perfectly natural state of affairs.
The WW as we see it is high-handed and arrogant in its hiding, but a WW that was out front and working miracles for people would, I think, quickly become despotic. Either that, or such limitations would have to be put on witches and wizards that society would end up looking like "Harrison Bergeron," in which anyone with a special talent is deliberately handicapped from birth on in order to preserve equality. In some ways, the Statute of Secrecy functions as a check on the power of wizards, the way peer review and scientific method function as a check on the power of scientists. Would a code of ethics, strictly enforced (a la the Jedi code in Star Wars), be a better solution? Possibly, though it would again open up the setting question of why wizards aren't more visible if they're right here beside us.
What's the significance of this? Why did the Potters have so much money? What's the narrative purpose of Harry being rich, never having to worry about having enough, being able to give his friends gifts?
It's partly a contrast to his poverty at the Dursleys, I'm sure, and also a plot answer to how, if the Dursleys refuse to buy his school things, he manages to get what he needs for seven years in school. But the vastness of the fortune is striking. I suppose it's a way to contrast him from both Ron and Draco--unlike Ron, he has means; unlike Draco, he's not obsessed with them.
What about the notorious Gryffindor murderer Sirius Black?
Especially given how angry Hagrid is about it, in PoA. :headscratch: I can't make heads or tales of that.
Whoa. Okay. Hagrid's automatic reaction isn't to reassure Harry that it's okay to be Muggleborn, but to say he _isn't_ Muggleborn. He only mentions Lily as an afterthought.
You know, I think you just put your finger on the thing that makes it impossible for me to like Hagrid. This is not the only time he does this sort of thing.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 09:02 am (UTC)Maybe, but I like the idea that maybe he used a thestral? It could have flown back on its own.
Why I don't think wizards are superior to Muggles, Part I
Date: 2005-01-10 11:28 am (UTC)I'm replying here, because it also refers to
I, for once, am not convinced that wizards could either take over the Muggle world easily nor that they could substantially improve it. Death and disease do exist in the wizarding world; they merely assume a different shape. Seeing as there is a fairly large number of wizards wearing glasses, we know that poor eyesight cannot be cured - nor pimples, when it comes to that, which indicates that magic is a very insufficient means when it comes to fighting "natural" handicaps.
We don't know how wizards handle diseases such as, say, influenza or cancer, but we know that they have a whole lot of their own, very specific and very nasty disease varieties. They might not have AIDS, but they have lycanthropy. St. Mungo's is full with patients who suffer from exotic diseases which don't exisit in the Muggle world, but which would follow the wizards there if a merger between the Muggle and wizarding worlds took place. I'm inclined to compare this process with the introduction of smallpox etc. by the white invaders to the natives in America.
Also, there is Mad-Eye Moody, who lacks a leg and an eye. While replacing the missing eye with a magical one might be very convenient, I don't think that Moody would have opted for a wooden leg if he had a choice. It seems that here the wizarding medicine encountered an injury that cannot be treated.
In conclusion, I think that inflicted injuries such as broken bones can be healed, but hereditary diseases, physical handicaps and magically inflicted diseases would prove rather more tricky.
Here you have a group of people who can essentially do anything (not really, but it would seem that way at first) and who can blithely walk into a situation, wave a wand, and make people behave (and so on).
The thing is, they have to be properly trained to do so. The wizarding world is full of not highly qualified witches and wizards: the school drop-outs, for once, and possibly also the waiters, inn and shop keepers, conductors etc. I assume that they are able to use magic within their profession in a rather limited manner; Madam Malkin is probably good at charming material into shape, but she might have no clue how to transfigure a mouse into a tea cup. Plus, wizards depend on tools and instruments which were charmed prior to use to match specific applications, e.g. broomsticks. It's not possible for your ordinary wizard on the street to simply take an old broomstick, put a charm on it and use it as a means of transport.
This opens the whole question of magical education and the lack thereof, including the question of what would happen to Harry if he was forced to leave Hogwarts. At some point, he wonders whether he'd be allowed to stay as Hagrid's assistant. He would not be allowed to use magic and he would not know how to control his powers.
Essentially, what I'm trying to say is that, as a social group, wizards are not necessarily more powerful than Muggles. A highly skilled wizard with a wand that matches his skills and a profound knowledge of incantations - yes. But as we learned from Moody, "you could all get your wands out now and point them at me and say the words, and I doubt I'd get so much as a nose-bleed" (GoF, Chapt. 14).
