A follow- up question to the discussion on the Malfoys:

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

From 2007 onwards, we have, via DH (that disastrous book) and interviews, discovered the following things:

1. The Death Eaters were right. According to Rowling, there are no "Muggleborns". Every Witch or Wizard born to normal parents is a throwback to a magical ancestor. Yes, she really said that!

2. All Wizards seem to feel themselves superior to normal people. Even good-hearted types like Arthur Weasely show themselves extremely prejudiced toward non-magical human beings, as well as extremely ignorant. But-

3. I am no expert on magical history - like Harry, I missed any hints of a coherent backstory that might have been in the books. But I do get the impression that, in addition to being prejudiced, magical people might fear ordinary human beings. Perhaps the persecutions shown as laughable in Harry's textbook were actually quite serious?

4. Young Tom Riddle was fearful of being locked up in an asylum.

5. Young Gellert Grindelwald and Albus Dumbledore aspired to rule over Muggles and Muggleborns.

6. Young Regulus believed Voldemort's agenda was to overthrow the stature of secrecy and have wizards take their rightful place as the lords of creation.

7. And then there's the way Dumbledore chose to raise Harry.

Where I'm going with all this? It's seemed to me for awhile now that the Death Eaters might have a point. What if every Dark Lord in the Wizarding World was either a Muggleborn or a Muggle-raised half-blood? What if Dumbledore was actually trying to create a new Dark Lord?

Think about it. Given what we see of Tommy's, Sev's, and Harry's experiences, magical children have a very hard time in the normal world. In self defense, they may well come up with grandiose theories about their specialness. And, like all magical children, they will lash out with magic at times of high stress. The future Dark Lords among them will control magic early, cling hard to their specialness, and learn contempt, as well as fear, for the normal people who don't and cant' understand them and cant' do magic, either. By the time such a child is 11, he may well be quite powerful magically and morally and emotionally quite messed up.

Thoughts?

Comments

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

According to Rowling, there are no "Muggleborns". Every Witch or Wizard born to normal parents is a throwback to a magical ancestor.

Remember, you can't escape your place in the natural order of things!

3. I am no expert on magical history - like Harry, I missed any hints of a coherent backstory that might have been in the books. But I do get the impression that, in addition to being prejudiced, magical people might fear ordinary human beings. Perhaps the persecutions shown as laughable in Harry's textbook were actually quite serious?

There's definitely something Bathilda Bagshot's not telling us here. Remember in Fantastic Beasts how the wizarding family got an Order of Merlin First Class not for driving off the dragon attacking the Muggle beach, but for wiping the witnesses' memories of the event? Remember how the textbook Harry's reading at the start of PoA emphasises how silly the Muggles were that they couldn't reliably identify witches and wizards and so burned hundreds of their own kind (oh what larks!)? There's fear at the very heart of the Ministry, and the best way Dumbledore can think of alleviating this fear is by teaching the next generation not that we're weak (as Voldemort claims), but that we're stupid. Because that won't encourage Muggle-baiting tendencies in the Freds and Georges of the world, no of course not.

[hwyla.livejournal.com]

There had to be a fear of witch trials - if not then it makes no sense to enact the Seclusion. I cannot believe the Wizarding World suddenly decided to go into hiding because the muggles suddenly demanded too much magic be done for them. Not after almost 300 years of witch trials.

What is really surprising to me is that JKR places the Secrecy Act so late in history.

While witch hunts in England go back to the late 10th Century - just about the time Hogwarts was founded - they weren't that frequent until later, beginning in the 14th Century and increasing in the 15th & 16th centuries, dying down for awhile only to pop back up in the 17th century - especially after King James. King James (as James VI of Scotland) wrote 'Daemonologie' in 1597 and was crowned James I of England in 1603. He played a very active role in the witch hunts of the 1600s - and in the rewrite of the Bible to include wording against witches. His reign ended in 1625. And yet the Wizarding World apparently doesn't separate from the muggle one until 1692? They put up with it for over 200 years and THEN decide to seclude themselves? Especially when one considers that the last executions for witchcraft (in England) were in 1682.

Personally, I think JKR just didn't do her homework on this one.

[oryx_leucoryx]

I thought that was 1688? Very close though.

[hwyla.livejournal.com]

I like this reasoning! So, instead of the Wizarding World being late to seclude, it turns around to a lessening (in certain parts of the British Isles) of accusals simply because 'magic' has become hidden? Makes sense to me (and it means JKR did her research after all)!