PoA Chapter One

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Totally forgot I meant to post this this morning!



Come with me to a time in the distant past, back when starting the book with Harry’s birthday didn’t mean hundreds of pages before he got to school and ending in June didn’t mean Voldemort plotting his evil plans around summer hols. In fact, Voldemort isn’t even in this book, which on the whole will do wonders for his reputation!

Harry Potter is an unusual boy. Not only does he hate summer holidays, but he really wants to do his homework. Wait…what? Who is this intellectually curious boy who wants to practice his magic? Not the Chosen One I know!

Harry’s writing an essay on how Witch Burning in the Fourteenth Century Was Completely Pointless. So basically, he’s writing a whole essay on how Muggles are idiots and completely impotent when it comes to hurting Wizards, as if this is something any wizard might forget if they weren’t assigned it in class. Why do they even care about what Muggles were doing in the 14th century?

Not to mention, it wasn’t pointless whether or not they burned witches since it’s not like the whole period in history was really about chasing down wizards as defined by this book.

If nothing else all the death provided a joke essay for Harry to write, so there’s a point right there!

Btw, was Dumbledore’s sister the only witch in history hurt by Muggles? We relentlessly laugh at Muggles thinking they could ever do anything to even get a Wizard’s attention but when Dumbledore needs a back story suddenly they’re capable of producing brain damage in people who are dropped on their heads from six story windows by their own families.

Which btw makes me think of how unlikely it is that, memory charms or not, there’s no society of deadly Muggles taking out Wizards right and left in stealth. Or….is there?

Harry’s using a quill and a bottle of ink in his bed to write this essay, despite no doubt having ball point pens a few feet away. Surely the quill thing’s lost its novelty by now. Especially since he’s afraid the Dursleys will hear the scratching. Quills aren’t one of those magical things we Muggles can’t handle, Harry. We stopped using them because we invented something better.

The Dursleys have a very medieval attitude towards magic. Understandably, since most of the time they’ve experienced it some wizard has been going medieval on their ass.

The narrator telling us the Dursleys tried to squash Harry’s magic out of him by keeping him downtrodden is like a remnant of that early idea that maybe magic was like creativity or imagination. Remember, before we knew Wizards didn’t really have much of either?

Earlier the Dursleys went out to talk about their new company car in loud voices so the neighbors could hear. Too bad Vernon couldn’t fly the car in through the window while everyone was eating lunch in a big dining hall, huh? That would have been really ostentatious!

Remember this later when we learn that when you have a truly superior transport everyone will flock to you without your asking them too. Nice subtle pointer to the true moral of the series, that Harry is a more deserving version of Vernon.

Harry’s friend Ron is stupid when it comes to telephones, but knows a lot more than Harry about important things because he comes from a wizard family. Take a moment to savor that, Ron. This is the last book you’ll be anything like the authority on wizard life.

OMG, Vernon says he doesn’t want to hear from people ‘like YOU’ to Harry. It’s like he looks down on Harry just because of his magical standing! He must be a bad guy.

Harry assumes Ron told Hermione not to call him, even though she actually knows how phones work, and she’d have been sensible enough to not say she went to Hogwarts. So…would she have said she knew Harry from one of the many other places at which Harry meets people that call him? Because there are none.

One good thing this summer is that Hedwig gets to fly out at night instead of being stuck in her cage. Though she might have been willing to stay in the cage if it meant Harry would let her out four years from now when it comes time to get chased by Death Eaters. RIP Hedwig.

Dudley is enormous and makes loud noises in his sleep. Probably because his weight problems make breathing difficult.

Harry’s never received a birthday card in his life. It’s kind of disturbing how likable Harry still is here. If I didn’t know him better, I’d see a nice young boy who just wants to go to school, be with his friends and do his homework.

Btw, I suspect Harry’s birthday is now an international holiday for wizards. (Even if the world war only took place in Britain.)

Harry goes to the window and enjoys the fresh air without once thinking about how the nice weather conflicts with his own inner turmoil. Weird!

Harry’s also longing for Hedwig because she’s the one person in the house who doesn’t flinch at the sight of him like the Dursleys. Good to know that three years from now Dumbledore will show up and tease them. That will totally make up for this lonely life!

We’re told Harry’s parents didn’t die in a car crash—um, did someone say they did? (I know Harry was told that growing up, but this book just says it apropos of nothing.)

Harry had to admit he was lucky for even reaching his 13th birthday. Again…who is this boy who admits he’s lucky in any way?

Harry expects Hedwig to come back with a mouse in her beak expecting praise. Owls don’t work that way, Harry. You’re thinking of a cat or a dog. Owls don’t catch the dead thing to show you. Owls just eat the mice and expel the bones and fur and things in a little pellet.

The Weasleys are spending the summer in Egypt because they won a prize. This sounds like it might be kicking off an exotic story, but really it’s just a reason to show them in the paper.

Another sign we’re still pre-GoF: the Weasleys are going on a fancy trip and not taking Harry!

Instead of writing about the pointlessness of Muggles, Harry ought to write an essay on the pointlessness of wizards inventing black and white magic pictures for the newspaper just so they can make their world look like the Muggle world just out of date enough to be nostalgic. I might read that essay.

Harry can’t think of anyone who deserves to win a pile of gold more than the Weasleys, because they are very nice and extremely poor. The virtuous kind of poor, where Dad’s an important government official and they’re one of the premiere families in the country.

You can tell because no matter how much gold they get, how many promotions Arthur earns or how many children move out and get well-paying jobs, they always remain the exact same level of virtuous poor where Ron can’t get things as nice Harry.

Ron’s note hopes “the Muggles” didn’t give Harry a hard time. I wonder if his letters to Hermione refer to her family that way too.

Molly wouldn’t let Ginny enter a tomb with mutant skeletons—more stupid Muggles who broke into tombs without knowing how to undo the curse.

I’m sure that overprotection of Ginny will stop by the time she’s 16, though, right? And we learn how badass she is? If only she was out of the house and married to someone like Harry Potter. He would never tell her to stay behind for safety.

So Bill’s a grave robber, basically? And grave robbers work for banks?

The Weasleys have blown most of their money on this one trip to Egypt, but at least they’re going to get Ron a new wand for next year. Thank goodness the old one snapped or Ron would probably be spending another year backfiring on himself.

Percy’s looking smug in the photograph. Get used that word, Percy. It’ll be attached to you until you properly grovel at your brother’s feet. And even then it’ll only be lifted for that one moment.

Ron sends Harry a Sneakoscope that Bill says is rubbish because it kept flashing at dinner. Spoiler alert: it’s because of the rat. Luckily the twins are also at the table, and are also untrustworthy so JKR can cover it up. Probably the more expensive Sneakoscopes are attuned to be able to pick out the bad kind of untrustworthy from the good, fun kind.

Harry looks at the present happily for a few seconds. I love this Harry!

Hermione’s in France. I hope you enjoy that family trip, Grangers. It’ll be your last with your daughter. If you even remember you have a daughter.

Hedwig flew to France all on her own because she knew Hermione would be worrying about customs or something.

The theme of pets/animals having their own agendas starts off right away.

Don’t ask me why Hermione was worried about sending a gift through customs. It’s a wood polishing kit, not a baby dragon.

Hermione’s jealous of Ron’s trip since ancient Egyptian wizards must have been fascinating. Ancient Egyptians Muggles were as lame as the British kind, though.

Hermione’s essay is 2 rolls longer than was asked for. I hope Binns rejects it and makes her write it again within the correct word count.

Hermione gives Harry…an actually thoughtful present. To review: Harry finds pleasure in the good things he does have, Ron is the authority on the wizard world and Hermione thinks about what other people would actually want instead of what she thinks they should have. Who are these people?

Harry’s now got a broomstick polishing kit and a wand polishing kit. Without TV, wizards spend a lot of time polishing wood. Jealous yet?

I assume Hermione’s thoughtful present is also showing that she does have Harry’s best interests at heart when she tattles about the Firebolt.

Quidditch is the most popular sport in the magical world. It’s also the only sport in the magical world.

Also Harry’s the youngest person in the century to be picked for his school team. Which…should not be that impressive.

Harry opens Hagrid’s gift. Phew! At least Hagrid hasn’t changed. Still annoying as ever. It’s a book that bites. Go ahead and open it, Harry. Maybe it will rip your throat out and Hagrid can berate you for scaring it.

Harry stops grinning when he sees his permission slip for Hogsmeade, since he’ll never convince the Dursleys to sign it. The kids lie throughout the books, but it doesn’t occur to Harry to forge a signature?

“Extremely unusual though he was, at that moment Harry Potter felt just like everyone else — glad, for the first time in his life, that it was his birthday.” Awww! It’s sad that all this stuff that explains why Harry is sympathetic will just turn into the explanation for why he’s a pissy ass whenever people cross him.

I saw a presentation on Phoenix Rising about how JKR always does everything at least twice, so now I obsessively look for parallels and things that are going to happen again/have happened again. In this chapter I got:

Things that happen twice:
Vernon made a big show with his car and the neighbors. Later Harry will get that attention for his Firebolt.

That’s not the last time we’ll be seeing that Sneakoscope go off “accidentally.”

It’s a gun. No it isn’t! It’s Chekov! No it isn’t!

Throughout the books, JKR sprinkles lots of things that turn out to be important later on. These are often incorrectly referred to as “Chekov’s guns” because Chekov, when talking about set decoration in the theater, said that if you put a gun over the fireplace in act I it had better go off in act IV. In HP terms, a “gun” is any detail mentioned anywhere at any time, and even with thousands of pages to work with, some of them still didn’t go off. So I’m mentioning them when they appear and noting if they were fired or turned out to be duds:

Bill the Cursebreaker
Bill’s background with curses and magical artifacts will obviously come in handy at some point, say if Harry puts together a crack team of Horcrux hunters.
Status: Dud. Bill, in general, turned out to be important for looking cool and marrying a French person (yeah, he got scarred, but only to show the kind of girl Fleur really is). And Harry never had a crack team of Horcrux Hunters. Or a crack team of anything, really.

Bathilda Bagshot
Bathilda Bagshot wrote that book Hermione’s always reading.
Status: Fired! In a way far beyond what one might have expected—she became a snake snuggy.


Special note about PoA: I’ve always had a weird relationship to this book because it’s most peoples’ favorite and Scabbers/the Marauders is one of the best reveals. Yet I never wanted to re-read it. I thought it was because I just hated the Buckbeak story—and as you’ll see I really do hate the Buckbeak story, but reading it again I found it kind of boring. I mean, JKR keeps all the balls in the air, she darts back and forth between all the stuff she’s got to entertain you—Hermione’s secret, Quidditch, Sirius Black news, Snape and Lupin, Buckbeak, Hogsmeade. But in the end PoA is really just like HBP. The real story going on isn’t happening to Harry, it’s happening near Harry, usually just out of his line of vision—and there’s no villain going after him so there’s very little at stake.



The Cricket Rule

Day-for-Night

As Harry looks out the window into a balmy summer night, looking for Hedwig.

Foley Work
Cue Dudley and Vernon snoring and turning over in their creaky beds.

Informed Attributes
Because “youngest player in this century…” sounds a lot better than saying “Because there wasn’t anybody else handy in Harry’s quarter of the small student body, he got to join the school team for the sport everyone’s forced to support because there’s nothing else a year early.”

Nut o’Fun
The mutant skeletons were the best thing in the chapter.

Jabootu Score: 5

Comments

[seductivedark.livejournal.com]

Or maybe it's okay as long as the wealth has been in the family for a while and the soul who made it is well and truly dead...

Which would bolster someone's (I forget whose, though! Shame on me!) theory that the Malfoy wealth is recent.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Oh, a lot of people had that theory. It was kind of interesting because they often criticized (understandably) the people who thought that since the Malfoys were aristocrats they were superior characters with exquisite manners who must be right. But saying that the Malfoys had to be new money because they were gross people is the flip side of the same class bias. The Malfoys are gross people in many ways but they apparently have good taste in clothes and their money is old. (I do love that their name is sort of Norman French as opposed to the presumably far more English Potters and Weasleys. There's the problem!)

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

Yes, many people say that the Malfoys are nouveau riche, and the Weasleys are old aristocracy fallen on hard times. It's pretty interesting, for the reasons you say, and others.

Do you know if the people who argue for either or both of those ideas tend to be either Slytherfen or very definitely not Slytherfen? Or both? I think I've seen people with very different views support these positions, but I'm not sure.

If so, I can't help wondering if some of this is just due to people enjoying the process of reinterpreting the text. (Sounds fun to me, but in this case, I'll stick with considering the Malfoys old money, and the Weasleys somewhere around lower middle class.)

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

From what I've seen it crosses types of fans depending on the argument. Some people just like the idea of nouveau riche Malfoys without a real value on it one way or another. But it seems like it's Malfoy fans and Slytherfen who get really into the idea that they're aristocrats in a fancy, fantasy way, and anti-Slytherfen who think it's "obvious" that they're nouveau riche and sometimes distort scenes to prove it. And that sometimes goes along with the "the Weasleys are really classy" idea, which is weird because there too the books specifically show them being tacky. Not in a snob way to put them down, but, like, joking about how Fred and George are wearing dragon skin suits as soon as they get rich and it just sounds hideous.

I remember one argument where people were pointing to Lucius "jingling his change" as if he was some sleazy uncle rattling his hand in his pocket to show he was loaded. When really the scene was something like Harry seeing Lucius at the ministry and simply hearing the clink of gold in his pocket to telegraph that OMG, Lucius was there to bribe somebody. He wasn't intentionally jingling. That goes along with a lot of claims that if Draco was really old money he would never talk about it, but that's not really true. The whole "never talk about money" refers to not saying exactly how much something costs, it doesn't mean that wealthy people don't talk about money or certainly that they're children don't ever put other people down for being broke or "lower class." Any time the subject comes up in canon the Malfoys are labelled as an old family.

[artystone.livejournal.com]

and anti-Slytherfen who think it's "obvious" that they're nouveau riche and sometimes distort scenes to prove it

LOL ah yes all that ostentations coin clanking that Lucius is infamous for!

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

I'm rather fond of the theory that they werte originally merchants, came over with Henry VII around the time of Bosworth, and made enough of a bundle in trade to marry some penniless landholder's heiress (possibly Muggle) not long afterwards. Not *quite* in the same ranking as the Blacks (at least acto the standards of the Blacks) but certainly well-aged in both fortune and influence since then.

The Blacks, on the other hand, have probably been in slow decline for the past century. Sure they've been tracking their pedigree for some 700 years, but we don't hear of any manor houses there. Narcissa did very well for herself in marrying Lucius and becoming Lady of the Manor.

[oryx_leucoryx]

Any time the subject comes up in canon the Malfoys are labelled as an old family.

They are old regarding how long they have been purebloods. Just like the Weasleys. This has no bearing on how long they have had their money.

The Malfoys give me a very insecure vibe. However this can simply be the result of Lucius having spent some days or weeks in a Ministry holding cell, interrogated by Crouch's Aurors - until his Imperius plea was accepted.

Also a big part of questioning the age of the Malfoys' wealth comes from separating canon!Malfoys from movie!Malfoys. For example, the book Lucius isn't half as scary as the movie version. In what other ways are they different?

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yes, I meant to make a point that old family =/= old money. But that's the only thing we hear about the Malfoys. I think Fudge, too, refers to them that way. Which means their name has been known as Pureblood as generations. That doesn't mean they've been rich forever (the Weasleys are also an old family and they're not rich), but it's never suggested that they're new anything in canon.

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Coming in late - but it's clear to me that the Malfoys are not as old or as pure as the Weasleys, because Weasley is an English name and Malfoy is French. Hogwarts, after all, predates the Norman invasion - and, if the Malfoys had gone back to Norman times, they would have an anglicized name, like Burke or FitzGerald, which are also Norman names. There is an English good - Foreigner bad vibe in these books that tends to make me think the Malfoys are, at least, newer to the British Isles than the Weasleys.

And the way the Weasleys are described doesn't make them sound at all lower-middle class. Much more like impoverished aristocrats - or, at the lowest, yeoman types like the Bennetts in Pride and Prejudice. In fact, they are almost exactly like the Bennetts, in that the father is an eccentric who gives off a rather upper class vibe, while the mother is aggressive, outspoken, and thoroughly bourgeoise.

I think what trips up a lot of Americans is that the Weasleys are poor. In the U.S., class is related to wealth. In the U.K., it isn't so much.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

but it's clear to me that the Malfoys are not as old or as pure as the Weasleys, because Weasley is an English name and Malfoy is French.

I agree--but them being newer to England wouldn't make them less pure, necessarily. They could have been pureblood Normans.

I also agree the Weasleys are not lower middle class at all. (Though I think Molly may have married up a bit.) Like I said, they're poor, but their dad's an important figure in the government and the older boys are all professionals. They have the connections, they just don't have a big income. I think they are sometimes *tacky* canonically, like the Twins' new suits when they make their money. But they're not coming up from Stan Shunpike's end of the class system. The whole Malfoy/Weasley feud establishes that the two families are equally respected, just on opposite sides of the political spectrum (and of course the Weasleys are good and very British).

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

The whole Malfoy/Weasley feud establishes that the two families are equally respected, just on opposite sides of the political spectrum (and of course the Weasleys are good and very British).

Does it? Just because the Malfoys bother to care about the Weasleys, you mean, or do you have something else in mind?

I mean, consider Severus vs. Sirius and James. Sirius and James were upper-class; Severus wasn't. If they'd all survived, stayed out of jail, and had families, we'd probably be seeing similar feuds between the Snapes and the Potters, and the Snapes and the Blacks.

Since we don't know why there's this feud between the Malfoys and the Weasleys, it's hard to conclude from it that the families must have similar places in the social hierarchy.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

If they'd all survived, stayed out of jail, and had families, we'd probably be seeing similar feuds between the Snapes and the Potters, and the Snapes and the Blacks.

I don't imagine we would, myself. To me--and this is very sketchy--it reads as if the Malfoys regard the Weasleys as an important old family and a political threat. The James/Sirius/Snape feud is personal and it seems like both James and Sirius dismiss Snape entirely on that score. Arthur seems like an important government figure to me, despite stories about how he's considered a joke etc. He seems to move easily amongst the most important types at the ministry.

But it's probably not something that can really be nailed down because "Pureblood" sometimes seems to equate to social class but sometimes doesn't. And it's hard to find too many class markers (like Stan's accent, for instance) in the family since they're so old-fashioned and wholesomely thrifty. I wouldn't call them aristocrats because I think that's getting into a class they are supposed to stand against. Elkins did an essay on this, I think, comparing the class view in HP to the world of Agatha Christie and it rant very true to me iirc.

[oryx_leucoryx]

(Though I think Molly may have married up a bit.)

Molly's uncle Ignatius married a Black. So either the Prewetts had a talent for marrying up or they already were there.

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

In response to both this post and the one below: given that the Prewetts were considered acceptable for a Black to marry, maybe Molly married *down* when she married Arthur?

Do we know why the Weasleys were burned off the tapestry? Maybe they were lower class than the Prewetts, and they were unacceptable on those grounds, rather than because they were already blood traitors.

I think that all the information on this that we get in OotP is Sirus saying, "...and Arthur's something like my second cousin once removed. But thereʹs no point looking for them on here ‐ if ever a family was a bunch of blood traitors itʹs the Weasleys." Maybe Sirius is confusing the primary reason that would have been given at the time he was speaking, and whatever reasons his family would have had at the time it actually happened.

[oryx_leucoryx]

It is really hard to tell if class alone would be a reason to disapprove of a marriage to the point of burning off the tapestry considering the paucity of data.

We know it was acceptable for a Black female to marry members of the following families: Burke, Longbottom, Crouch, Potter, Lestrange, Malfoy.

It was acceptable for a Black male to marry members of the following families: Flint, Gamp, Yaxley, Bulstrode, McMillan, Crabbe, Prewett and Rosier.

Of these we have wealth indications for Potter, Lestrange, Malfoy and probably Crouch. I don't know about indications of class as independent from wealth. Vincent Crabbe's speech pattern doesn't appear very 'classy'. Did Walburga's mother marry well above her station?

[oryx_leucoryx]

Aunt Muriel is from Molly's side, though she may not necessarily be a Prewett herself (she could be on Molly's mother side of the family). Anyway, her goblin-made tiara had been in the family (which one?) for centuries and it sounds like she was wealthy enough that being disinherited by her was a meaningful threat (though not to ones as successful as the twins).

[oryx_leucoryx]

Another question is how poor would the Weasleys have been had they stopped at say, 3 children.

Part of the problem with the series is how people who seem to have a back-story don't really. I think the Burrow never housed anyone before Arthur and Molly made it their family home. So where did Arthur grow up? We see some Weasley uncles and cousins at the wedding but we never heard of them before (except that deceased and never married Uncle Bilius - was he a Weasley or a Prewett?). Are the Weasleys out of touch with their other relatives? Why? Septimus was already a 'blood traitor' yet he married a pureblood and so did his son. So what form did Septimus' 'blood treason' have?

And what about the Prewetts? The Blacks thought they were acceptable. How were they different from the Weasleys?

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

And the way the Weasleys are described doesn't make them sound at all lower-middle class. Much more like impoverished aristocrats

Could you elaborate on that? You have a point that being poor doesn't automatically make them lower-middle class, but I don't see a lot of evidence *for* their being impoverished aristocrats.

I suppose I think *lower* middle class specifically because they're poor; otherwise, I'd consider them middle class. I do distinguish between them and Stan, who's clearly working class.

But anyone can have eccentric hobbies, or be aggressive and outspoken. I don't really see that as a strong indication, either way.

Really, I'm not sure what we have to go on, other than their jobs. Arthur has a government job, which is definitely a respectable job, but his job isn't a very important one. Yes, he's the head of the Misuse of Muggle Artifacts Office, but it's an office, not a department. And a small office, at that: Ron says in CoS "it’s only him and an old warlock called Perkins in the office." And because it deals with Muggle stuff, it isn't a position of respect, either.

To be honest, I tend to see Arthur as kind of a senior but minor clerk, or something. True, the new Muggle Protection Act is described as "his," by both Lucius and Dumbledore, which sounds important. On the other hand, I know that people have commented on how it's odd to think that minor officials can create laws; could it be that he was just asked to draft it by someone higher up in the Department of Magical Law Enforcement? His office is in that department. Since it's well known that he likes Muggles, he'd be a natural choice.

As for the sons that have jobs, they all seem to be doing reasonably well, but I don't know that we can judge much about the family's social class by them. For example, Bill works for a bank, which is stereotypically a highly respected job, but what he actually does is rob graves. That doesn't fit into the real-world stereotype, and we can't really judge exactly how prestigious it is in the WW.

[oryx_leucoryx]

There aren't that many departments at the Ministry. DMLE consists of many offices, the largest of which is the Aurors' Office, and I suppose Arthur's office of 2 is among the smallest. For all we know, he may report directly to Amelia Bones, DMLE head. (And we do not know what he did before Fudge became Minsiter. He may have held a subordinate position in one of the larger offices, so becoming head of the smallest office is sort of a move up but not exactly.) But he also has personal connections in other departments - there's Bagman in Magical Games and Sports and Amos Diggory in Regulation and Control of Magical Creatures. I'm not sure if those connections are a network based on political leanings or social equals or some combination thereof.

For example, Bill works for a bank, which is stereotypically a highly respected job, but what he actually does is rob graves. That doesn't fit into the real-world stereotype, and we can't really judge exactly how prestigious it is in the WW.

More importantly - the bank is owned and operated by a race that has a history of mutual distrust with wizards. This should also lower the social standing of wizards who get involved with it.

a quick response-

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Can't take much time for this now, Lynn, but, basically, I tend to interpret these books via all the English classics they echo, both consciously and unconsciously. As I said, the Weasleys, to me, are the Bennetts. And the upper crust looks down on them because Mr. Bennett married a merchant's daughter. There is nothing wrong with his own standing, and the family are part of society. the same is true of the Weasleys, as I see it. They are certainly not working-class like Stan, Hagrid or Severus. Other clues:
Unlike a couple of others in the discussion, I do think the Weasleys have lived in their home for quite some time. They are householders and landowners - yeoman class, at least. And they own quite a bit of land. Second, whitehound/Borolin pointed out that the Weasleys and Dumbledores came across as eccentric (and, in the case of Arthur, impoverished) nobles, while the Malfoys really don't. It's just the vibe. I have read so many English mysteries with an impoverished noble family who can't afford a gardener! That's what the Weasleys remind me of.

Well - Arthur does. Molly does come across as thoroughly middle-class; perhaps a well-to-do tradesman's daughter or sister, like Mrs. Bennett. OTOH, the Blacks weren't averse to marrying into the Prewett family. The Princes are mentioned nowhere on that tapestry.

