Warlocks, Wizards, and their Wardrobes

[Hillman, Lee]

No: HPFGUIDX 23704

Gwyneth asked: 
> A simple question, hoping for a simple answer:
> 
> What's a Warlock?
> 
> What makes a Warlock different from a Wizard?  Because Dumbledore is 
> Head Warlock or something-like-that, is he a Warlock?  So can a 
> Warlock be a Wizard?  Are all warlocks wizards?  Are all wizards 
> warlocks? Can a witch be a warlock?  What is a warlock?
> 
> Okay, maybe that was more than A question.  But I'm interested in 
> knowing.
> 

This may be too simple an answer, but here's what I think:

Warlock = A Person-of-Magic who is of the male gender.

Witch = A Person-of-Magic who is of the female gender.

Wizard = A Person-of-Magic of unspecified gender _or_ male.

Warlocks = A group of People-of-Magic who are _all_ Male.

Witches = A group of People-of-Magic who are _all_ Female.

Wizards = A group of People-of-Magic who are of unspecified, male, or (more
likely) mixed genders.

This theory has some basis. First, many systems of magic specify "warlock"
to be the term for a male witch, as "witch" has feminine connotations. In
this sense, Rowling may be basing the term on a more "classical" or
historical doctrine. Second, she taught French for several years, and French
has gendered nouns. In any group situation where genders may be mixed, the
default usage (IIRC) goes to the male. In other words, in French, one could
refer to a group of mages who are all female, and the gender would be
female, or a group of mages who are all male, and the gender would be male,
but if the group is possibly mixed, it must be referred to as male. Third,
she seems to make a distinction between "Witchcraft" and "Wizardry," but
there seems to be no difference between these two schools of magic. All
witches and wizards learn magic from the same professors, in integrated
classes, and apart from the lesson on unicorns, and the lack of girls on
Slytherin's Quidditch team, there appears to be no preferential treatment
given to one gender over the other. 

So I humbly submit that the explanation is as simple as "warlock" is a
specifically male term, "witch" is a specifically female term, and "wizard"
is a more-or-less male term but that can be loosely applied to both genders.


Ah, you ask, but then why is there discrepancy between always calling
Hermione a witch and sometimes calling all genders wizarding folk? Well,
have any of you ever referred to a whole group of your friends, presumably
of mixed gender, as "Guys?" As in, "Hey, guys!" or "Come on, you guys?"

Just as Muggles do, I believe wizarding folk often use shorthand in
referring to themselves or groups of themselves. Thus "wizards" while
originally a predominantly male-oriented term has become acceptable as a
catch-all. 

[By extension, I suppose some male-chauvenistic warlocks could refer
sardonically to their male companions as "witches," the same way often
groups of Muggle men will derisively call their fellows, "Ladies" or
"girls."]


As for your other question, about wardrobes, that has been the subject of
much debate. Personally, I think it has to do with the background of each
individual family: how much contact they have or have had with Muggles, how
much Muggle blood is in the family, how progressive or conservative the
family's views are about interaction, etc. Certainly, I think it possible
for a family to exist with almost no contact with the Muggle world and
therefore need very little in the way of non-wizard clothing. However, in
this modern age, I think it less likely that any children would be unaware
of basics like sneakers, jeans, and t-shirts. And if I were a witch with no
contact, I'd still take myself down to the local discount store for
underwear and socks--way easier than making them myself!


Gwendolyn Grace

BTW, Gwyneth, Dumbledore is "Supreme Mugwump," which is something entirely
different about which we can all debate. I know someone posted the
definition of Mugwump and where it derives historically, but can't recall
the post. Check the Lexicon. http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon