deathtocapslock | The Endless Possibilities of Squibs

Entry tags:

The Endless Possibilities of Squibs

Diddle's posts always bring out waves of comments, and for good reason. The points brought up are thought provoking, if not a little depressing. To me, people who would call this community a "bunch of bitter, angry shippers" are incapable of having intellectual discussions. This place is a beautiful thing: we love the series so much that we can point out every miserable, bad, stupid, or nonsensical point and at the end of it, we still know we like the series. That's love right there. Aint it, Will?

Jo, your breath seriously reeks.
But enough flattery. Let's talk Squib.

* Filch is obviously ashamed of being a Squib, suggesting that they suffer from prejudice from fellow wizards, unlike Muggleborns. “Mudblood” is still a worse insult than “Sneakin’ Squib,” though.
-

for_diddled

I can't even begin to try to put together the hierarchy and "ism" here, so I'm going to speculate on what could have been.

Rowling said magical blood was dominant, so squibs were extremely rare. Wouldn't it be nice if instead of the wizard world being such an easy place to lose respect, they all looked for opportunities to lift people up?

Imagine it- someone is born and it's discovered that they're a squib, meaning resistant to magical blood. The wizard world takes this to mean that this person will have a strong, resistant personality and that they are good to have around medical wards. They make good healer's assistants, consultants. They go to school like everyone else, but instead of transfiguration, charms, and other classes requiring magic, they can elect to take extra potions and herbology classes.
(Which is sort of pigeon-holing, but at least there isn't the shame factor.)

What if squibs were seen as great community organizers? The symbolism there would be that a person is born and has no natural defenses (wizards do place so much emphasis on magic) so the loved ones all band together to protect him/her.

Or how about if Squibs were seen as bridges between magical people and non-magical people and so were thought to be natural peacemakers, diplomats, and counselors?

The ideas are pretty superstitious, but compared to Human House Elf and outcast, it’s a better deal. If only wizards weren’t so damn clique-y and quick to group everyone. Worst part is, I can’t even tell if it’s wizards or if it’s Rowling herself. In the case of the latter, is it because she was raised in a place that obsessively sectioned people off? I'm going to just assume it's that. I had a psychology professor who came from the United Kingdom and she was always telling me about how bad the classism was and how her own daughter had a teacher make a really nasty (and wildly inappropriate) classist remark regarding the subject matter of her art gallery project.

Edit: I think we all learned something interesting here today- there's a lot of ambiguity about the class "Potions" as far as methods, grading, and procedure goes.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Interesting ideas. It is a shame that wizards are so...exclusionary.

Nitpick: potions does require the active use of magic, it just doesn't require *wands.* A Muggle trying to make a potion would just get a toxic mess.

Really? But it was only in the HBP year that I saw Hermione needing to use magic for her potions. The other times, it looked like chopping and measuring.

I'm just saying, I don't remember magic for the potions in book 3 and book 2.

The books don't go into explicit detail about the composition of every potion, so we don't see every step. But transference of magic could easily take place during stirring for example - just because there aren't words and gestures with a wand doesn't mean no *magic* is occurring.

That makes sense.

I'll modify the idea a little and say that the Squibs would instead take a different sort of potions class. One that was more about the application of potions (as lynn_waterfall suggested "a squib could *use* a lot of magic that was essentially *done* by others") and creating potions that were made without magic. There have to be at least a few that don't require magic, but that a non-magical person wouldn't come up with because the ingredients required magic to obtain.

I always thought that potions were like cook books- following the directions exactly would yield the same results and only the oh-so-clever wizards were smart enough to know which ingredients to mix.

Following standard instructions, if you are a witch/wizard, will get you a lowest-common-denominator potion, is the impression I get: something that works well enough but isn't a particularly powerful version of the potion, or slightly less stable, etc. Whereas someone who knows potions well and has an intuitive grasp of it could create more subtle and powerful effects, not only because of their knowledge of how to mix things but of the character of the magic they infuse into the potion - the will, intent, etc. They also could create new potions and modify existing ones with less trial-and-error.

