Let's Read Tales of Beedle The Bard, part four:

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

Summary of the Story: Muggle king (surprise. :P) wants to be the only one who can perform magic. Unfortunately, his view of magic is mostly people waving twigs at one another, and a local Wormtongue-esque charlatan decides to take advantage of this, complete with threatening the titular washer-woman, Babbity Rabbity, into coming with him and helping him out (to be fair, he was pretty desperate):

" 'Crone!' roared the charlatan. 'Your cackling has cost me dear! If you fail to help me, I shall denounce you as a witch, and it will be you who is torn apart by the king's hounds!'" (Page 67)

Things seem to go swimmingly for the Muggle king at first, except when it comes to the bit about necromancy -- let's say one of the dogs ate a poisonous toadstool and died. :(

Anyways, the king tries it out and -- surprise surprise -- Babbity (who's of course been secretly assisting him) can't do it.

Then things start to get hairy, as the charlatan pulls a You Have Outlived Your Usefulness + Burn The Witch on Babbity Rabbity, who uses her trickery to make it look like she's turned into a tree, the woodsmen do the sensible thing and cut it down -- or not so sensible considering the stump starts cackling.

0.0.

...

Anyways, Babbity uses her witchy powers to trick the king into leaving the magical folk alone, the charlatan's exposed as the dickweed he is, and all is well. (For the Wizarding World, anyway)


Dumbledore's commentary: Opens thus: "The story of 'Babbity Rabbity and Her Cackling Stump' is, in many ways, the most 'real' of Beedle's tales, in that the magic described in the story conforms, almost entirely, to known magical laws." (78) Of course, some might beg to differ. :P He then goes on about death and how it's irreversible and blah blah blah...actually quite interesting bit of historical information...and this:

"The King in Beedle's story is a foolish Muggle who both covets and fears magic. He believes that he can become a wizard simply by learning incantations and waving a wand. He is completely ignorant of the true nature of magic and wizards, and therefore swallows the preposterous suggestions of both the charlatan and Babbitty. This is certainly typical of a particular type of Muggle thinking: In their ignorance, they are prepared to accept all sorts of impossibilities about magic, including the proposition that Babbity has turned herself into a tree that can still think and talk. (It is worth noting at this point, however, that while Beedle uses the talking-tree device to show us how ignorant the Muggle King is, he also asks us to believe that Babbitty can talk while she is a rabbit. This might be poetic license, but I think it more likely that Beedle had only heart about Animagi, and never met one, for this is the only liberty that he takes with magical laws in the story. Animagi do not retain the power of human speech while in their animal form, although they keep all their human thinking and reasoning powers. This, as every schoolchild knows, is the fundamental difference between being an Animagus and Transfiguring oneself into an animal. In the case of the latter, one would become the animal entirely, with the consequence that one would know no magic, be unaware that one had ever been a wizard, and would need somebody else to Transfigure one back to one's original form." (Page 85)

0.0.

*Dumbles Rage-O-Meter trembles, threatening to reach the breaking point*

Behave. <.<

Yeah...there's also a footnote about witches and wizards being born, not made -- and while I'm guessing JKR was going for Force Sensitivity or something, it comes off eerily like Umbridge's words to Mrs. Cattermole in DEATHLY HALLOWS. (You know, the "she must have stolen the wand" douchequakery? That's what it sounds like)

And then Dumbledore goes on about Babbitty's technique: blah blah trees, wandmakers, Bowtruckles, the Cruciatus Curse...

Yeah, I shit you not:

"In Beedle's time, the Cruciatus Curse had not yet been made illegal by the Ministry of Magic, and could have produced precisely the sensation with which Babbity threatens the king." (86) Basically, sort of like an ax hitting his side.

*Sighs*

Look, I can understand Values Dissonance -- a little -- but considering DEATHLY HALLOWS again...yeah. :/ Nice to see the whole It's Okay If A Good Guy Does It approach to the Unforgivables is still intact. :P

>:(

Dumbles Rage-O-Meter: 11. *It explodes again*

*Hauls it off to maintenance to get it fixed...again*




Take heart, guys...one more and it's over. :)

Comments

[dracasadiablo.livejournal.com]

He is completely ignorant of the true nature of magic and wizards, and therefore swallows the preposterous suggestions of both the charlatan and Babbitty. This is certainly typical of a particular type of Muggle thinking: In their ignorance, they are prepared to accept all sorts of impossibilities about magic

Well, for once I agree with DD. The number of HP fans that blindly accept all ever changing rules of magic world that JKR dish out is staggering.

fundamental difference between being an Animagus and Transfiguring oneself into an animal. In the case of the latter, one would become the animal entirely, with the consequence that one would know no magic, be unaware that one had ever been a wizard, and would need somebody else to Transfigure one back to one's original form.

So, when fake!Moody transfigured Draco he was essentially a very frightened, confused ferret.
How can anybody in the school just shrug it off?

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

-I think what really upset me was the whole It's Okay If A Good Guy Does It thing. When Draco calls Hermione a "Mudblood", it's a bad thing -- fair enough. Dumbledore treating Muggles like dumb animals? Not cool at all. And they *don't* go together.

That said, very good point regarding the HP fans. :)

-Holy shit, I didn't think of that. D: *Buries face in hands* That is just horrible on so many levels...

[dracasadiablo.livejournal.com]

Ah, but Hermione is magical and more importantly a Gryffindor. Muggles? What importance they have? No magical power = unimportant, comic relief, and/or ignorant and nasty. :(

It's horrible. And quite pointless as a "teaching" method. Yes, Draco is embarrassed by being turned into a ferret and by people laughing at him. But can he understand / remember the "amazing bouncing ferret" episode?
Or did Moody only traumatize some poor animal?

Btw. The animal cruelty is rampant in HP books.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

It really is. *Cough* Billy Stubbs' rabbit *Cough* I'm not usually the judgmental type, but all I can say is that JKR has...a really twisted psyche. :/

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

The King in Beedle's story is a foolish Muggle who both covets and fears magic.

Translated: in a world where magic is real, it's foolish to want to be able to do it. Also, it's foolish to fear that other people will use magic to hurt you. In particular, it's foolish to both want to have that power yourself, and to fear it in others when you don't have it.

Sorry, why is that foolish again? Or rather, why is it foolish for Muggles? Wizards, after all, do want to use magic, and fear magic being used against them enough to have a mandatory class devoted to protecting themselves from magic wielded by others.

"Coveting and fearing magic" isn't like wanting to go on a roller-coaster when you both enjoy it and are scared by the experience, you know. "Coveting and fearing magic" is actually wanting and fearing two separate things.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

*This*! :D

[dracasadiablo.livejournal.com]

Anybody exposed to HP wizards would either :
1. Fear the magic (and infantile, petty tyrants using it) and wish to have magic powers so they can defend themselves. Or;
2. Fear and wish there was no such thing as magic / all wizards would go and live on the Mars so they can never be around them. :(

[kahran042]

And if all the wizards went to Mars, then they could go to Pigfarts and meet Rumbleroar!

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

"This is certainly typical of a particular type of Muggle thinking: In their ignorance, they are prepared to accept all sorts of impossibilities about magic, including the proposition that Babbity has turned herself into a tree that can still think and talk."

Well, Dumbles, maybe if the wizards actually made some effort to interact with wider society instead of shutting themselves off, then Muggles wouldn't be so ignorant about it.

"In Beedle's time, the Cruciatus Curse had not yet been made illegal by the Ministry of Magic, and could have produced precisely the sensation with which Babbity threatens the king."

I've never read the book, but it sounds here like DD's straying dangerously close into "It was legal, therefore Babbity's not a bad person for using it." Which is... kinda disturbing, I must say.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

*This*. :D

And...yeah, Dumbles' mentality would make a certified psychologist piss his pants. :P

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

I've never read the book, but it sounds here like DD's straying dangerously close into "It was legal, therefore Babbity's not a bad person for using it." Which is... kinda disturbing, I must say.

That comment of his is kinda strange, as well as disturbing. Terri did a pretty convincing post in Snapedom about how Dumbledore is Chaotic and promotes the Chaotic perspective in Hogwarts, but this comment of Dumbledore's is Lawful Evil. (Or maybe Lawful Stupid, but I think to under Lawful Stupid, you harm yourself rather than your enemies.)

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/Well, Dumbles, maybe if the wizards actually made some effort to interact with wider society instead of shutting themselves off, then Muggles wouldn't be so ignorant about it./

It's not even that. If the Muggles actually *do* find out about magic and the wizarding world, they're mind-wiped anyway, unless they're relatives of wizards. So, the wizarding world is trying to have it both ways. They purposely make Muggles ignorant for safety reasons (ostensibly), yet mock and deride them for being "ignorant."

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

Oh, excellent point! I hadn't considered that, but you're right. It's like the 19th century attitude towards educating women: Women are too dumb to learn medicine, law, or business, so we won't even bother to teach them those things, then we'll ridicule them and bar them from power because they're ignorant and uneducated.

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

Or racists' attitude toward minorities. "Yes, blacks are inferior, so we'll forbid them to learn how to read and write, enslave them, and, once they're free, bar them from power and financial security by setting up all of these legal, social, and economic barriers, and then we'll ridicule them for having disproportionately high rates of illiteracy and poverty."

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

Holy shit. D:

[sunnyskywalker]

Don't forget the time limit! "Even if their entire families were barred from any kind of advancement whatsoever and so were no more able to help their kids get a leg up than their ancestors, after X arbitrary number of years, any failure to improve their lots is because they're lazy, just not trying, or just not that bright." If Muggleborns faced real bigotry in the ww, I bet we would see that - "Sure, your Muggleborn parents and grandparents were barred from the only decently paying jobs in the ww and have to sell sandwiches on the Hogwarts Express, and so couldn't afford to buy you a decent wand or get you special tutoring and had no connections to powerful people to help you out, but your the third generation that's been magical, so you not having those good connections skills to get the good jobs is entirely your fault."

[dracasadiablo.livejournal.com]

I've never read the book, but it sounds here like DD's straying dangerously close into "It was legal, therefore Babbity's not a bad person for using it." Which is... kinda disturbing, I must say.
It's more then disturbing. The argument that something that will later be considered "unforgivable" (but not for Gryffindors) is o.k. because then it was legal is pure Nightmare Fuel.

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

Indeed. I don't really like any of these stories (at least "The Warlock's Hairy Heart" gets away with "bland but cute"), but this is the only one of the lot that makes me GENUINELY angry. Not only is it completely stupid and nonsensical, but also rabidly anti-non-magic-people. I'll have more to say about it when I go over the story in my MST.

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

Babbity Rabbity

Real fairytales, in my experience, reserve their silly names for supernatural beings (like Rumplestiltskin - although I read somewhere that this may be a pun in an older version where instead of sticking his foot in the floor in the end, he sticks another body part into the queen, so...). In a wizarding context, Babbity Rabbity is not a supernatural being. This is stupid.

This, as every schoolchild knows, is the fundamental difference between being an Animagus and Transfiguring oneself into an animal. In the case of the latter, one would become the animal entirely, with the consequence that one would know no magic, be unaware that one had ever been a wizard, and would need somebody else to Transfigure one back to one's original form."

So when Viktor Krum partially Transfigured himself into a shark for the second task, he was risking the possibility that he might eat the merfolk, the hostages, or his opponents? Maybe there is something to the whole "Dark Arts are inherently corruptive" theory after all. Also, Cedric's Transfiguration of a stone into a dog to distract the dragon is coming across as somewhat unsettling. This discussion of minds also raises the question of whether something can be Transfigured into a human or other sapient life form, and what control an unscrupulous wizard* might have over the thoughts and beliefs of such a creature.

*i.e. a wizard

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

-Good point regarding Babbity Rabbity's name. :) (And I didn't really hear that other version of Rumpelstiltskin, sadly enough. XD)

-"So when Viktor Krum partially Transfigured himself into a shark for the second task, he was risking the possibility that he might eat the merfolk, the hostages, or his opponents? Maybe there is something to the whole "Dark Arts are inherently corruptive" theory after all. Also, Cedric's Transfiguration of a stone into a dog to distract the dragon is coming across as somewhat unsettling. This discussion of minds also raises the question of whether something can be Transfigured into a human or other sapient life form, and what control an unscrupulous wizard* might have over the thoughts and beliefs of such a creature."

0.0.

Holy shit...I didn't think of that one either. D:

[sunnyskywalker]

Did he not Transfigure his brain? Would it fit properly in a shark skull? Does. Not. Compute.

Transfiguring rocks into animals definitely raises some issues. Maybe this leads to golems.

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

Did he grow the sensory organs that detect electricity in the water? How would the human parts of his brain deal with the new sensory data? How would his gills interact with his human respiratory system and would he suffer any adverse effect if he stopped moving?

[dracasadiablo.livejournal.com]

And he was swimming in a lake. Not in the salt water. So, was he a Bull Shark then? Or is this "Oh dear, biology."?

[maidofkent.livejournal.com]

So, when Slughorn transfigures himself into an armchair, he would have truly become a piece of furniture, with no thoughts,emotions,sensory experiences, and, especially, magical abilities whatsoever. Presumably, he would have to stay as furniture until someone like Dumbledore came along and realised what had happened, or until he fell to pieces. If Death Eaters had been coming to call, and set fire to the house, Slughorn would have been totally helpless. But hang on.....when Slughorn is untransfigured, he complains that, as an armchair, he could feel Dumbledore's wand poking him (sorry), so how does that work exactly....

Oh dear maths/ continuity/ logic

[urbanman1984.livejournal.com]

Continuity has never been JKR's strong point! But perhaps it is not quite as bad as her maths.

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

In all honesty I always interpreted that as Sluggy projecting an *illusion* of being an armchair.

Admittedly, Rowling seems to be very slow to present any form of magic that is illusory, but illusions are such an ingrained part of traditional interpretation of magic that it's hard not to leap to the conclusion.

[dracasadiablo.livejournal.com]

Sense, it makes none.
But then it's true for most of the books. :/

[kahran042]

Maybe Slughorn is a Furnimagus? :)

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

I thought the shark was an incomplete Animagus transformation.

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Pretty weird for Dumbledore to talk about 'magical laws' when we all know Rowling would change them in a microsecond when she needed them to support the story and not prove a hindrance.

Oh! I'm sorry if this was the last straw that broke your trembling Dumbles Rage-O-Meter! Again!

[karentheunicorn.livejournal.com]

Yea when I saw the comment on this thread that Dumbledore was making grand statements about 'magical laws' - the first think I thought was, what magical laws?

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

Is it ever stated what makes magic work/fuels it in series? Because I don't remember anything like that.

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

It's okay, brad. It's currently being fixed. :) (Well, after the poor thing had to be fed some chicken noodle soup and watch some reruns of FIREFLY to calm down. *Hugs it*)

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

"In Beedle's time, the Cruciatus Curse had not yet been made illegal by the Ministry of Magic, and could have produced precisely the sensation with which Babbity threatens the king." (86) Basically, sort of like an ax hitting his side.

Seriously?! It wasn't illegal so it was ok?

And I had this fantasy that she just had a momentary lapse of judgment when she had Harry use the cruciatus curse....

[ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately no. :(

[oryx_leucoryx]

Well, DH came out about 7 years after GOF, right? That's enough time to forget what the issue was supposed to be ...