Just my two cents, of course!

Re: a quick response-

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think the Malfoys come across as nightmare aristocrats--weirdos, iow. Not healthy people. Lots of money, but they do weird things with it and spend it in ghastly ways. It doesn't read to me as screaming that they haven't had their money for a long time, just that they've always been the sort of grotesque aristocrats that probably don't follow the rules of polite, sensible English folk. I think Elkins made that point in her essay about how in Agatha Christie you didn't want to get too far up the social scale because after a certain point it's unsavory.

Re: a quick response-

[oryx_leucoryx]

Regarding Arthur's family: Arthur's mother was probably born around 1917. Arthur was probably born in the early 1950s, when his mother was in her 30s. We know there were no Weasley cousins at Hogwarts in Harry's years, so I tend to think Arthur's brothers (supposedly 2 according to interviews, we see one of them at the wedding) were older than him and their sons were around Bill and Charlie's age or older. Would Arthur have remained to live in his father's house if he was the younger son?

Re: a quick response-

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

But, in that case, if he has a rambling house and large garden, and no mortgage that we know about, doesn't it also tend to show the family has fallen on hard times? At one point, the Weasley parents managed to acquire this house, even if the upkeep on it is now beyond them. Clearly, their priority (Arthur's, anyway) isn't money. Their poverty is in part their own creation - which doesn't mean they are to blame for it, really, but they did choose to have all those kids.

Just thinking out loud. I just wasn't sure whether you were supporting me or arguing against me.

Re: a quick response-

[lynn-waterfall.livejournal.com]

I think that all of that is fair, and that it's a perfectly reasonable reading. It's more that I'm not *convinced*, and this wouldn't be my default assumption.

The point that Arthur has a fairly good social network in the Ministry does tend to support his being upper class; that's what I find to be the strongest point.

However, he's had a long career at the Ministry, and he probably knew some of them at school. He's pleasant and easy-going, and doesn't mind bending the rules/laws for a friend. He could develop social ties with people, even if they aren't in the same class.

Also, what specific contacts does he have, exactly? Ludo Bagman is pretty important, being the head of a department. But on the other hand, Bagman made his political career on the basis of being an excellent athlete, so *he* might not be as upper class as Crouch and Fudge, for example. (Of course, he still could be.) What other cases do we have?

Then there's Percy. It seems to me that there's a vibe from his family that he's "getting above himself" with his ambitions. (Above and beyond the fact that they dislike his being pompous, too serious, and working too hard.) There could be all kinds of reasons for that, though, such as Percy's age, and their disapproval of that kind of ambition. Or the fact that they just don't like him/the way he manages his authority when he has some. So it's hard to be sure what this bit tells us, if anything.

Re: a quick response-

[jodel-from-aol.livejournal.com]

When you stop and consider, I tend to doubt that there is any really simple analog regarding who is considered an "aristo" in wizarding society that corresponds with what pointers flag the "aristocracy" among Muggles.

Titled wizards have always been rare, and as the two societies have distanced themselves, they have become rarer. I very much doubt that there are any left, even with such minor titles as Sir Nick's knighthood. There is no wizarding royal to *convey* a title upon a wizarding subject.

So by default we have a rather uneasy conflict between a meritocracy, which Albus benefitted from, and the usual benefits of plutocracy, which the Malfoys (and probably others) deploy to their own advantage. And the Slughorns serving as a broker and go-between introducing the two to one another, for the mutual benefit of all.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised to learn that there is a sliding scale of wizarding prestige which depends to a large extent upon how much at a distance one is able to live *away* from Muggles. By that kind of a standard, the Weasleys and the Malfoys (and the Lovegoods off in their tower) all would score fairly high, regardless of what their actual standard of living might be. The Blacks, whose London house has been surrounded by the 18th or 19th century expansion of London are very much a house in decline, although that decline is slow, and probably has been slowed further by their rigorous rejection of any muggle influences.

Bathilda Bagshott, who actually lived *in* her mixed village would rank somewhat lower in prestige than a family who lived outside it, the twins who moved from a country home to a flat above their shop in a secluded wizarding district retained their family prestige, and the residents of Hogsmeade would be high status, regardless of their actual apparant "class". Muggle-borns who go back to live with Muggle families every summer are at the bottom of the heap.