The Hogwarts House System, and its Connexion to the Politics of the Wizarding World

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

I’m not entirely sure that this is the best place to post this essay, but as it concerns issues which we frequently comment about here, I thought I might as well share it with you. As you may be able to guess from the title, it contains my thoughts on the House system and how it connects to the politics of the wizarding world. Enjoy! :)

 

 

Theoretically, at least, the Sorting Hat sorts students based upon their innate personalities; thus, brave students go into Gryffindor, clever ones into Ravenclaw, hard-working ones into Hufflepuff and cunning ones into Slytherin. It seems unlikely, however, that this is the only – or even the main – factor in the Hat’s choice. For a start, we know that certain families tend towards certain Houses (the Weasleys all seem to be Gryffindors, for example, whilst Draco’s ancestors were apparently all in Slytherin). Family members do not all share the same personality, however, and, if personality were the main factor in the Hat’s choice, we would expect virtually every family to have members in each House. Secondly, many people seem to have been sorted into the “wrong” House; Crabbe and Goyle, for example, never display any signs of cunning or ambition, and Albus Dumbledore seems more like a Ravenclaw or Slytherin than a Gryffindor. This would be more explicable if we take the view that the main factor in students’ House choices is, in fact, their own personal preferences. The wizarding world seems fairly corporatist, and family unity is highly prized (hence, for example, the Weasleys’ anger when Percy chooses to side with the Ministry over his father), so it seems quite likely that children would have a strong preference towards being sorted into their parents’ House; this would also explain the fact that students frequently seem not to display their House’s preferred qualities to any great degree.

Wizarding politics seems to be mostly split between those who support the rights of the old Pureblood families, and those who advocate greater inclusion of Muggleborns into wizarding society and politics. This division seems to be reflected in the school House system. Slytherin House’s reputation as the home of the rich and privileged and a bastion of Pureblood supremacy suggests that it is the House of choice for pro-Purebloods; Godric Gryffindor, on the other hand, was described by Rowling as “an enlightened fighter against anti-Muggle discrimination”, suggesting that, from the beginning, his House has been associated with the pro-Muggleborns. Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff don’t seem so strongly aligned; possibly they are both halfway houses (no pun intended), containing a mixture of pro-Purebloods and pro-Muggleborns, and aligning themselves with whichever political faction currently has the upper hand.

The fact that Slytherin and Gryffindor apparently clashed over whether or not to include Muggleborns suggests that this issue has been an important one in wizarding politics for many centuries. As society’s attitudes are never static, the balance of power will probably have swung like a pendulum from one side to another, with first the Pureblood Faction, then the Muggleborn, having the upper hand. At the time of the HP novels, it seems that the pro-Muggleborns are in control; not only does Mr. Borgin complain that “wizarding blood is counting for less and less everywhere”, the alignment of Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff Houses with Gryffindor against Slytherin would make more sense if the political winds were blowing in the former’s favour. It would also explain why Voldemort’s followers mostly seem to be from Slytherin House: rich aristocrats are usually the least likely to try and overthrow the established order, having as they do the most to lose and the least to gain; if, however, they’ve felt their power and influence being eroded over the past decades, and this process seems likely to continue for the foreseeable future, they might be tempted to rise up in rebellion in order to prevent this from happening.

It seems likely that most Dark Wizards come from whichever faction is currently losing. As of the late twentieth century, this means that Voldemort and most of his supporters are from Slytherin; when the Purebloods had the most influence, Gryffindor was probably the “dark” House. Which brings us onto a certain infamous line: in PS, when Harry is worried about being sorted into Hufflepuff, Hagrid consoles him by saying that Hufflepuff is better than Slytherin, adding that “There’s not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn’t in Slytherin.” At first glance, this seems ridiculous (what, so there were literally no Dark Wizards over the past millennium who were in Gryffindor, Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw?), but it may be that Hagrid’s definition of “goin’ bad” isn’t the same as most people’s. By way of analogy to Muggle dictators, Slytherin Dark Wizards would mostly be like General Franco, trying to return the wizarding world to a mythical golden age before their society was corrupted by foreign elements. Gryffindor ones, on the other hand, would be more like communist revolutionaries, trying to overthrow those in power to create a more egalitarian society. Hagrid’s blood status makes him a natural member of the Gryffindor faction, and it seems quite likely that he would sympathise with the aims, if not the methods, of these Gryffindor Dark Wizards. If this is the case, then it may be that he doesn’t consider any Gryffindor Dark Wizard to be bad – misguided, certainly, but not evil, unlike the Slytherins, who want to keep people like him down and deny them equal rights and opportunities. From his point of view, therefore, “All bad wizards are Slytherins” might be a perfectly reasonable thing to say.

The Gryffindor House-Slytherin House hostility also makes more sense when viewed through this lens. From the Gryffindors’ point of view, the Slytherins certainly are despicable: they’re seen as stupid and ugly (and yet, at the same time, as a dangerous threat, mirroring many real-world examples of prejudice), and virtually anything they do is considered bad by default, even when, in objective terms, they’re often little worse or even better than the Gryffindors (see, for example, practically any chapter in any Harry Potter book). This would be extremely over-the-top if it were a simple example of inter-House rivalry; if seen as a continuation of a centuries-old feud, however, it seems more explicable. (As mentioned above, wizarding society is very corporatist, so it seems quite likely that children would inherit their parents’ political views.) It also explains the hatred of the Malfoys for the Weasleys: as an old Pureblood family, the Weasleys would seem to be natural Optimates (indeed, it may be that they were until a few generations ago, which would explain why they are still Pureblood despite being so pro-Muggle), and thus would be considered class traitors by the Malfoys.

We aren’t really told the Slytherin view in the books, probably because Harry aligns his world-view almost entirely with the Gryffindors. This makes the Slytherins come across as ridiculous caricatures in places; if viewed through the lens of “Harry Potter as political propaganda”, however, their characterisation starts to make more sense.

 

Comments

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

/Harry didn't ask for Gryffindor specifically, just not to be in Slytherin. If he asked not to be put into Ravenclaw, would the house not put him there? Dumbledor sort of implied that the only option a student has is "not Slytherin".

He just about came right out and said there was a rigid dichotomy, too, there, didn't he? "You're X because you are not Y as Y is the antithesis of X in every way."/

And don't forget the line Dumbledore gave to Severus about his bravery; telling Severus he thinks they sort too soon.

I always felt like that came as more of an insult and I I'm sure that Dumbledore did not meant it that way but I feel like Severus is the head of Slytherin house, isn't it enough for DD that Severus is the spy and the leader of the Slytherins per say

For better or worse he's been a Slytherin for most of his life...yet DD seems to throw that statement out there in such a way that makes me want to smack the old man. It's like saying well, you're good enough now that you qualify to be in our awwwwsomely cool gryffindor house.

I know, yea...DD probably meant it as a 'complement' but it just irritates the hell out of me. Instead of just a direct, thank you Severus you are a credit to your house and Hogwarts...it has to be a sort of smart ass remark/back handed complement.

Okay, end rant/

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

Oh, I fully agree with you. It's (at best) a backhanded compliment. Not only does it devalue Slytherin itself and Severus's actions as a Slytherin, it also puts forth the idea that only true Gryffs can be brave...or at least that true Slytherins *can't* be brave. Which is, ahem, horse manure: ambition does not rule out courage (indeed, depending on the nature of one's ambitions courage can be an essential thing in reaching them), nor does 'cunning' (which sounds to me like critical thinking), nor do strategic thinking and caution (all that strategic thinking and caution rule out is pointless, foolhardy action that might have a worse effect than doing nothing). In fact, I'd argue that sometimes it takes *greater* courage to pursue a course of action once one has thought about it clearly and measured the real risks...Gryffindor throw-yourself-in-without-thinking 'bravery' has the benefit of not making you actually realize just how great the risks you might be taking really are.

Sort too soon my foot.

don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

And don't forget the line Dumbledore gave to Severus about his bravery; telling Severus he thinks they sort too soon.

I always felt like that came as more of an insult and I I'm sure that Dumbledore did not meant it that way but I feel like Severus is the head of Slytherin house, isn't it enough for DD that Severus is the spy and the leader of the Slytherins per say

ITA. I have real issues with people bandying this statement about as how Dumbledore was so fair-minded and generous to nasty old Snape who didn't deserve such praise. Like, wtf, are you kidding me? Snape hated Gryffindor! It was practically a symbol of all the things that went wrong with his life and what he'd lost and how sucktastic his existence was- Dumbledore knew that the Marauders bullied Snape for years, even after he almost got eaten by a werewolf thanks to Sirius, and he still says that hey, for all the courage he's shown, all the sacrifices he's made, after all that's he's suffered...he oughta have been a Gryffindor. *spits on him*

Like, don't flatter the guy, don't tell him that he's redefined the image of the typical Slytherin, that their house traits can be used for good, or just a simple well done, good for you or anything...no, diss the house he's in and imply that any good he's done came from characteristics that belong to a house he hates and with which his house has a long-standing enmity. Classy, Dumbles!

/rant.

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

/ITA. I have real issues with people bandying this statement about as how Dumbledore was so fair-minded and generous to nasty old Snape who didn't deserve such praise. Like, wtf, are you kidding me? Snape hated Gryffindor!/

Well for my own personal side of this topic - I've had my head bitten off in other groups because I dared suggest DD was being a jackass and should have never said that to Severus.

I don't think Dumbledore saw it as he was being a jackass. Dumbledore in his mind must have seen it as a complement but to me it was a pretty shitastic thing to say to Severus. It felt like a slap more than encouragement or respect.

Sort of like, Harry will continue to be the greatest hero ever and get Severus a headmasters portrait.

Its like the author is saying only through Gryffindor can a character like Severus gain respect. It is not through his own attempts that it comes.



/Like, don't flatter the guy, don't tell him that he's redefined the image of the typical Slytherin, that their house traits can be used for good, or just a simple well done, good for you or anything...no, diss the house he's in and imply that any good he's done came from characteristics that belong to a house he hates and with which his house has a long-standing enmity. Classy, Dumbles!/

The house of Slytherin as been a part of the school since day one. Yet even 19 years after Severus is dead there is still this attachment, so much so that Harry's 11 year old middle son seems to find it a nightmare of horrors he might end up in Slytherin.

You mean to tell me it took Harry till the first day of school right before he put his son on the train to tell his son not to be worried about what house he ends up in. Shouldn't Harry have been impressing upon his children these things from day one? You mean to say he never once told his children about Dumbledore or Snape, especially the damn kid he named Albus Severus?

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

Argh, I hate the way DD's whitewashed and viewed as a saint that can do no wrong (but he said sorry to Harry for ditching him at his abusive relatives for years! And he threw glasses at their heads! It's all okay now!).

You're right, though, DD didn't say it to be a jerk, he didn't realize that's how it came off 'coz it was probably the highest compliment he could give- 'you could've been a Gryffindor! Don't you feel better about your shitty life now?!'

I honestly felt like that was such a slap in the face, I can't even deal with it without getting all rage-y about it. >:[

Yet even 19 years after Severus is dead there is still this attachment, so much so that Harry's 11 year old middle son seems to find it a nightmare of horrors he might end up in Slytherin.

I KNOOOOW. Why is it still an insult to be told you might be in Slytherin? Why is that the worst nightmare ever?! I hate that prejudice is still going strong- and lol, you're right, so Harry never told him in eleven years who he was named after? ASP never said, 'Dad, why did you saddle me with these ridiculous names, I'm gonna get beat up at school' and Harry's all, 'Be proud of your heritage, you've got the names of the coolest heroes ever!' Honestly, the way JKR has all these characters NOT talk to each other about the elephant in the room, IDEK. She comes up with brilliant concepts, but then it's never realistic the way she orchestrates her info-dumps, like, why wouldn't people already know certain information, etc. etc?

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

/Argh, I hate the way DD's whitewashed and viewed as a saint that can do no wrong (but he said sorry to Harry for ditching him at his abusive relatives for years! And he threw glasses at their heads! It's all okay now!)./

Yea, it seemed a little late to the ballgame to be scolding the Dursley's at that point.

The magical community has all these craptastic jobs for various things - you mean to tell me a social worker that would check up on adopted/orphaned magical kids is out of the question? So obviously they didn't learn anything from Tom Riddles life of dumping a magical kid off on someone else.

Apparently checking up on Harry was above Dumbledores paygrade.

Magical people don't mind making muggles forget who they are but heaven forbid they check up on a 1 year old child who's parents got murdered.

And the whole leaving Harry on the doorstep, is that supposed to be cute? I know a lot of movies and such and old stories have that happening. It's like the Moses story in the bible, but the way I remember it Baby Moses was being hidden to protect him from being killed, and his little sister sort of watched over him and directed him to the Princess of Egypts area so she could adopt him. The mom just didn't dump her baby off on random egyptian #4 and hope it all turned out great for her son.

Magical people seem to treat there children like little unwanted litters of puppies - oh just throw them out of the truck in front of anyone's house...someone will pick him up and love him. Hell, since harry was supposed to die anyway it's a good thing they didn't do the other things mean people tend to do with unwanted animals.

And hay, lets not forget the fact that it's At the end of Oct, first of Nov when little baby Harry is dumped off on the doorstep - do you suppose it was a warm tropical night there on Privit drive when left baby Harry laying on the doorstep? It even says it was a few hours before Mrs. Dursley found him. What the hell Dumbledore, they couldn't even ring the doorbell and run???

The Dursley's knew about magic, why wouldn't they knock on the door and explain what happened? They didn't even give the Dursley's a shread, a dip...a grain of respect to know anything but expected them to automatically want to take Harry.

I'm in no way standing up for the Dursley's because they were pretty shitty to in a lot of ways, however there behavior compaired to everyone else doesn't seem abnormal considering.

/Honestly, the way JKR has all these characters NOT talk to each other about the elephant in the room, IDEK. She comes up with brilliant concepts, but then it's never realistic the way she orchestrates her info-dumps, like, why wouldn't people already know certain information, etc. etc?/

Well, the whole Epilogue was 19 years later and in an interview JKR was asked why 19 years. The way I remember it Her answer revolved around teenage pregancy and not wanting to show Ginny/Hermione pregnant to early.

Um...really...thats why?

I'm assuming that she thinks we're all bad at math or that kids are not going to care about Harry's mother who would have been pregnant at 19. And heck, I don't know the math on Arthur and Molly but I'd wonder about Molly's age to when she first gave birth.

I mean after Voldemort was offed at the end of DH did JKR think we were expecting the girls to get knocked up the next night? The answer to that question about 19 years sort of came way out of left field and made me wonder what the hell JKR is trying to do/prove.

It was done because she's concerned about teenage pregnancy?

if someone is delusional enough to go get preggered up because Hermione had a baby at 19 - then I'm suspecting that the person that does that will continue to follow the example of the HP series and leave the baby on random person doorstep when the baby gets too much for them to handle.

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[oryx_leucoryx]

So obviously they didn't learn anything from Tom Riddles life of dumping a magical kid off on someone else.


How could they? Most of them don't know that Tom Riddle became Voldemort. They think Riddle disappeared sometime in his 20s, while he was working at the shop, and was never seen again. And part of the reason is because Dumbles insists that they should call You-Know-Who by his real name, Voldemort.

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

So obviously they didn't learn anything from Tom Riddles life of dumping a magical kid off on someone else.


/How could they? Most of them don't know that Tom Riddle became Voldemort. They think Riddle disappeared sometime in his 20s, while he was working at the shop, and was never seen again. And part of the reason is because Dumbles insists that they should call You-Know-Who by his real name, Voldemort./

I was not talking about 20 year old riddle I was talking about the baby Tom being dumped in a muggle orphanage.


And I'm not expecting them to know at the moment of his birth but apparently the ministry knows when someone underage is doing magic. Is that just with a wand or is that any time?

Also how do they even find out a kid is going to go to Hogwarts? And besides How did Dumbledore know to go find young Riddle in the first place when he didn't have a wand?

I seem to remember something about the name of a kid who is magical appearing in a book at Hogwarts or something like that. But IF they can do that, shouldn't they be able to know even before the kid is going to go to Hogwarts if they're magical?

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[oryx_leucoryx]

I was not talking about 20 year old riddle I was talking about the baby Tom being dumped in a muggle orphanage.


Well, as far as most people knew, that worked fantastically. He attended school, was an excellent student, became Head Boy. Too bad he decided not to run for Minister and instead got a job at that shop. What was there to learn for anyone who wasn't Albus Dumbledore? Because nobody else knew Tom destroyed at least 2 children at the orphanage, released a basilisk, killed his paternal relatives while framing his last maternal relative in the crime, etc etc.

And I'm not expecting them to know at the moment of his birth but apparently the ministry knows when someone underage is doing magic. Is that just with a wand or is that any time?

According to what Severus tells Lily, underage magic 'counts' only once they have wands, or judging from Hermione's case, only once they start some kind of schooling. It isn't clear if children's magic is noticed but ignored or whether it goes completely unnoticed. But I think the wand has to be around for the magic to register, or else it is hard to explain how nobody noticed an underage wizard was present when supposedly Morfin killed the Riddles. But if Tom left his own wand in a hiding place after he took Morfin's wand to do the deed then perhaps there was no record of underage magic.

Also how do they even find out a kid is going to go to Hogwarts? And besides How did Dumbledore know to go find young Riddle in the first place when he didn't have a wand?

According to Rowling's site there is a magical quill at Hogwarts that records all births of magical children. (Which means there was no need to dangle Neville from a window, all Algie had to do was ask Dumbledore if Neville was registered by the quill.)

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

/Well, as far as most people knew, that worked fantastically. He attended school, was an excellent student, became Head Boy. Too bad he decided not to run for Minister and instead got a job at that shop. What was there to learn for anyone who wasn't Albus Dumbledore? Because nobody else knew Tom destroyed at least 2 children at the orphanage, released a basilisk, killed his paternal relatives while framing his last maternal relative in the crime, etc etc./

I think you are missing my point.

They still left him in a muggle orphanage, whatever he became, they knew he was there, the people in charge allowed him to remain there. I get your point on they didn't suspect him while he was being a 'model' human. But after that he became Voldemort - And people found out who he was and knew it was Tom Riddle.

DID the magical people in power learn from it? Did they take steps to make sure from then on when they realized how dumping a magical child off might affect them? Did they even look into it and consider building their own orphanage? Or did they just decide oh well it was a fluke?

Are they still just dumping magical children off on muggle doorsteps? The first think they do with Harry is dump him off.


/According to what Severus tells Lily, underage magic 'counts' only once they have wands,/

I know he says it doesn't count. That doesn't mean they don't know about it.


/r judging from Hermione's case, only once they start some kind of schooling./

I don't know what you mean by her case? Because she is muggle born? They must have known she existed.

/It isn't clear if children's magic is noticed but ignored or whether it goes completely unnoticed./

I think you answer that at the end of your post.

/But I think the wand has to be around for the magic to register,/

I think again, you answered that at the end of your post.

/or else it is hard to explain how nobody noticed an underage wizard was present when supposedly Morfin killed the Riddles. But if Tom left his own wand in a hiding place after he took Morfin's wand to do the deed then perhaps there was no record of underage magic./

It doesn't seem like it has a whole lot to do with wands because if it was just wands how do they know these kids exist - continue for answer.


/According to Rowling's site there is a magical quill at Hogwarts that records all births of magical children. (Which means there was no need to dangle Neville from a window, all Algie had to do was ask Dumbledore if Neville was registered by the quill.)/

Basicly you just answered everything right there. They are apparently knowing at birth where all the magical children are and who they are. They would have known about Tom. They would have also known about Harry and Neville. I wonder if it tells them the date the child will be born. Because one wonders how Voldemort in a whole world of people would only find 2 babies born in July. I guess the prophecy only works in a certain geographical radius (haha!) OR maybe Voldie just said, the baby surely must be an english baby. There is no way I am going to have to do battle with an inferior wizard born in Brazil or Turkey :p

They clearly would have known about Tom the moment he was born. Yet they don't seem to investigate or check on these children till they are around 10/11ish. They could have easily taken Tom right away if they'd investigated he was put in an orphanage and given him to a magical family. But hind sight is 20/20, and there is no telling if that would have made a difference in Tom's life. But there was evidence that he was troubled at the oprhange. Would it have made a difference if as a young child he would have been placed with a magical family who could help him?

It probably depends on if JKR intended him to be evil from birth. Who is to say it wasn't because his mother used a love potion to get muggle Tom - maybe the cemicals affected the baby. (shrugs)

My point isn't to do with Tom as much as the after effect. Did the ministry and Hogwarts change its opperations where magical children are concerned.

The child that suggests they didn't is Harry.

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

At the time that Harry was left with the Dursleys (and indeed all through his school years) nobody but Dumbledore and later the Trio knew that clever, charming Tom Riddle had ANYTHING to do with Voldemort. From the POV of anyone else in the WW who knew about Tom and where he grew up (and he seems to have hidden that bit of knowledge from many), leaving him at the orphanage had apparently NO negative effects whatsoever, and they didn't learn differently until after Tom was killed by Harry in 1998. And Dumbledore kept the truth about Tom secret, by encouraging people to think of 'Voldemort' as his TRUE NAME. Dumbledore himself clearly didn't learn, true, but then Dumbles is an empathy-deprived jerk and also has his own agenda regarding Tom and Harry. So drawing conclusions based on HARRY'S placement alone doesn't work - because nobody other than DD knew at that time that Tom was Voldemort. Also in Harry's case, Dumbles himself was the one who placed him - not some 'they,' not some Ministry person or someone at Hogwarts or anyone else in the wider WW. Dumbles is the one you should be critiquing over Tom and Harry.

(Yes, the WW is astonishingly lax about wizarding children in general, I get your point, and I agree. They ought to keep tabs on them and help them out. But I think oryx is pointing out that the timeline you propose for WHEN they ought to have woken up about it (due to Tom) doesn't work. Thanks to Dumbles they simply didn't know about the real effect on Tom at the point of Harry's placement, so there was nothing for them to have 'learned better' about at that particular point in time, I'm saying. One would hope they did better after learning about Tom, but that's not something really covered in the books' timespan. So we just don't know.)

Again, RE Harry, there is no 'they' who dump Harry off. The blame for this goes squarely on Dumbles' shoulders - most of the WW had NO IDEA what happened to Harry after Halloween 1981 because Dumbles snatched him up and did as he pleased with the kid. And consciously kept people from knowing (all in the name of the kid's safety, of course.../sarcasm). I'm willing to bet that even if there had been established oversight for orphaned kids and methods of dealing with them beyond giving them to surviving magical relatives, Dumbles would have circumvented them in order to have Harry raised as he did. (It certainly gave him a nice loyal, unquestioning little soldier.) In his case the WW or 'Hogwarts' as a whole really isn't to blame, IMHO. Dumbledore alone is.

Oryx's point about Hermione I think is based on the claim that Hermione makes in PS/SS that she was testing spells out after she got her wand but before she actually started Hogwarts.

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/The magical community has all these craptastic jobs for various things - you mean to tell me a social worker that would check up on adopted/orphaned magical kids is out of the question? So obviously they didn't learn anything from Tom Riddles life of dumping a magical kid off on someone else./

Nor did they learn anything from the case of Tom Riddle's mother. Merope may have not been a child, but she was still extremely vulnerable and in need of help. A Ministry official himself saw how bad her circumstances were. But after he does his job of sending her brother and father to Azakaban, that's it. Nobody ever bothers to check up on her again.

And then once she dies giving birth to her son, the same thing happens to him. The Hogwarts staff presumably knows where wizarding children live in order to owl them acceptance letters, but they can't be bothered to use that knowledge in order to check up on the children?

I mean, I know that we had a discussion in an earlier post about the likelihood of magical children being abused in this day and age, but what about in Tom Riddle's day? Sure, he wasn't living in the Middle Ages, but the measures that Muggles took against people who were perceived to be "mad" or "different" in those days were nothing to brag about. Tom had every reason to fear the asylum. I don't know how much they would have been able to get away with, considering that he was a minor, but considering that electroshock therapy treatments were permitted, as well as other unsavory procedures, what exactly would have happened if Tom had been subjected to those?

I mean, good grief, what if Mrs. Cole had been an extremely religious woman who assumed that Tom was being possessed by a demon and hired a priest to forcibly exorcise him? What if the Dursleys had also been extremely religious and wanted to "stamp the magic out" of Harry that way? What would the wizarding world have done about that?

/Magical people don't mind making muggles forget who they are but heaven forbid they check up on a 1 year old child who's parents got murdered./

Maybe that's why wizards tend to have no misgivings about wiping Muggles' memories. They themselves are content to conduct their lives in a state of blissful oblivion and ignorance, maybe they reason that Muggles would feel the same way.

/The Dursley's knew about magic, why wouldn't they knock on the door and explain what happened? They didn't even give the Dursley's a shread, a dip...a grain of respect to know anything but expected them to automatically want to take Harry./

The wizarding world just has a really weird relationship with the relatives of Muggleborn students in general. The Ministry allows them to know about the wizarding world and allows them to enter it, but Hogwarts doesn't bother to keep them well-informed about their children's well-being. We see Hermione's parents go shopping with her in Diagon Alley in the second book, but don't ever find out if Hogwarts informed them about Hermione being Petrified. I assume that Muggle parents are under some kind of agreement with the wizarding world to not let other Muggles know about magic. (Although I don't know how it's enforced. Through threats of Obliviation, maybe?)

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[majorjune.livejournal.com]

What the hell Dumbledore, they couldn't even ring the doorbell and run???

Or what would have made even more sense, ring the doorbell and apparate away? :-P


The Dursley's knew about magic, why wouldn't they knock on the door and explain what happened? They didn't even give the Dursley's a shread, a dip...a grain of respect to know anything but expected them to automatically want to take Harry.

Nor did they give the Dursleys any money to aid in Harry's upbringing, either when they first abandoned him on their doorstep, or anytime in the ensuing 10 years...

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

/Nor did they give the Dursleys any money to aid in Harry's upbringing, either when they first abandoned him on their doorstep, or anytime in the ensuing 10 years.../

They could have easily made available the Potters money to take care of Harry - and someone in the wizarding world could have been made executer of the estate or something like that to make sure the Dursley's didn't steal the money.

Besides, IRL most of the times a 11 year old kid isn't given access to money like that. Usually an adult/gardian will oversee if both parents have died.

Besides If they didn't trust the Potter money in the hands of the dursley's why would they trust the baby?

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[majorjune.livejournal.com]

I'm not saying that the Dursleys should have had direct access to the Potter funds (and something tells me that as Muggles, they wouldn't have been able to access it), and obviously Harry was too young to manage his own economic affairs.

What I am saying is that the wizarding community in general, and DD in particular, was assuming a lot just by abandoning Harry on his aunt's doorstep, with little explanation, and expecting them to raise him for the next 10 years. They're lucky that Petunia and Vernon didn't just call Social Services the next day and say "Hey, someone dumped this unknown kid on our doorstep last night, we don't know who he is, come take him off of our hands!"

The least the wizarding community could have done was to see that the Dursley's got a yearly stipend to help with the costs of raising a child who was unexpectedly dumped on them. If Petunia and Vernon knew that they'd at least be reimbursed, and maybe even make a little cash in the process, then their attitude towards Harry could have been very different.

Hell, in the Muggle world the state does that as a matter of routine for foster parents, so why not in the wizarding world?

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[seductivedark.livejournal.com]

I completely agree. The money was meant for Harry anyway, didn't Hagrid say something about that in PS/SS? That the Potters wouldn't have left him penniless or something? You'd think there would have been an allowance given to the people who took over their job of raising the child once they died, a stipend from a trust, and if the Potters, who knew they were on Voldemort's black-list, didn't bother to set something up then the WW should have.

Vernon's pretty successful later on but at the time Harry was abandoned on his doorstep he was probably still just a struggling junior salesman or whatever it is he did, with a young wife and infant son of his own to support. There was no reason on earth for the WW to withhold the means with which to raise baby Harry from the people who were actually raising him.

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that line threw me off, too. What do you mean by "Sort too soon?" Slytherins can't be brave or noble now? Only Gryffindors can? And even if that's true, it's only *now* that you recognize that the Sorting Hat makes mistakes and realize that maybe it's not a good idea to determine kids' personality types that early?

Yes, I do agree that Albus probably didn't intend to insult Severus, but that remark really was insensitive.

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[majorjune.livejournal.com]

it's only *now* that you recognize that the Sorting Hat makes mistakes and realize that maybe it's not a good idea to determine kids' personality types that early?

That's the big thing that bothers me with the whole sorting into houses that have implied personality traits/abilities attached to them...because I know that when *I* was 11, my personality was very different than what I developed into as an adult.

It's like the saying my mother used to use: "If you give me the name, then I'll play that game!" IOW, you label someone, especially at that impressionable age, then you're almost guaranteed that they will grow into that...

Especially if you've set up the dynamics so that each house not only is assigned certain personality traits/abilities, but only those traits. So at the age of 11 some kid is told "You're a hard worker, and nothing else, into Hufflepuff for you!" -- that kid is basically being told, "Don't try to grow up to be brave, or ambitious, or intelligent, because we've already assigned you to your designated Life's Role..."

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[oryx_leucoryx]

And add to the 'Sort to soon' Albus' comment that only a *true* Gryffindor could pull the sword out of the hat - how can there be non-true Gryffindors? Either one is brave, bold etc and gets placed there or one chooses to be placed there, thus showing one is brave, bold etc even though the Hat may not recognize those traits as one's most significant ones. If our choices show what we are then there can't be non-true Gryffindors (or any other House).

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

/And add to the 'Sort to soon' Albus' comment that only a *true* Gryffindor could pull the sword out of the hat - how can there be non-true Gryffindors/

Yea, why call it true Gryffindors - why couldn't it just be those who are truly brave but it makes it sound like you can only be brave IF you are a Gryffindor doesn't it.

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

Because it's a load of claptrap designed to stoke Harry's ego, to encourage him in rash unthinking action, and to think Dumbles totally wonderful and be ready to do anything for him?

Sorry, I may be feeling slightly sarcastic today.

Re: don't mind me, got a little carried away here...

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

it's only *now* that you recognize that the Sorting Hat makes mistakes and realize that maybe it's not a good idea to determine kids' personality types that early?

IKR? I wish the Sorting Hat had been toast by the end of DH, I can see a new era of relatively more peace and prosperity if kids weren't sorted into groups that had long-standing grudges against each other.

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

"And don't forget the line Dumbledore gave to Severus about his bravery; telling Severus he thinks they sort too soon."

Yeah, this one of the (many, many) things about HP that didn't bother me at the time, but which, looking back on it, I really dislike. Saying "Sometimes we sort too soon" is a bit like going up to a black soldier and saying "Hey, you're so brave, you could almost be white!" Yeah, thanks...

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

What happened to just plain thank you, Severus. How many times do we get to see that? I don't remember any point where Harry or anyone was made to tell Severus they were sorry for making shitty judgements on him. No he's not a 'nice' guy but is it hard to see why he's not nice when he seems to have been treated like a piece of crap most of his life.

I think I remember one thank you, when Dumbledore was about to die and Severus saves him from the cursed ring. And if my memory serves me right the thank you came after Severus agreed to Dumbledore's plan of murdering himself?

Thanks for saving my life, now...you will have to kill me later.

OH and by the way, the whole reason I gave you for hanging around me so long at this craptastic school was a total lie. Yea thats right Severs, Harry's gotta be killed - but hay you hate the kid anyway so no biggie.

Oh yea and by the way I'm not going to leave any proof or evidence about your loyalty to anyone - sooooo on the odd chance you do manage to live through this war, don't expect any help from me or my portrait in clearing your name.

BUT HAY no worries. If you do die I'm sure Harry will figure fix it so you get all you deserve.

And if you do die, you will be traped with me on kings cross station with a ugly disfigured baby voldemort...so no pressure on living, Sev.

[borg-princess.livejournal.com]

Saying "Sometimes we sort too soon" is a bit like going up to a black soldier and saying "Hey, you're so brave, you could almost be white!" Yeah, thanks...

Oh, great analogy! I'll have to remember that one.