Why I don't think wizards are superior to Muggles, Part II
Date: 2005-01-10 11:30 am (UTC)As to a direct confrontation between Muggles and wizards: Muggles might not have curses, but they have weapons. And what's more: they do have the notorious weapons of mass destruction, which wizards seem to lack. Wizards kill individually, using Avada Kedavra. IIRC, the only curse that killed many people at the same time is the one used by Peter to cover his escape, and that seemed to be an explosion rather than a curse targeting humans directly. Now, taking your opponents out one by one is a method of warfare that was abandoned by Muggles centuries ago.
I think that the wizards' conviction of their own superiority goes back to the times when Muggles were indeed weaker than wizards. However, after the separation between both worlds took place, Muggles have developed their own rather advanced technology, which could well be a match for magic.
Re: Why I don't think wizards are superior to Muggles, Part II
Date: 2005-01-10 02:17 pm (UTC)Re: Why I don't think wizards are superior to Muggles, Part II
Date: 2005-01-10 05:42 pm (UTC)Re: Why I don't think wizards are superior to Muggles, Part II
Date: 2005-01-10 06:00 pm (UTC)For Hagrid's view? I think he has something of a point about particular groups of people. I could see Malfoy even at this point manipulating people in a cult of some sort--powerful, attractive, and able to do non-rational wonders... yeah. Jim Jones city.
Re: Why I don't think wizards are superior to Muggles, Part II
Date: 2005-01-10 06:31 pm (UTC)Hm, I think Hagrid mostly sees Muggles as quite pathetic creatures who lead their sorry little lives without the use of magic. On the tube, he is amazed by how Muggles manage to travel without magic - while I am amazed by how wizards seem to only have means of transport that are either monitored by the Ministry (Floo network, Portkeys, Aparition) or slow and dangerous (brooms).
The way I'm reading his comment, he is concerned that the pitiful Muggles would want wizards to provide magical solutions to all their problems. For the reasons stated, I don't think Muggles would consider magic as so much superior to their own achievements.
However, I do agree that an unscrupulous wizard could create a cult. But this would work the other way round, too: a wizard such as Arthur Weasley, who is obsessed with Muggle things and collects plugs, would be just as ready to follow a cult created by a clever Muggle.
Basically, I think that the balance of power is more equal than Hagrid (and many in the wizarding world) assume.
Re: Why I don't think wizards are superior to Muggles, Part II
Date: 2005-01-10 07:08 pm (UTC)On that, I agree--the Wizarding World is shockingly clueless about a lot of things because of its insularity. For quite a long time, they probably led much more comfortable lives than Muggles, had a higher literacy rate (those Potions guides and spell books would require reading), and, judging by appearances, de facto gender equality. They would see Muggle-borns come in having to learn how to read, impressed by being able to keep warm in the winter, and, in the case of girls, astounded at the thought of having power in the actual world. It would be easy to get into a habit of thought in which Muggles muddled around without magic and didn't get much done, and by the time the Muggles started to catch up, the wizards had lost interest.
a wizard such as Arthur Weasley, who is obsessed with Muggle things and collects plugs, would be just as ready to follow a cult created by a clever Muggle.
I think Arthur himself has too strong a sense of self to be drawn into a cult, but I agree. I could see witches and wizards who renounce magic to go and live as Muggles because it's oh-so-superior, and this Muggle guru has promised to teach me how to use the Internet if I just give him all my wizard gold...
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:11 am (UTC)I always thought, in a meta sense, it went nicely with the fairy tale, rags-to-riches kind of world. It wouldn't be properly fantastical is Harry managed to finally escape the Dursleys then had to return again, begging for money. I imagine it made life easier on JKR's part - and considering we see later in the Malfoys and Weasleys that having a lot of money is not a reflection of moral character, it doesn't really hurt.
As for how he got it... I've always loved the theory that James comes from a family who invented or manufactured the Snitch (which is mentioned in Quidditch Through The Ages as originating in Godric's Hollow) and that is why, in Snape's Worst Memory, he's playing around with one, and why Harry has Seeker's blood. Don't know where I first readthis, though - Unplottables, most likely.
*cokescreen* Well, I rather imagined him flying it like a broom when i first read that, but... as you will. *snerk*
no subject
Date: 2005-01-11 05:19 am (UTC)I always thought something similar as well. Harry goes from poor little orphan boy, to rich little boy who will make his own wizarding family. And I definately have to agree with
Also, I still can't resist trying out my fledgling icon making skills so...
no subject
Date: 2005-01-14 09:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:18 am (UTC)I hadn't really thought of it like that. I just read it as Harry being small for his age, and the question was a courtesy. Either that or completely inane, like when you're at the grocery store and run into someone you know. They very nearly always ask if you're "Picking up some groceries?" despite the fact that the answer should be obvious. Then again, that could be a weird southern US thing.
/ramble
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:19 am (UTC)Though Hagrid never says "Sirius was in Gryffindor" - he remembers him as James Potter's buddy, and riding a motorbike. He doesn't say much during the revelation scene, until he mentions the bike incident, so perhaps he didn't know Sirius as a Gryffindor?
I'm not sure how this is possible, but as Sirius was a Black it may have just slipped Hagrid's mind that he wasn't in Slytherin too.
Or, y'know, JKR made a mistake. I personally think this scene reads like one of the first written, since it makes a lot of mistakes based on what comes after, that can easily be discarded as Hagrid being wrong. Maybe it just helped create the impression that Hagrid is the kind of character to be wrong.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:21 am (UTC)I think it's part of the fantasy. Not only is Harry being rescued from his horrible life, not only is he famous, respected and the possessor of fabulous magical powers, he's rich too! It also solves the problem of having to rely on the Dursleys for support -- if he didn't have his own money, Vernon could simply refuse to pay for him to go to Hogwarts (which he sort of threatened to do a chapter or two back, before the secret of the vault was revealed), or to buy him the books and supplies he needs. I'm sure Dumbledore could work something out, but it's simpler for Harry to just be able to pay for things himself.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:23 am (UTC)Perhaps minor exceptions are allowed by prior arrangement? Lee Jordan's tarantula certainly isn't an owl, cat, or toad. And I can't imagine at least some of the Slytherins wanting to keep snakes.
*wince* Now my brain is presenting me with the image of Harry arguing in Parsetongue with a ball python. "Those bloody gerbils are expensive! You'll eat your thawed rat and like it!"
...now that I've alienated all the non-snake-folk...
Utterly uncanonical, but in AT, we posited a few specialized minor schools (two religious, and one for younger students whose powers were manifesting too early to be able to put off training them) and a smattering of home-schooled young witches and wizards. JKR's said that Hogwarts is the only local Wizarding school, but the homeschooling is still a possibility.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:27 am (UTC)I'd guess the letter comes out with what they'd prefer, but families who've been around for awhile know that the school administration is pretty lax about what pets are actually brought along. Ron's the sixth Weasley to go. By then, everyone's probably on reasonably friendly terms. Probably were by the time Percy said, "Oh, Mum... couldn't I take my rat instead?" To which someone probably shrugged and said, "Well, if it can handle the cats, have at it."
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:29 am (UTC)And, you know, he's not that bad of a kid. Kinda snobby and I can't blame Harry for getting pissed about Hagrid, but then again it isn't as if Draco said anything about Hagrid that wasn't true. And it's hearsay anyhow. A kid who didn't know Hagrid would probably think it was cool that Draco is so informed.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-11 05:11 am (UTC)Had Draco not gotten into the Hagrid comments, I think Harry could have seen past the slight resemblence in attitude that Draco might have with Dudley and started off a decent relationship. Even after that there was some possibility as Harry was still rather clueless, but Ron got there first. And so after that all we see of Draco is Harry's warped opinion of the boy.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:31 am (UTC)Good observation. I love that they're so close together - was Peter or Remus 712, perhaps? I can just imagine them going to the bank together on their first day out of Hogwarts, getting new accounts for their new lives as adults . . .
What about the notorious Gryffindor murderer Sirius Black?
Well, he does apparently come from an established and predominantly-Slytherin house. . . people might have brought that up after the murders.
What's the significance of this? Why did the Potters have so much money? What's the narrative purpose of Harry being rich, never having to worry about having enough, being able to give his friends gifts?
