OOTP Chapter Eleven: "The Sorting Hat's New Song"

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

* “Harry didn’t want to tell the others that he and Luna were having the same hallucination” – erm, Harry, two people don’t independently have the same hallucinations. If two of you can see it, it’s a safe bet that there’s something there.

* Also, note the arbitrary scepticism here. Harry knows that there exist sounds which can be heard by some people and not by others (the basilisk’s voice); why, then, is the idea of an object which only some people can see so ridiculous?

* Nice to see Luna sticking up for herself like that. Unlike Hermione, who seems to be intimidated into silence.

* Of course, the Trio will tacitly accept Luna’s assessment of Hagrid’s competence when they decide not to carry on with COMC next year.

* Luna’s role is quite interesting, IMHO. She seems here to be set up as the teller of uncomfortable truths, and it’s a shame JKR didn’t make more of this function. Maybe Harry could have accepted things he didn’t like hearing from someone he had no reason to be antagonistic towards (i.e., Luna), as a stepping-stone to listening to uncomfortable truths told even by people he didn’t like, such as Draco.

* I like how the Mirror of Erised scene has become an example of Harry seeing “something that Ron could not”, as if the Mirror really had Harry’s parents in it, and anyone else just isn’t seeing it properly. It might be more accurate to say that he and Ron had both seen different but equally valid things.

* Actually wait, scratch that – the idea of Harry seeing someone else’s viewpoint as “equally valid” just isn’t going to happen, is it?

* Ginny is “hailed by some fellow fourth-years” the moment they reach the Gryffindor table. See how popular she is! She’s totally worthy to be the Chosen One’s woman!

* Note how the Sorting Hat pairs Slytherin and Gryffindor as two really good friends. Either Salazar wasn’t as evil as everyone now believes, or Godric wasn’t such an opponent of Dark Magic as the Gryffindors would like to think.

* Slytherin supported teaching “those / Whose ancestry is purest”, even though the House’s other main value of “ambition” would make it a natural home for those on the fringes of wizarding society – such as muggle-borns – who want to make something of themselves, and most hereditary aristocracies (as the pureblood families seem to be in the WW) would feel more at home in brave and loyal Gryffindor than cunning and ambitious Slytherin. So either the Hat is mistaken to suggest that Slytherin was much of a pureblood supremacist (perhaps it’s getting a bit senile after a thousand years); or ambition only became associated with Slytherin House at a later date; or Slytherin wasn’t initially a pureblood fanatic, but became so at a later date (perhaps one of the muggle-borns tried to betray the school?); or wizarding aristocracy is more like that of ancient Rome, with every individual competing to be better than his peers.

* Actually, that last suggestion might be quite close to the truth: Hermione mentions that wizards don’t have any princes, and there never seem to have been any wizard kings (or if there were, they were too remote in time to be mentioned), so the idea of a group of competing noblemen trying for the top job is quite plausible.

* Although the WW does seem to be fairly corporatist, so perhaps it’s not so much individuals competing for glory as families manoeuvring to increase their influence, a bit like in Renaissance Italy.

* Getting back to the actual book, it’s interesting to see how Hufflepuff’s described as taking “the rest”, which is about as close as we get to a canonical admission that Hufflepuff’s just a rag-bag House for people who wouldn’t fit into the other Houses.

* The school apparently worked well for “several happy years”, which would seem odd if Slytherin and Gryffindor had been at loggerheads over such a basic principle as whom to admit. Perhaps as mentioned above Slytherin was initially OK with the idea of letting in Muggleborns, but later changed his mind (for whatever reason), leading to all the conflict?

* The Hat outright says that the Houses are supposed to be united, which doesn’t seem to chime with the portrayal of Slytherin in later books. Is JKR just extraordinarily un-self-reflective, putting in all that stuff about Houses uniting because it sounded like a good principle, but not realising that her actual portrayal of the Houses undercut this theme? Or did she intend to address it, but suffered burnout between Books 5 and 6, and ended the series as quickly as possible without bothering about thematic closure?