Just my impression. Even cookbook-style recipes, however, wouldn't take away the need for magic to make the ingredients interact in the correct way. Take Neville. His problem with all magic is control, not power. We see him mess up in potions with not following the directions, but he is *also* noted as being the one to cause his cauldron to *melt* or *explode* more often than the others, and we aren't always told that it was because the ingredients are potentially volatile on their own. If you misbrew a potion while expending lots of magical power but little control, the result would be dramatic, yes? Whereas merely mixing up ingredients wouldn't always do that, and someone with less power would not add additional volatility to the mix there, resulting in fewer *big* failures and more quiet fizzles.

And in potions, if it was all-or-nothing based ONLY on the ingredients, wouldn't grading be more pass/fail (either the potion functions or it doesn't) than by degrees of correctness/effectiveness?

I suppose that is what JKR meant but wouldn't it have been wise to have the Potions teachers show the class how to channel their magic without a wand into the potion making process then?

I think the Squibs could be excellent as handlers of (already created) potions, because they could feel the power, but not to add any more magic to it. So I can see them e.g. in apothecaries. A potioneer in the lab, a Squib seller in the front of the shop.

Yes! That job is perfect. It says "we aren't capable of doing this, but with your gifts, you are" which Filch doesn't get in his current job.

For example, the ingredients we know of for the draught of living death are all ordinary non-magical plants. The magic can't come merely from ingredients alone.

I do get what you're saying, and agree that some potions must use magic, but when I saw draught of living death, I always thought that was nothing more than what Juliet drank in the play.

Shakespeare's grasp of botany is unlikely to have been much better than his grasp of geography, historical accuracy, continuity, etc. The apothecary's potion is a plot device rather than something likely to work with real plants.

And to clarify, since I think I misunderstood your comment, the draught of living death is almost certainly magical seeing as how I don't think asphodel and wormwood can in real life produce a sedative powerful enough to simulate death. (Or Snape was just simplifying and they aren't the only ingredients).

From Famous Wizards Cards

Leticia Somnolens
Medieval, dates unknown.
This spiteful hag was jealous of the king's daughter and caused her to prick her finger on a spindle tainted with a Draught of the Living Death. A young wizard who had smeared his lips with Wiggenweld potion kissed the princess and brought her out of her trance.

----------------

It appears the Draught of Living Death causes suspended animation.

True. There is Care of Magical Creatures, though, which also probably doesn't require magic at all, any more than Herbology.

Working in the library wouldn't require magic, either. Hey, maybe Irma Pince is a squib, too, but just conceals it better.

Also... considering how many charmed objects there are in the WW, not to mention the existence of potions, it seems to me that a squib could *use* a lot of magic that was essentially *done* by others. Not to mention the possibility of squibs (from some families, at least) potentially having house elves to help them out.

In HBP when Irma sees that Harry's Potions book is defaced (by the Prince's corrections and spells) she causes the inkpot to chase harry out of the library. I think she is a witch.

I just checked that scene in my electronic version, and I didn't see anything like that. Maybe the file's damaged, but I don't have the printed book with me on vacation. Maybe it's in another scene?

Oddly, in that scene you mentioned, Hermione has the line "-- so it would be down to Filch to realise it wasn't a cough potion, and he's not a very good wizard, I doubt he can tell one potion from --"

I'd ask if JKR forgot Filch was a squib, except this is the book where Hagrid calls him a "sneakin' squib." (shakes head)

IIRC she makes their books beat them over their heads (couldn't find the actual reference though). I think they're talking about the attack on Katie Bell at the time.

Maybe Hermione was just trying to use less offensive terminology to refer to Filch.

Oops! Wrong scene. It's when Ginny and Harry eat chocolate in the library, OOTP ch 29.

And whipping out her wand, she caused Harry's books, bag, and ink bottle to chase him and Ginny from the library, whacking them repeatedly over the head as they ran.

One of the corner-stones to 'Eileen is Irma' theories (because in the previous chapter Severus threw the jar of cockroaches at Harry as he ordered him to leave).

As for whether Filch is a born squib, a failed wizard, not a very good wizard - the books can't decide. Hence swythyv's Argus Filch - One Tough Customer.

I do think it's possible that wizarding society just makes very little distinction between 'has no magic' and 'has almost no magic'. If someone has so little magic that they can't effectively do anything with it, that's probably good enough to get them called a Squib.

*insert obligatory 'Of course, I don't think Rowling ever really thought this through' addendum*

I´m not sure about Herbology... maybe some special herbs need special hands, otherwise they don´t grow... I think it is similar to Potions. Sometimes there is magic needed and sometimes it is better to touch things with non-magical hands?
The same with animals, maybe.
And the same with books...?
A Squib using magic done by others - I can see this e.g. in a hospital. Still the same paradigm: if it is better not to add magic to something, a Squib is our person.

I wonder if the wizards would ever realize that there are times when adding magic isn't the solution?

Oh, hey... your comment made me realize something! Arthur Weasley seems fascinated with muggle artifacts and objects, but he's still sort of clueless. A squib would be perfect for going undercover and learning about muggles. They could teach seminars in departments like Arthur's or just be on staff for when someone had a question about a muggle object- like a rubber duck?

-- I wonder if the wizards would ever realize that there are times when adding magic isn't the solution? --

In Rowlingword? Hm, I don´t think so... :-(((

-- They could teach seminars ... --

That is perfect! They really are something as a bridge between wizarding and muggle world! They can interact safely with Muggle children without fear of spontaneous magic. They can go to Muggle schools and bring any bit of information from there. Hey, they can be the wizarding spies in Muggle word!
Maybe the parents of the muggleborns could do this, too?

I can recall it being mentioned somewhere that some potions are stirred using wands

They aren't. Rowling made that blunder in an interview, and we all know how much faith to put in interview info.

Given how unstable and unreliable potions brewing can be in canon, it stands to reason that any implement that comes in contact with a potion is going to have a specific effect. Consequently, unless all wands are made from the same materials (which we know they aren't), you don't want any wand to ever touch a potion during the brewing process. You level the field by using a standardized stirring rod, and trying to channel magic through that.

Part of the disruptions are due to the difficulty that inexpert brewers have doing that. Particularly in the early years when even channeling magic though a proper wand can be dicy.

"In the case of the latter, is it because she was raised in a place that obsessively sectioned people off? I'm going to just assume it's that. I had a psychology professor who came from the United Kingdom and she was always telling me about how bad the classism was and how her own daughter had a teacher make a really nasty (and wildly inappropriate) classist remark regarding the subject matter of her art gallery project."

I think JKR was raised up in the Church of Scotland, which has strong Calvinist (read: predestination) influences, which might have led to her portray certain sections of society (e.g., Squibs) as being good only for certain tasks. There's a very good article about it here:

http://ferretbrain.com/articles/article-161

Regarding the "What subjects could Squibs do?" question, I'm surprised nobody's mentioned History of Magic yet. It's always been portrayed as just like normal History, only concerning magical people rather than muggles, with no spell-work reguired.

That's fascinating! No wonder there was something about the series that bugged me...

What about Arithmancy? Or translating ancient Runic texts? They could preserve unique areas of knowledge that have fallen out of popular knowledge.

And of course we learn that Argus Filch is charged with restoring the Fat Lady's *magical* portrait.

Oh, man... true! How would he do that?

He'd schlep the thing down to Francisco's Emporium of Fantastikal Fine Arts, where Francisco, an actual wizard artist, would undertake the task.

For a sizeable fee.

;-)

Hmmm, if Squibs are naturally resistant to magic then is there possibly a way that they might be able to channel that to cancel out other people's magic as well? The fact that wizards seem to have no contingency plans for if their magic doesn't work would mean that something that negated it could destroy a good portion of the WW if handled correctly. And the jerks would totally have it coming too.

I've always wondered: Hogwarts was spelled to look like an empty old ruin of a castle to Muggles - so how could Filch even see pupils and the real Hogwarts?

Hmm. Plot hole?

It would work if there was an actual magical difference between Squibs and Muggles (now I'm thinking of a series where the Squibs have magical cores which are empty- just enough magical about them to not be Muggles, but they don't have any reserves to actually perform magic with). As it is, Squibs are just people born to wizarding families but not possessing magic...and canon never bothers to give an explanation for why Muggle-repelling wards don't work on them. And in book five the Wizengamot is even wondering whether Squibs can see Dementors!

Isn't Diagon Alley protected similarly? So how does Hermione get her parents there? Just drag them through the inn which they can't see, and then the alley itself isn't spelled against them? That's all which makes sense, unless wizards actually do make exceptions for the parents of Muggleborns and either spell them or make some sort of adjustment in the wards so that they won't block those people. Which I'm rather skeptical about. As it is, I'm wondering if Hogwarts even bothered to contact Hermione's parents when she was petrified in book two.

Maybe it works similarly to Fidelius, and if you have seen it once (with somebody who knows about it and can show it to you), it is there for you forever.
But, on the other hand, the barrier at King´s Cross was visible all the time... so I don´t know.
But if Filch can see Hogwarts and Hermione´s parents Diagon Alley, I think muggles can see Hogwarts, under some conditions...

(In fact, yes, plot hole.)

I was listening in on an imaginary private debate on the subject-

It's like Hermione- she's a wizard born to muggles.
-So a Squib is a muggle born to wizards?
No! They're wizards, just without magic!
-Uh... is that anything like how Jackie Burkhart said "I'm not a poor person, I'm a rich person who has no money" when her dad cut her off?
Yes, sort of like that.
-Then what's the difference between a muggle and a wizard without magic? Knowledge of the wizard world? Ability to feel magic? Have wizards bothered to make this distinction, or do they just class everyone and shut up?
Class everyone and shut up.
-I see.

That sort of thing makes you wonder about the wizarding world's real beliefs about magical bloodlines. Supposedly, purebloods are superior because both parents are wizards, yet purebloods can inexplicably have Squib children, as can half-bloods and Muggle-borns. Given the way that Squibs have been treated in the series and the attitude that wizards have toward Muggles, wouldn't Squibs be more viciously targeted than Muggle-borns? In fact, shouldn't wizards be happy about Muggle-borns, since their appearance would mean more wizards, more people who can actually do magic, rather than Squibs, who are basically Muggles with wizard parents? Since the relationship between the Muggle world and the wizarding world depends on who can do magic and who can't, why should there be any blood prejudice if Squibs can randomly be born to anyone? I'd think that the ability to do magic would take first priority over bloodlines.

Besides, just the fact that Muggles can have magical children and wizards can have non-magical children should be a sign that wizards and Muggles aren't so different or separate after all.

Most of the problem is that Rowling tells us that magic is a dominant trait, while she shows us a world in which magic appears to be a recessive trait -- which she later reversed herself to admit to.

Of course she also shows us a world in which there is no way that magic could possibly be due to a single gene, too. It has to be due to a combination of them.

One of the foundation essays over on Red Hen goes into this in way too much detail. A very late development in that essay came after one of the people on the Spinners' End board took a course in genetics and passed on the information that strings and strings of the mapped out human genome appear to be composed of empty genes.

Magic is an *aberation* in humans. And it is more likely than not to have been a late inclusion to the genome of magical ones. I am currently postulating that since channeling magic is *dangerous* to humans (they cannot readily control it after all, even with a wand it can cause major damage to the caster), eventually human biology -- which was never designed to channel magic, unlike that of an actual magical *species* -- has more recently (biologically speaking that is, we're talking about thousands of years) developed the "Squib factor" as a safeguard, in which an individual carries a perfectly normal magical set of genes, which the Squib factor neutralizes, making it impossible for them to channel magic *actively*.

These individuals are resistant to both muggle *and* magical ailments, are able to operate charmed objects without losing control of them, and can see and communicate with ghosts, but they cannot cast spells.

And the Squib factor is also dominant (and can manifest spontaneously, apparantly, although rarely), so since there is no really good way to be able to tell a Squib from a muggle (and no one seems to be intersted in investigating one) some bloodlines have probably been Squibs for generations until the Squib factor fails to be passed on, resulting in a "muggle-born" wizard.

In fact, this is most likely to occur in pairings of Squibs with true muggles, since the muggle does not contribute anything that will hinder the magical traits from manifesting, wheras the Squib's magical traits are passed on by random selection, which includes the Squib factor..

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The Endless Possibilities of Squibs

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject