COS Chapter Seven: "Mudbloods and Murmurs"

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

 

* Collin’s really acting like an obsessive stalker here. I wonder if that’s how Harry appeared to Draco in HBP?

* Ron’s malfunctioning wand actually sounds quite dangerous, but nobody thinks it might be a good idea to replace it. Although OTOH having a lax attitude towards safety seems to be one of the few things about the WW that seems consistent throughout the books (they’ll show it again when Percy tries to stop people using dangerous cauldrons), so maybe I should be thankful that it isn’t just one of these things that changes whenever the plot demands.

* I assume that JKR’s just forgotten to mention the try-outs that every Quidditch team apparently does each year.

* I’m just going to tune out while Harry recaps the rules of Quidditch for Collin.

* Everyone’s not bothering to pay attention to Wood’s new tactics. Remember kids, teamwork’s for suckers! You just do what you want to do!

* Wood is still upset over Gryffindor losing last year. Serves him right for being too thick to have a reserve Seeker, IMHO.

* Note how Wood’s first reaction upon seeing Collin is to jump to the conclusion that he’s a Slytherin spy. Not that he’s in any way biased against Slytherin, or anything like that.

* Remember chaps, looking like a troll = evil. Part-giant, OTOH, = misunderstood woobie. Even though trolls don’t really seem much worse than giants.

* There are no girls on the Slytherin team, just to remind everyone that they’re sexist, and therefore evil. JKR hates sexism, which is why she took care to include so many liberated, independent-minded women in the novels.

* Wood’s “spitting with rage” now. Christ, Oliver, calm down, it’s not the end of the world. Maybe the Gryffindor and Slytherin teams could just play a friendly, or something.

* “Aren’t you Lucius Malfoy’s son?” says Fred, looking at Draco with dislike. Remember kids, it’s wrong to judge people based on their family.

* Is it possible to smirk so broadly that your eyes are “reduced to slits”, or is Draco actually grinning with happiness here?

* I don’t think that Malfoy did buy his way onto the team. For a start, Seeker is the most (i.e., only) important position in the game, and I don’t think that flying on better brooms would compensate for having an inferior Seeker. Secondly, he’s on the team for at least three years, when the Slytherins could easily have ditched him as soon as they’d got the brooms. They’d even have had a good excuse after losing that Quidditch match in “The Rogue Bludger”.

* Lucius seemed like quite a harsh, demanding father when we saw him in Borgin and Burke’s, IMHO, so the thought that he’s pleased daddy enough to make him buy new brooms for the team is probably making Draco grin even more.

* I bet he looks adorable in this scene.

* Now I can’t stop thinking of Lauren Lopez in A Very Potter Sequel. “Don’t worry, daddy, you’ll love me after this! I’ll catch that Snitch, mark my words!”

* Just thought it interesting to note that Malfoy wasn’t involved in the conversation until Ron brought him in. It’s not like he was strutting up and down, boasting about his new broom, or anything like that.

* Hermione’s the one who starts with the personal insults. Really, I think that the good [sic] guys are acting worse than the baddies here.

* If the theory that Draco’s really just happy because he’s finally made his daddy proud is right, then implying that he’d just bought his way onto the team is probably one of the most offensive things Hermione could say. Unsurprisingly, he responds with one of the most offensive things that he could say.

* Draco calls Hermione a “Mudblood”, despite the fact that she’s a Muggleborn, and therefore cannot be expected to know what it means, suggesting that either she’s upset him so much he’s not thinking straight, or that he wants to keep face in front of his teammates by responding to her insults, but at the same time doesn’t want to upset her. If the latter, it could be evidence for some kind of D/Hr ship.

* JKR seems to be expecting us to go “ZOMG Draco’s an evil racist!” suggesting that she’s forgotten why exactly it is that racism’s considered so wrong. I don’t think it’s just that you’re looking down on people for the way they were born – if it were, then jokes about stupid blondes would be considered as bad as jokes about stupid black people. Rather, it’s wrong because minorities often suffer from discrimination (and in many cases have suffered from it even more in the relatively recent past), and racist language helps to reinforce and normalise the prejudiced attitudes which lead to such discrimination. Because we haven’t really see people suffering from anti-Muggleborn prejudice, it’s hard to think of “Mudblood” as a particularly serious insult.

* This, BTW, is why I disagree with people who say things like “Rowling uses the Harry Potter books to teach children not to be racist.” If she were really doing that, she’d show how racism affects people’s lives (cf. To Kill a Mockingbird). What she’s actually doing is taking real racism and using it in lieu of actual worldbuilding and characterisation. We already know that racism is wrong, and we think Draco’s a bad person because his use of the term “Mudblood” is superficially similar to real-life examples of racism; we don’t learn about how racism is bad from its effects on HP characters, because it doesn’t really have any.