If nothing else, it makes the situation slightly less clichéd. Poor!Harry and Ron vs. Rich!Malfoy would have been a little too easy. But I do think that it plays into the whole wish-fulfillment thing. Honestly (digression warning!), HP:PS as compared to the later books reminds me of the Hobbit as compared to the LotR trilogy. In the trilogy, the Ring is a dark and many-layered object; sometimes it brings light amusement or useful power, but just as often it's dangerous and subversive. In the Hobbit, though, it's a nice little deus ex machina, a nifty tool that our rotund hero picks up on his quest. Likewise, I find myself dismissing much of HP:PS as "well, in my fantasy world, I would have massive ten-course meals every day, and piles of gold to buy my friends presents, and mean parents who learned to respect me, and amazing skills at a sport I'd never heard of, and parents that everyone loved!" We start seeing the dark sides of both magic and Harry's situation later on, but for now, I'm willing to accept that he's rich simply because it would be so lovely to be rich.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 08:45 am (UTC)I seem to remember that JKR posted a rejected first draft on her website where it was suggested that James and Lily found (stole?) the Philosopher's Stone and used it according to the manufacturer's instructions, so to speak. I should go and look it up again, I guess. I just remember thinking what a fabulous idea that was. Bad!JamesandLily! :)
The first time I read the books, though, I assumed this was all inherited money - James is a pure-blooded Wizard and just as arrogant as the Malfoys, so it seems logical that there should be piles of ancestral gold lying around somewhere - but that doesn't tie in with Sirius' going round to the Potter's for 'Sunday lunch' (Book 5?) which sounds very British lower-middle-class...
Eh. I suspect All Will Be Revealed in Book Six. Maybe.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 02:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 09:10 am (UTC)But it's still possible for him not to have taught two consecutive years.
And abusive!Lucius takes a blow.
Thank you, my personal belief is that he's purely the conception of Jason Isaacs.
Sirius's vault is 711. If they're near each other, then Sirius for some reason has an account waaaay down in the depths of the bank.
Not only that, but 713 (and perhaps the others on this corridor) can't even be opened by keys, but require goblin fingers. If anyone else tries to open it, it's really no good. I'm very curious to see if Sirius' vault will come into the plot. It must be left to someone. It would be sort of cool if the wrong relative tried to open it unauthorized...
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 03:53 pm (UTC)Isaacs definitely came up with the idea of Lucius being physically abusive toward Draco, but there is ample evidence in the books themselves that Lucius is emotionally abusive, IMO. I wrote about it pretty extensively in my essay on Lucius here for
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 10:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 11:04 am (UTC)A bottle-necked economy, would be my guess. If you can get a loan, it's not like you can go elsewhere. Maybe that's why Fred and George couldn't start their business until Harry offered them money?
Also, it's a bit scary that the goblins are the bankers *and* the bookies? Are they the loansharks too, just to sew all the financial matters at once?
With what? The umbrella? Mary Poppins!Hagrid.
Sirius' motorcycle? Hagrid did have it, the last we saw.
Doesn't that leave a gaping hole in the logic here? If HP wizards have nothing to fear from Muggles, what do they have to lose by helping them?
Not to mention the question of all the Muggles who died in the witch-hunts...
Really, this lack of charity is one of the reason that I wonder how well, if at all, Christianity took hold among European Wizardry. Not that religion can't be abused, but the "family-first, allies-second, no charity for stragglers" attitude seems more Roman or tribal than anything the great world religions endorse.
Because Harry's never been treated kindly in his life, I'd imagine, not because Hagrid is inherently trustworthy.
Harry has a complete blind-spot about people who are kind to him. He thinks that they are automatically good, even when an outside perspective might go "hmmm".
This is our only view of Draco interacting alone with someone he thinks is, or might be, a friendly equal.
And everything he says would have worked, if Harry had been raised by wizards -- a lot of that would have worked on *Ron*, who has most of the wizarding prejudices. Draco makes the child's mistake of thinking everyone is just like himself.
Hagrid's automatic reaction isn't to reassure Harry that it's okay to be Muggleborn, but to say he _isn't_ Muggleborn.
Obviously, it's not okay to be Muggleborn. Just like it's not okay to be Slytherin.
What about the notorious Gryffindor murderer Sirius Black? It amazes me how often I have to stick a post-it on Hagrid's dialogue to point out that he's said something biased or flatly incorrect.
The trick is figuring out who has what prejudice. Hagrid is anti-Muggle (mildly), anti-Slytherin, and pro-Dumbledore. The Weasleys are Hagrid is anti-Muggle (mildly), anti-Slytherin, anti-giant, anti-werewolf, and pro-Dumbledore. The Malfoys are Hagrid is anti-Muggle (violently), anti-giant, anti-werewolf, anti-Dumbledore, and pro-Voldemort.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 12:54 pm (UTC)Rather like the Jews in mediaeval Europe, perhaps, who were (a) not allowed to own land but (b) the only people who were allowed to make money by lending at interest to Christians?
I suspect that HBP will be largely concerned with the non-human races; there are unfinished plot threads about house-elves, giants, and centaurs, and some sub-surface hints about the goblins as well. So I'll be very interested to see what new vistas of social complexity open to us...
Really, this lack of charity is one of the reason that I wonder how well, if at all, Christianity took hold among European Wizardry. Not that religion can't be abused, but the "family-first, allies-second, no charity for stragglers" attitude seems more Roman or tribal than anything the great world religions endorse.
Tell that to the Bush administration.
Hagrid is anti-Muggle (mildly), anti-Slytherin, and pro-Dumbledore. The Weasleys are Hagrid is anti-Muggle (mildly), anti-Slytherin, anti-giant, anti-werewolf, and pro-Dumbledore. The Malfoys are Hagrid is anti-Muggle (violently), anti-giant, anti-werewolf, anti-Dumbledore, and pro-Voldemort.
Ummmm... OK, I think I've figured out what happened there. Copy-and-paste-and-forget-to-erase-the-repeated-bit, am I right? I do that sometimes.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 01:02 pm (UTC)And were reviled for it.
Tell that to the Bush administration.
See religion, abuse of.
Copy-and-paste-and-forget-to-erase-the-repeated-bit
ARGGGH! yes. I've been having so much trouble just responding to LJ lately, all my typos are getting through.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 11:50 am (UTC)And this corresponds with something that's always bugged me about the way Rowling presents Dumbledore as the major moral instance in the books. (Which she does, in my opinion, and which makes it difficult for me to consider him a fully fleshed-out chararacter rather than a plot device. But I digress.)
In CoS, when Harry emerges from the tunnel, shaken by his encounter with the basilisk, he confesses his fear that that there is a strong resembles between him and Tom Riddle and that the Sorting Hat acknowledged this resemblence by trying to put him in Slytherin. Dumbledore, instead of pointing out that Slytherin is just a House like any other and not breeding ground for Dark wizards, comforts Harry in a rather different way: "[The Sorting Hat] Put you in Gryffindor." "It only put me in Gryffindor, [...] because I asked not to go in Slytherin." "Exactly. [...] Which makes you very different from Tom Riddle. It is our choices, Harry, that shos what we truly are, far more than our abilities."
What annoys me about this particular passage is not so much the fact that this form of prejudice is encouraged, but that it is encouraged almost in passing, and that it is connected to one of the major moral lessons of the books. It implies that by allowing themselves to be put in Slytherin, the kids actively choose evil and embrace Darkness.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 01:07 pm (UTC)Kind of makes you wondered what Snape would think of Dumbledore's reply, doesn't it? I bet the Headmaster says unflattering things about Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff too, though not to the point of implying you're evil if you chose to go to either of those houses.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:07 pm (UTC)Poor Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff seem to be widely ignored by the Headmaster, though.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 06:13 pm (UTC)And Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff get slighted by the lack of attention they get.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 09:20 pm (UTC)Anyway, moving away from the medicine side for a moment, a lot of people seem to assume that the wizarding world could solve all our problems - world peace and so on. Well, we know that's not possible - just look at the choas in OotP! Imagine the Ministry of Magic trying to sort out some of the Muggle problems as well as the stuff they have to deal with!
My final point is the fact that wizards would have a dreadful time if the Muggles all knew about them. It might sound facecious but I think that it would be rather like X-Men - wizards would be persecuted, hated and probably stopped from using their magic if possible. No one likes the idea that there's a whole group of people more powerful than they are. And the wizards can do a LOT. They might not be killable but they could have a horrible, horrible time. PLus, mankind has got a lot better at killing than they were in the medieval times. Why risk making enemies when you can stay safely hidden?
Also though, implication is that the leaders of the world do know about the wizarding world. Fudge was able to tell the Prime Minister about Sirius Black and the other Death Eaters without too much trouble. So it's possible that some of the world DOES know about wizards.
But there's no point telling Harry this - he's just 11. My guess is that Hagrid was told to keep things dumbed down for Harry - he's entering a world that's going to hold enough problems. No need to lump them all on him now.
I always assumed with the pets that they were guidelines and that no one really cared that Ron had showed up with a rat, especially such an inoffensive one. It's not like Ron ever took him to lessons. The guidelines were probably more to stop kids bringing in tigers or something.
I think the resaon Hagird concentrates on the fact that Harry isn't from a Muggle family is because that's what Harry is worried about. He feels inferior because he's grown up with the Dursleys and doesn't know anything. He's not feeling offended - just afraid. I don't think it's meant to be a slight on Muggles.
Oddly enough, I've never read Hagrid's dialouge as meaning "Every wizard/witch who went evil was Slytherin." It's probably me reading strangely but I always, always took it to mean "Most of the very important ones were Slytherins." God knows why.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-14 09:02 pm (UTC)Oddly enough, I've never read Hagrid's dialouge as meaning "Every wizard/witch who went evil was Slytherin." It's probably me reading strangely but I always, always took it to mean "Most of the very important ones were Slytherins." God knows why.
I don't know why either, because it seems very clear. Not even "Oh, they're all Slytherins", which could plausibly be exaggeration, but not a single one isn't Slytherin, he says.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-17 07:46 pm (UTC)I think the resaon I read it that way is because Hagrid's language style is so exaggerated anyway that I just took it that it was his usual speech pattern obscuring the truth. Or possibly, I don't read properly, which has also been known to happen. :)
no subject
Date: 2005-01-10 09:52 pm (UTC)I don't have the books here so this could be impossible, but given that Hagrid specifically says "flew" one word, could he have actually said "floo" and Harry assumes it's "flew" because he doesn't know that word yet? Like he took the floo to somewhere nearby and JKR is cleverly spelling it the way Harry heard it because she hasn't introduced the idea yet? She does that sometimes, mentions things that only later get explained.
In PoA we learn that witches only pretended to die from being burnt at the stake... Doesn't that leave a gaping hole in the logic here?
I often feel there's a real problem with JKR wanting to have something like racism between these two groups but then refusing to give it any real basis. For instance, there is no real tension between Muggleborns and Purebloods, so the attitude of family's like the Blacks and Malfoys is arbitrary and not reflected anywhere else. Having wizards unsuccessfully persecuted by Muggles when we know from our own history how violently "witches" were persecuted is an odd thing, especially when it would make the world make more sense and not less. It seems this is almost like false history, where wizards refuse to admit they were hurt by Muggles so that Muggles are always the enemy but also always inferior and ineffectual. A real history of persecution would explain wizard aggression more.
Why did the Potters have so much money?
I assume the Potters are an old wizarding family like the Blacks, only nice, and this is part of the fantasy wish-fulfillment part. It may just be easier for JKR to assume Harry has money whenever he needs it, though he still gets other people to buy his brooms for him! Harry clearly "deserves" money the way other kids don't.
The fact that Madam Malkin says this implies that there's more than one school he could be going to, I think.
I thought it was more a reference to Harry's age, which looks about right to begin school. MM is asking Harry if he's here for his Hogwarts robes (as opposed to regular robes) because of his age, and Draco is asking Harry if he, too, is about to start his first year at Hogwarts.
Or at the very least, he wants this boy he's just met to think so.
I assumed the latter, that he wants the boy he just met to think he does, since he doesn't get the broom and next year we see that while Lucius isn't abusive, he certainly can't be bullied into anything by Draco. Lucius will buy his kid a broom, but on his own terms. I love the idea that Harry misses the interesting fact that there are different kinds of brats in the world. Dudley's the soft, over-fed kind, Draco's the pointy, restricted kind.
I love this scene of Draco's. He's chatty, trying far to hard, and keeps making things worse for himself by trying harder, imo, when Harry doesn't seem to like him. Given his father I can imagine he's learned the way to make friends is to prove you're the right sort by not being destined for Hufflepuff, playing Quidditch, and being just about to get a fabulous broom. The very worst thing he could say to Harry.
Then he tries to show ultimate coolness by passing on juicy, accurate gossip about the weird groundskeeper and Harry acts like he insulted his best friend. Which he did.
It amazes me how often I have to stick a post-it on Hagrid's dialogue to point out that he's said something biased or flatly incorrect.
Yup. Especially that Slytherin line. You have to wonder if Hagrid is just wanting to prove his point so not bringing Sirius up, or if he blocks out that bit of information because it bothers him. Harry has a similar tendency to exaggerate when he's bothered by the truth, like the way he "defends" Ron by saying he didn't have all that bad a first Quidditch practice, or forbids anyone from saying Hagrid's not a perfect teacher.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-11 09:17 pm (UTC)But they were persecuted. They were not killed, but they were persecuted. They were hunted down and seized, and treated poorly pre-fire. They would have still had to endure the verbal abuse of the Muggles. Their homes would have been trashed if not burned to the ground, leaving them with nothing once they escape the burning. They'd have to move someplace else after every 'burning' so they weren't seen again by the same townspeople. They'd have something to fear on the mere merit of seeing how the Muggles reacted towards alleged witches with terrible hysteria. They saw that the Muggles were willing and ready to kill without the tiniest hint of regret or compassion. This would make it pretty easy, I'd imagine, for the wizards to reciprocate those feelings.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-12 03:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-11 04:48 am (UTC)As for the rat. There are several possible theories that I can see, although all have gaping plotholes. One is that, of course, Ron is a Gryffindor and Dumbledore clearly favors them. Secondly, the teachers either KNOW it's Peter--again, Dumbledore is strange this way--or don't find out until it's "too late". Lastly, Scabbers was Percy's rat, and Percy is a Prefect and studious individual, so perhaps they made an exception.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-14 08:59 pm (UTC)Bwah! But yeah, that's what I thought too. One bank can't be good.
I'm inclined to follow the "they just favor Gryffindors" explanation, since Lee Jordan also has a non-standard pet (a tarantula). The only Slytherin with a pet that we know of is Milicent, I think, and she has a cat.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-17 10:39 pm (UTC)I've always seen this as actually very skillfully done of JKR -- clearly there is a deep-down prejudice against Muggleborns, which even wizards who know better haven't entirely gotten rid of, and she shows how deep it is by having even Hagrid, who not only isn't a snob but isn't much of a wizard himself, display a bit of it. It's a bit like old and new money, I'd imagine. Even if you, as the hypothetical scion of an established rich family, know perfectly well that inheriting something isn't morally superior to earning it, you may still react to being called nouveau riche with "I'll have you know my family owned this town! And anyway, what difference does it make?" I'm not saying Hagrid isn't displaying his prejudice here, but I don't think it means that he doesn't mean the second part -- he really does think Lily was as good a witch as any pureblood, he just won't have anyone saying James and Lily Potter were Muggles!
711
Date: 2005-01-18 12:35 am (UTC)I would really really like to know what's in 712. And who owns it.
- Clara
no subject
Date: 2005-01-18 03:04 am (UTC)'Just the one. Gringotts. Run by goblins.' (50)
What's the effect on an economy/society when there's only one bank?
Oh, but goblins are magic, you know. They are specially good at serving the banking needs of the wizarding community. Besides, if they weren't allowed a monopoly, they'd probably rebel again just like Binns talks about. ;D
'How did you get here?' Harry asked, looking around for another boat.
'Flew,' said Hagrid. (50-51)
Er. With what? The umbrella? Mary Poppins!Hagrid.
Have to agree, a thestral makes a lot of sense here. What I really want to know is how the heck the Dursleys got OFF the island if Harry and Hagrid took their boat. ???
Students may also bring an owl OR a cat OR a toad
(53)
Ron is allowed to have a rat. This is a clear error on JKR's part, no? Seems like it should have been corrected in later editions.
I think the important point here is that yes, students can have ONE pet. Not two, not three, no menageries, no outlandish monsters, and other than that they're pretty lenient, or maybe students may request permission for other pets.
[Y]et somehow, even though everything Hagrid had told him so far was unbelievable, Harry couldn't help trusting him. (53)
Because Harry's never been treated kindly in his life, I'd imagine, not because Hagrid is inherently trustworthy.
Hagrid's not trustworthy? *weepz* I thought Hagrid was about the most inherently trustworthy character in the series. And IMO, Harry usually shows pretty good people-sense. Wow. People sure interpret stuff differently.
It seems plain that Quirrell taught at the school before this year. I don't know why, but I often see people questioning this.
I always just assumed that he was fairly fresh out of school himself . . . but looking again, there's not much to support studying over teaching. *concedes*
'There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin. You-Know-Who was one.' (60-61)
What about the notorious Gryffindor murderer Sirius Black?
I've puzzled over this one too, and came to the conclusion that Hagrid speaks in hyperbole and exaggeration, and taking his words too literally in a case like this will only give one a headache.