Muggles

[carolynwhite2]

Laurasia: 
> PORTRAYAL OF MUGGLES
> How are Muggles are portrayed by the books? How do Wizards view
> Muggles? (esp. in relation to class. Are Wizards elite?) 
Specifically
> Arthur's fascination with Muggles and how he interacts with them.
> 
> But as to the question of how Muggles are portrayed in the books,
> especially in relation to class, I don't see any other category 
which
> could be sufficient. "3.2.2 ····Relationship with muggle world" is
> a start, but there are no headings for talking about what Muggles 
> are like as a group.
> 
> Should these posts be left in the main heading?
> 
> This would mean you only coded a post to  "2.13 ··Muggles" if the
> post was talking about how JKR portrays Muggles (as a group), what 
> the general opinion of Muggles (as a group) is, or how specific 
> characters (Arthur, Dumbledore, etc) view Muggles (as a group). 
> 
> Sound alright?

Carolyn:
I suspect that these particular posts should be moved to '3.2.2 
Relationship with the muggle world', but then that whole category 
reviewed to see if it would make more sense to split it up into 
further subsections.

Laurasia:
> MUGGLES AND WIZARDS
> Specifics about the Muggles/Wizard separation (memory charms to keep
> it secret) How aware are Muggles of the Wizarding World (eg, Can
> Muggles see Dementors, Can Muggles be bitten by Werewolves?)?

> "3.2.2 ····Relationship with muggle world" would seem to be enough
> to cover the separation between Wizard/Muggles worlds. But these 
> posts tend to be about social relations, not political.

Carolyn: Again, put them into 3.2.2 I think, then review that whole 
section. The WW/muggle political comparisons are currently a subset 
of 3.2.2, but that may not stand up to analysis when someone takes a 
look.

Laurasia:
> MUGGLES GENETICS
> What actually distinguishes a Muggle from Wizard? Do Muggles have a
> genetic link with Squibs?

> Could "3.4.7 ····WW lifespans, genetics & population estimates"
> also be explanded to include Muggle genetics? These posts don't ask 
> what makes a wizard, but what makes a muggle.

Carolyn: yes, I think it would be reasonable to move these posts into 
3.4.7 for the time being, then sort out that whole section and see 
what sub-sets might be needed.

Laurasia:
> MUGGLE-BORNS
> Muggle parents sending their children off to Hogwarts.
> 
> We have a heading "3.5.2 ····Purebloods & half bloods," should
> there be a Muggleborn heading? Or should that heading just be 
> expanded?
> 
Carolyn: 
I would personally put these posts into section 3.2.2, as it is all 
about handling muggle/wizard relations - what special letters muggle 
parents might get to explain about Hogwarts etc.


Laurasia: 
> The only minor problem is that some posts discuss how the Durselys
> treat Harry and what they believe as a family unit, not as
> individuals. Are these more approporate for "1.4.7.3
> ······Dursleys" because they are about family beliefs, attitudes 
> and joint actions? Or alternatively, will there be some posts from 
> that heading being recoded to Vernon, Petunia and Dudley? KathyK, I
> see you've elected to do Family Dynamics. What do you think?
> 

Carolyn: 
Coding to Dursleys/family dynamics sounds ok to me. My question is 
whether they should be coded to Harry or not. Preferably not, but...

Overall, re my responses to these questions, what I think we should 
do is try and keep the character codes fairly 'pure', in the sense 
that posts coded to them should be mainly about the character in 
question, rather than mainly about one of the many meta-themes or WW 
themes.

Do others agree?

Carolyn