* Anyway, back to the actual story…

* Once again, the good guys are the first to use force. Why am I not surprised?

* I think it’s sweet the way Flint dives in front of Malfoy to stop him being attacked. The Slytherins often seem to look out for each other the most (see also Lucius patting Snape on the back when he’s first Sorted). Contrast this with the Gryffindors in PS, who refuse to speak to Harry, Hermione, Ron or Neville after they lose some House Points.

* What’s this, one of the good guys has suffered some negative consequences as a result of attacking someone else? Hold on while I go make a note of this in my diary.

* Again with the clothes! Lockhart’s wearing robes of “palest mauve” today. Harry’s really starting to look rather gay now; given JKR’s fondness for stereotypes (viz. the Finnegans) and inability to write a decent romance (chest monster!), I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find her way of showing homosexuality would be having someone spend all their time looking at their crush’s clothes.

* Note how Hagrid doesn’t remonstrate with Ron for trying to curse Malfoy. Clearly he’s a responsible adult and an excellent candidate for a prestigious teaching position.

* I know Hagrid doesn’t like Lockhart, but he really should know better than to undermine him like that in front of his pupils.

* So the jinx on DADA has been in place for what, forty or so years now? And people are only just starting to twig? I know wizards are slow learners, but really…

* Also, couldn’t Dumbledore find ways to either discover how Riddle jinxed the position and undo it somehow, or to get around it, such as hiring two teachers who each teach on alternate years or getting rid of DADA and replacing it with a class which is functionally indistinguishable but has a different name (“battle magic”, perhaps?).

* I think that this scene was one which the film actually did better than the books. Yes, having Hermione getting all upset may not have been fully logical, but it at least made Draco look like a hurtful bully rather than an eccentric crank. It also suggested that someone might have called Hermione that before, hinting at actual day-to-day anti-Muggleborn prejudice, which is more than the books ever managed to do.

* “Maybe it was a good thing yer wand backfired.” Wait, is Hagrid glad that Ron got to be on the receiving end in the hope that he’ll be less likely to curse people in future? No, of course not, he’s worrying that Ron might otherwise have got in trouble.

* Hagrid comes across as so judgemental when he says “’Spect Lucius Malfoy would’ve come marchin’ up ter school if yeh’d cursed his son.” Clearly, caring about your children being attacked is a sign of great evil. Good guys know that being randomly hexed is what makes a man out of you.

* Although Lucius doesn’t seem to have done much when Draco was hexed into unconsciousness on the train (twice!), which probably foreshadows the Redeemed!Malfoys situation at the end of DH.

* Hagrid’s been breaking the law to make his pumpkins grow faster. Which couldn’t possibly be dangerous in any way, oh no.

* Suddenly, Draco’s gossip about him getting drunk and setting his bed on fire looks awfully plausible.

* Everybody hates Filch, which is entirely understandable, given all the times he complains about having to clean up the mess children make and, erm, gives them detention for breaking the rules. Yep, entirely understandable.

* So how does Parseltongue work, then? ’Cause surely Lockhart ought to have heard it, even if he didn’t understand what it was saying? Or is it a sort of telepathy? But then Ron managed to speak it in DH…

* Awfully convenient the way the basilisk goes around describing its evil plan to itself, isn’t it? Do basilisks just have really bad memories, and need to keep repeating their plans to themselves in case they forget?

* Part of me can’t help but feel pleased that Ron vomited slugs over that trophy. Maybe next time he’ll think twice before hexing someone. Or not.
 

 

Comments

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

It's really quite ugly. And it makes Rowling's use of pasteded-on-yay Nazi imagery even more offensive. Not only is she using real-world atrocities to bolster her own bad writing without really showing understanding of those real events, she is also portraying the supposed villains according to the same images the *Nazis* used to try to justify their genocide, and that many throughout history have used to justify persecution of the Jews. She turns real history on its head and consequently (although not consciously, I believe) sets up a situation in the Potterverse which the stereotypes are shown as being true, the subjects of the stereotypes bring about their own ostracism, and are in fact the 'real' murderers, filthy criminals harming the pure brave ones. That's icky enough on its own, but when you rematch up the Potterverse players with the real-world groups who respectively 1) were stereotyped this way (Jews) and 2) used these stereotypes (Nazis and their supporters) it just is worlds of wrong.

I won't go into the portrayal of Muggles, either. Just ick.

I wish JKR would bother to *think*. The first couple of books weren't so bad, she's got to be *capable* of it.

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/She turns real history on its head and consequently (although not consciously, I believe) sets up a situation in the Potterverse which the stereotypes are shown as being true, the subjects of the stereotypes bring about their own ostracism,/

That's what a lot of people have been saying about her portrayal of giants and house elves. On the one hand, we're supposed to think that it's wrong to discriminate against them. But on the other hand, we're shown that the stereotypes about them *are* true. House elves, with the exception of Dobby, really do like being slaves. Giants really are wild and brutish. What makes the house elf situation so maddening is that while we see that house elves are treated badly, we're also cautioned that freedom is bad for them, since that's not what they want. Well, then what do they want? Are house elves just a race of brainwashed masochists, perfectly content to have their heads mounted on walls after they die, be mistreated by the Ministry, be slaves with no pay or leave, and be kicked around by their masters?

In DH, the lesson that we're supposed to gather from "Kreacher's Tale" was that Voldemort was mistaken to treat Kreacher badly, that if he hadn't threatened him, he wouldn't have lost his Horcrux. Well, how on earth would Voldemort have known how to treat Kreacher, Hermione? He doesn't care about human beings; you really think that he's going to care about house elves?

Here you have a guy who grew up with Muggles and probably had no idea what a house elf even was before he found out that he was a wizard. Upon entering the wizarding world, no doubt he would asked someone about them, would have had that person tell him that house elves were inferior beings whose sole purpose in life was to be slaves, and then would have seen that person proven right by his first encounter with them. Having seen how people treat their house elves, how the Ministry has never bothered to provide any protections for them, and how nauseatingly subservient house elves are to the point of masochism, how else do you think Voldemort would have regarded them? They're *slaves,* one of the major tenets of slavery is that the enslaved are pieces of property that are easily interchangeable and replaceable. Of course he wouldn't think that getting rid of Kreacher was wrong. Neither would the rest of the wizarding world.

I mean, what's the moral of the story here? It's okay to keep house elves as property just as long as you don't physically hurt them? That message reminds me of the horrible justifications that racists still make about slavery: that there was "good slavery" and "bad slavery." Uh, no, regardless of whether or not the owners hurt their slaves, they're still reprehensible for having slaves at all. And the idea that house elves *want* to be enslaved, that freedom and rights are in fact *repulsive* to them...that idea is just disgusting.

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

Oh gods yes. The house elf and giant situations are complete ick, I totally agree. This is why I really, really dislike the crapilogue (beyond the bad writing): Harry has killed Voldie, yes, but so many other problems have not been dealt with, or even *recognized,* but "all is well." It just upholds an ideal of covert - rather than *overt* - wizarding supremacy. Benevolent supremacy, of course of course, but wizards are at the end held up as *really better* than non-wizard people, human or otherwise. The moral of the story is that Muggleborns shouldn't be persecuted because *they're really wizards, equal to any other wizard,* not that they shouldn't be persecuted because *they're people and so equal to wizards regardless of ability.*

Obviously Muggleborns shouldn't be persecuted for any reason - nor should any other group. But the *reason* implicit in the way the story is told for *why* they should not be persecuted is very problematic, is what I'm saying.

I once saw an interpretation of the books along the lines of 'clearly Harry is Just Like Christ.' I have problems with how this idea works out in the books, but this review particularly disgusted me, because it stated that one of the major ways Harry is like Christ is his 'dual nature.' Meaning that he grew up like a Muggle, and his mother was Muggleborn, so it was like he was like a Muggle (logic gap there - Lily was still a *witch*) and also a wizard, and this is Just Like Christ because Christ was human and divine! There was even a neat little table, making clear that human=Muggle and wizard=divine.

If wizards are divine, it's only in the style of the Greek gods who had no problem torturing, cheating on each other, and committing various other atrocities against each other and the puny humans they ruled over. Christian-divine? Not so much.

I rather suspect that the sort of mindset-problems like these, together with the massive levels of corruption and cruelty in the WW (dementors anyone? life imprisonment without trial, Aurors authorized to use the Unforgivables rather than arrest?) are precisely what gives rise to so many dark lords.

/rant

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/If wizards are divine, it's only in the style of the Greek gods who had no problem torturing, cheating on each other, and committing various other atrocities against each other and the puny humans they ruled over. Christian-divine? Not so much./

Well, if you want to be cynical, you could say that that sort of behavior is also practiced by God and his followers in the Old Testament. But I digress.

The main problem that I have with the "Harry is just like Jesus" argument is not just because that's a really grand and outlandish statement to make, it's because one of the most important beliefs and ideas that I associate with Jesus is forgiveness. Forgiveness for others' sins, forgiveness for one's enemy.

It's easy to connect Aslan with Jesus because everything fits. Not only is the symbol of a lion, powerful but gentle, a compelling image of Jesus, but all of the events involving Aslan in "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" mimic the Gospels. You have Edmund who is a traitor, Aslan who forgives him and volunteers to be sacrificed in his place, the whole scene where Aslan is taunted and humiliated by his enemies that is inspired by the Crucifixion, and then the scene of the Resurrection where Aslan returns, whole and unharmed.

In DH, Harry does sacrifice himself and he does come back from the dead. Yet who does he sacrifice himself for? Draco? Severus? Bellatrix? Lucius? No, Harry sacrifices himself for his loved ones and for everyone else who is fighting or has lost loved ones in battle. Harry does risk his life by saving Draco in the Room of Requirement, but he doesn't do it because he has forgiven Draco; he does it because it's the right thing to do. There is never a point in the book where Harry forgives his enemies. He does not forgive Peter, Draco, Severus, or even Voldemort. The only gesture he makes to Voldemort in the end is the half-hearted entreaty to feel remorse. The only gesture that he makes to Snape is naming one of his sons after him - and that is years after Snape is dead. Harry never has a confrontation with Draco, Snape, or Peter where they address their enmity and finally reconcile with each other.

And for those who say that for Harry to do any of the aforementioned things would be too sappy, trite, sentimental, and unrealistic, fine. If that's true, then don't compare him to Jesus. Because as unrealistic and sappy as those things may sound, those actions are exactly what Jesus would have done. Above all else, Jesus was a compassionate pacifist. So, I don't know where people are getting the idea that Harry = Jesus, apart from the whole sacrifice and resurrection scenes that we got in DH.

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Yes! Amen to all of this, and thank you! Jesus is all about love and forgiveness, and forgiveness is radical, powerful, and DIFFICULT (not trite and sappy at all). And it is something we simply never see in the Potterverse. Not once.

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

You're very welcome! :D

I don't believe that forgiveness is sappy myself, but I know that others do. I think that one of the reasons for that is that the act of bestowing forgiveness can be seen in a variety of ways, many of them negative. It can be viewed as condescending, as self-indulgent, as submissive, or as weak. When the person being forgiven is unrepentant and clearly does not deserve to be forgiven, then forgiveness can be viewed as weakness, as an act of letting that person off too easily.

A prime example that I can take from the HP series is Lord Voldemort himself. He is a cold-blooded murderer who is responsible, both indirectly and directly, for the deaths of hundreds of people. He only cares about achieving his own aims, doesn't love anyone, and shows no remorse. If Harry were to one day go up to Voldemort and say, "I forgive you," I can bet you anything that thousands of HP fans would roll their eyes and wonder if it was a joke.

I don't know if you've ever seen the animated TV show, "Avatar: The Last Airbender" (it's a great show, you should check it out if you haven't seen it), but the series finale inspired a lot of debate among the fans, because (spoilers!) Aang, the hero of the series, does not kill Ozai, the main antagonist, but strips him of his powers instead. Ozai is then thrown into jail. A lot of fans were upset that Aang didn't kill him at the end. They said, "All the Avatars said it was his destiny to kill him! Aang was being selfish by keeping to his pacifist Buddhist ways! It was a sacrifice that he had to make, it's war! He was only thinking of himself - he's not the only person in the world! What if Ozai got out of prison or found a way to get his powers back...etc."

Note that Aang never actually did forgive Ozai. He just refrained from killing him. But in the eyes of many of the fans, that wasn't enough. Me? My main problems with the finale were the plot threads that weren't tied up and the shipping (I like Zuko/Katara, what can I say? *sheepish*). I didn't mind Aang's resolution at all and I thought it was nice that the hero spared the villain and got to keep his moral values by the end of it.

But yes, getting back on track, we don't really see instances of forgiveness in the HP series. Lily never forgives Snape for calling her "Mudblood," Harry, Ron, and Hermione never forgive Draco for being a bully, Snape never forgives James for being a bully, the Weasley family doesn't forgive Percy until he comes back to them and apologizes, Harry doesn't really forgive Snape (at least, he never forgives him to his face), nobody forgives Peter for anything, and Harry and Dudley reach a quasi-reconciliation, but it's not really a movement toward forgiveness. As for Harry and Dumbledore...I don't know if it's a case of Harry forgiving Dumbledore as it is Harry just not realizing how bad Dumbledore's actions were. When Dumbledore asks his pardon, it's for not telling him about the Hallows and not telling him about his family history. They don't discuss Dumbledore's manipulation, so either Harry doesn't consider it to be important or doesn't believe that it was bad at all. By the time they're done talking, Harry's forgotten all about it.