* So, is the Hat’s advice for the student body in general, or is it also directed more specifically at Dumbles? Certainly, I can’t imagine his rigging the House Cup to make Gryffindor win every year for the last four years would endear him to many students from other Houses, especially not Slytherin, given their traditional rivalry.

* Ron’s not being very restrained with his eating, is he? Remember, though, it’s only bad people like Dudley, Crabbe and Goyle who actually get fat. Ron, being a good guy, can eat as much as he likes and remain lean and lanky.

* Harry’s refusing to even consider being more friendly with the Slytherins. Truly that boy is a fount of love and compassion!

* Ron’s being such an insensitive jerk that NHN leaves and sits by somebody else. He’ll display this sort of behaviour again in HBP, when he alienates Moaning Myrtle, who’s just about to tell Harry that Draco’s the one behind the murder attempts.

* Looking back on this book, I remembered Ron and Hermione’s arguments as basically being good-natured banter, but they really do seem to be getting on each other’s nerves here. JKR must have some pretty odd ideas about love if she thinks that these two are right for each other. (Although actually, looking at her relationship with her first husband…)

* Professor Umbridge’s speech all sounds like fairly run-of-the-mill and uncontroversial stuff to me. I’m not entirely sure how Hermione got from it to “The Ministry is interfering at Hogwarts”.

* Also, trust AuthorAvatar!Hermione to guess what’s wrong with Umbridge from the beginning. In reality, I think Hermione would agree with much of what Umbridge is doing (hey, maybe Hogwarts would benefit from not leaving staff hiring entirely in the hands of the Twinkly One…), and the two seem to have quite similar personalities, so she’d probably connect on a personal level.

* Ron really isn’t a very good prefect, is he? “Hey, you lot, midgets”?

* You’d have thought that after four years the Fat Lady would be able to recognise Gryffindor students and let them in. Apparently, though, such thinking is too original for the WW.

* Seamus sounds sort of embarrassed about his mother’s behaviour, IMHO, at least at the start of his conversation. It’s not until Harry starts insulting his family that he begins to get all defensive and start disbelieving Harry.

* Also, memo to Harry: if you’re trying to convince people that you’re telling the truth, it’s probably not a good idea to insult their relatives when they ask you what’s going on.

* “‘I’ll have a go at anyone who calls me a liar,’ said Harry.” Given that Seamus’ mum – and, indeed, most of the WW – probably only heard the official Ministry line, isn’t it only to be expected that they’d be a bit sceptical about Harry’s claims? When you only give people one side of the story, it’s no wonder they end up supporting that side (which, come to think of it, might explain a lot about why many fans seem to follow the Harry-Dumbledore party line…).

* Now Harry’s shouting abuse at Seamus and brandishing his wand. How on earth could anybody believe the Ministry propaganda about him being mad? Clearly he is a model of sanity and emotional stability.

* Note how Ron’s first reaction is to side with Harry. I’m sure he’ll prove to be an excellent choice as prefect. *facepalm*

* Seriously, though, I wish Seamus had been made prefect instead. It would be so satisfying for this scene to end with Harry being given detention.

* So Ron lets Harry’s comments about Seamus’ mother pass, but threatens Seamus with detention. So not only does Harry look nasty and defensive, but his best friend looks like he’s using his new-found prefect powers to play favourites. Seriously, it’s like they’re purposefully trying to alienate every boy in that room.

* Unfortunately, though, it doesn’t alienate anyone else, and the other boys line up to agree with Harry, which would just make Seamus feel even more put upon, and less likely to accept what Harry says.

* I’m especially disappointed with Neville. He seems like the sort of character who ought to tell Harry that’s he’s being a dick. Instead he chips in to say how great he and Dumbledore are. Mr. Longbottom, as of this moment you are officially dead to me.

* Harry wonders how many more attacks like Seamus’ he will have to endure before it is all over. Well if your first response to people asking you what happened is to insult them and their family and threaten them with your wand, probably quite a few.

* BTW, does anyone know how prefects are chosen at Hogwarts? Ron and Hermione seem to be the only Gryffindor prefects, but surely there ought to be pairs of sixth- and seventh-year prefects as well? Or is it just that people get appointed in their fifth year, then once they leave school a new pair of fifth-years are appointed, so that there are always two in each house? But then, wouldn’t that mean that students in some years have no chance whatsoever of being made prefects? And isn’t that a little unfair?

 

Comments

Re: pure and cunning

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

Good point. And someone here (or maybe it was Red Hen, I can't remember) pointed out that Bathilda's textbook presents the anachronistic persecutions as ineffectual, as a joke (with the deaths of innocent Muggles neatly brushed under the carpet). Dumbledore's attempt to reduce anti-Muggle feeling by pretending they were never a real threat, perhaps? (Compare also Hagrid's presumably Dumbledore-approved belief that seclusion happened to avoid the great responsibility that comes with great power).

But if we assume that Muggle hostility in the tenth century was exaggerated by later historians for whatever agenda, we're left with far less reason for Hogwarts to be a remotely situated heavily-defended castle and for Slytherin's paranoia about Muggle-born students. Reducing Slytherin's motivation for installing the basilisk to "he was just evil" is disappointing but ultimately has the same effect, but without some perceived external threat, Hogwarts remains unexplained. Unless you're suggesting that there was some other threat back then (possibly goblin-related), and as Muggles became the wizarding world's bogeyman present-day attitudes were projected onto the past?

Re: pure and cunning

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

It really seems so weird to me that JKR didn't do the research historically if she was going to bother to throw in that sort of thing. But I also like researching stuff (hence the working on a Library Science) degree, so what do I know?

Re: pure and cunning

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

Professor Binns always bothered me, now that I think about it. As a little girl who adored history I couldn't understand why everybody in the HP 'verse treated it as useless. On the other hand, common sense is also apparently useless, so maybe I shouldn't take it too hard.

Re: pure and cunning

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

Well, my argument is that Slytherin wasn't worried about muggle-born students at all. I think that's a story that was invented later.

Having a heavily fortified castle might have been important for other reasons besides protecting against muggles. Hogwarts was established during a period when there were several waves of Viking invasions, and then there was the Norman conquest in 1066. Perhaps they weren't originally protecting themselves against muggles, but against other wizards from invading countries.

Actually, I've been speculating that fighting amongst the founders due to external pressures may have been disagreements over whether or not to admit the magical children of the Norman invaders into the school.

Re: pure and cunning

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

Well it's certainly an argument that can be raised and defended, but then you have the Bloody *Baron* underfoot at practically the time of the founding, and "Baron" is a Norman title. The English had Earls at that point, and I think the Saxons (or the Scots) had Thanes, but the Barons all came over with the Conqueror.

Re: pure and cunning

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

I suppose it might be possible that the Baron came over to Britain as a soldier of fortune or something before the Conquest (Edward the Confessor, IIRC, was quite big on hiring Norman mercenaries), which could push his arrival a few decades before 1066. It might also explain why he could have become associated with Slytherin House, even is Salazar was against the idea of letting Norman wizards into Hogwarts: "It's all very well letting just *one* in, but to let them loads of them in en masse? That's just going too far..."

Re: pure and cunning

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

Oh, I should have clarified that my speculation was that Slytherin was more open to the Normans than the other founders were. Which means that I should also clarify that I don't think he created his basilisk specifically to protect against Norman wizards. I was just trying to make the general point that it was a tumultuous period in history and there may have been good reasons aside from protecting against muggles to have a heavily fortified castle with a basilisk.

Another possibility for the existence of the basilisk was that it protected the castle against dark creatures from the forbidden forest, such as the acromantulas. I read this somewhere recently but I can't remember whose idea it was.

Re: pure and cunning

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

Another possibility for the existence of the basilisk was that it protected the castle against dark creatures from the forbidden forest, such as the acromantulas. I read this somewhere recently but I can't remember whose idea it was.

As far as we know, the acromantulas were introduced by Hagrid (how sensible it was for Dumbledore to appoint him groundskeeper!). And maybe it's just me, but something big and predatory that can kill with a glance doesn't seem the safest protection against other big and predatory things that can kill in various inventive ways.

Big predator that kills with a glance

[terri-testing.livejournal.com]

Luna's theory (in my fiction Protean Charm) was that Salazar raised and released a Basilisk in the subterranean chambers beneath Hogwarts castle to protect the castle from subterranean invasions.

From those subterranean-dwelling beings (frequently found at odds with human wizards), Goblins.

There's a maze of tunnels beneath the castle centered on the Chamber of Secrets, apparently, with but one egress into Hogwarts castle proper: Myrtle's loo.

And loos were invented (and retro-fitted into castles) in Victoria's reign, at the earliest, in our world. And the WW seems slow to adopt modern Muggle technology.

It is canon that Albus Dumbledore is accustomed to chamberpots, after all. (A roomful of those, not a loo, was what the RoR gave Albus when he urgently needed a leak.) So we can infer that in Albus's youth, chamberpots were de rigeur.

The question of when the plumbing in Myrtle's loo (which connected with the Chamber) was actually installed, (and by whom) might be fascinating....

Re: pure and cunning

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

ah, good point about the Baron. Actually, his being there from almost the beginning sort of suggests that Hogwarts was founded sometime in the 11th or early 12th centuries rather than the 10th, doesn't it?

The reason I was speculating that the fighting amongst the founders had something to do with the Normans is that I think it's kind of interesting that basically all of the characters with surnames of French origin were/are Slytherins. The Bloody Baron was a Slytherin as well. It could be that Rowling was just stereotyping the French aristocratic families as evil, but I'm wondering if there's a watsonian explanation, such as Salazar being more welcoming of the Normans than the other founders were, for some reason.

Re: pure and cunning

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

And Salazar himself has a foreign name, of course. And lots of Voldemort's DEs have foreign-sounding names, like Dolohov and Karkaroff. Perhaps Salazar wanted to take only those of pure noble blood, wherever they were from, whereas the other founders were fine with taking commoners but couldn't stand those Norman invaders. In practice, due to the small number of people who came over with the Conquest (and even smaller number of wizards, of course), Salazar's policy was more exclusionary, and so he was remembered as the really selective one, even though both groups were selective, just in different ways. Due to lack of accurate records dating from the early years of Hogwarts, people just remembered Salazar as "the exclusionary one" without remembering who exactly he wanted to exclude; then, when Pureblood vs. Muggleborn became the major political controversy, these concerns were projected back into the Founders' time, and exclusionary Slytherin was naturally assumed to be the Pureblood supporter.

Perhaps Godric was initially less hostile to foreign wizards than Helga and Rowena? His surname is French, after all, which might reflect some sort of continental ancestry. Perhaps if both he and Slazar had foreign origins, they might be drawn into alliance with each other due to being to some degree outcasts, which was the initial basis of their close friendship.

Re: pure and cunning

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

Yes, Salazar possibly having foreign origins himself is one reason I was considering for why he would be more welcoming of foreign wizards.

And I like your idea about Salazar and Godric being friends due to them both possibly having foreign ancestry.

My theory right now, though, is that Salazar himself was not especially concerned about blood, even though his house eventually came to be identified with that. I think Salazar may have been thinking about purity in terms of the state of one's soul and that he was primarily interested in students whose families still followed old magical traditions.

Re: pure and cunning

[sunnyskywalker]

"Salazar" is a Basque name, and according to the Arabs, the Basques were "majus" - pagans or wizards. And from the little we know of their pre-Christian religion, a snake deity named Sugaar might have been important. All of which suggests that his family might have some old magical traditions, and that he was used to or at least grew up on stories of living in a community where even non-magical people respected the magical ones and understood their ways. So even if SS was raised as or had become a Christian (which would offer some attractive educational possibilities, although if he or his father were recently from the Iberian peninsula some familiarity with Muslim and Jewish traditions wouldn't be surprising either), he could still feel that tradition was important.

He could easily have had a spin on Christianity which allowed room for respect for wizarding traditions - there are plenty of Bible verses about how if your faith is great enough, nothing will be impossible for you. So clearly wizarding ability for "miracles" is a sign of their great faith and spiritual purity, and that they could do these miracles even before conversion just showed how they already had the true faith in their hearts. Or something. So families with lots of magical members and strong magical tradition could be said to be "pure" in that they were obviously raising their kids with good values...

It is hard to wrangle JKR's history into anything resembling a plausible adjunct to real history, but at least some of this might work.

Re: pure and cunning

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

Hard to say. The whole setup is cod-mideavil and hoplessly inaccurate on so many points that you have to throw up your hands and just conclude that it all takes place in Storybookland (where nothing, even the population, ever changes).

Re: pure and cunning

[sunnyskywalker]

An 11th or 12th century date would fit with the general timeline for the rise of medieval universities. Hogwarts wouldn't have been quite a normal university if they took students with magical ability who couldn't read or write (and they probably wouldn't have had a big enough selection to avoid that), but it would at least have a clear inspiration. If the Founders had longish lives, they could have started off in the 10th century affiliated with the reviving monasteries and/or maybe cathedral schools, decided to make their own study center of sorts for advanced study in magic, and over the next century gradually adapted the school's form as they learned more about the latest educational trends and decided to take in a broader range of students. (The Fat Friar suggests there were at least some periods when wizards and the Church got along, or maybe he just kept his magic under wraps - either way, since the church was the big educational game in town, it wouldn't be too surprising if at least one Founder was involved somehow. Possibly all. They could have taken orders after already having kids, or just followed the general practice of the day of failing at celibacy, which iirc wasn't even a universal rule until 1123.)

Re: pure and cunning

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

Well let's see... The Baron could not have become a baron before 1066, and Helena seems to have still been considered a young woman when she died. Let's say she was about 30. That would mean that she was born in 1036 at the earliest. It doesn't appear that the reproductive years for witches last much longer than they do for muggle women, so Rowena probably wouldn't have been born much earlier than 996 (meaning she would have been 40 at the time of Helena's birth). That would put the founding of Hogwarts at about 1015 at the earliest.

Re: pure and cunning

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

Are we sure that the baron's title was English? IIRC, it's never said where he's the baron of; he could have been a continental nobleman who for some reason had come to Britain, perhaps during the reign of Edward the Confessor (who was supposed to have made use of continental soldiers).

Re: pure and cunning

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

Good point. Or it could be that some wizarding families from the Continent sent their children to Hogwarts.

Re: pure and cunning

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

"But if we assume that Muggle hostility in the tenth century was exaggerated by later historians for whatever agenda, we're left with far less reason for Hogwarts to be a remotely situated heavily-defended castle and for Slytherin's paranoia about Muggle-born students."

There certainly were fewer persecutions in the Dark Ages than there were later on, but IIRC at least some of this was because the authorities believed that magic was just an ignorant country superstition, not really worth paying attention to. So it might have made sense for wizards to hide their existence any way, just to be on the safe side.

Re: pure and cunning

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

A remotely situated, heavily-defended castle in a *foreign country*, at that.

Re: pure and cunning

[sunnyskywalker]

Oh, but they could have had a motive for wanting Hogwarts to be inland away from navigable waterways - there were still Viking raids in the 10th century, although they were winding down. Even if there hadn't been any for a while, they probably weren't ready to call the all-clear just yet. Even Muggle Vikings could have been dangerous to wizards caught unawares without their wands (James and Lily-style), and who's to say there weren't magical Vikings too? Maybe they really did appear out of nowhere sometimes. (There certainly seems to be a method for making your ship appear in the lake, which might be why they have that giant squid and a basilisk with lake access.) And it's entirely possible that the goblins took advantage of the chaos to cause their own trouble, and who knows what 10th-century giants were up to. Just for kicks, maybe they also either were very politically astute or had a seer who predicted the Norman invasion, and decided to stay well out of the way.

Or maybe it's a much more mundane explanation, like "Rowena's family had some land so we used it," and a lot of the defenses were added centuries later, but their history lessons just roll it all together and blame the Muggles for everything that can't be put down to goblin rebellions.

Plus, if I were teaching magic to teenagers with poor control, I'd want to be a remote location to protect others' safety, but wizards don't seem to worry about that sort of thing.