What is permissible? (was Re: A pet theory concerning magic in the real world.)

[Haggridd]

No: HPFGUIDX 18004

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Neil Ward" <neilward at d...> wrote:
> Egg On My Head said:
> 
> <<This is a pet theory I have been harbouring for some time, and 
have tried
> out on a few people and developed.  Basically it is an
>  explanation for those who insist on believing that J.K. Rowling 
must  have
> got her ideas from somewhere.  Basically, my problem is that we 
are 
never
> told how the muggle killings that characterised voldemorts reign 
were
> explained - memory charms cannot surely destroy memories  of loved 
ones.  My
> idea is that as the muggle prime minister is in contact with the 
minister
> for magic, the magic minister (mm) aranged  with the prime inister 
(pm) so
> that all the troubles in northern  Ieland of the seventies and 
eighties were
> invented - therefore any  killing was as a result of magic - and the
> troubles were invented as an excuse - to stop any muggles getting
> suspicious.  The few  terrorist activitis were commited by death 
eaters -
> unwilling to  admit defeat - the recent rise of voldemort would 
explain the
> recent  upsurge in terrorist activity.>>
> 
> Hi Egg on My Head (I hope that isn't your regular name!),
> 
> Welcome to the group.
> 
> I think that JKR may have drawn on her general knowledge of 
terrorism and
> intolerance in the world in her portrayal of the Death Eaters, but
I 
doubt
> that she would have consciously used Northern Ireland as a specific 
example
> in the way you imply.  The troubles in Northern Ireland have
brought 
very
> real death and destruction to that part of the UK and for anyone 
living
> there (or in the UK as a whole) it remains a sensitive subject.
> 
> The level of terrorist activity in mainland Britain has been quite 
low
> compared to that in Northern Ireland.  If your theory were true, 
which is
> unlikely, IMO, there would have to have been a disproportionate 
number
> 'magical' deaths in Northern Ireland and I don't see anything in
the 
books
> that suggests that Voldemort's reign of terror was focused there.
> 
> [Admin note:  We can't get too deeply into the political element of 
this, as
> there is still a ban on politically-sensitive discussions on this 
list].
> 
> On the general point you led with, I'm sure that most writers are 
influenced
> or inspired by the world around them.  An interesting aspect of 
fantasy
> writing is how much of the real world creeps in and how much is
left 
to pure
> invention (if there is such a thing).  I'd say that fantasy writing
> generally has its anchors in the real world and I like the way JKR 
uses this
> connection between fantasy and reality as an opportunity to explain 
the
> magical causes of mysterious or even actual events in the real 
Muggle*
> world.
> 
> Neil
> 
I too am relatively new to this message board, and I am confused. I 
don't believe that anyone suggested that JKR wrote either an allegory 
or a roman-a-clef.  I also don't think that eggonmyface derived any 
vicarious pleasure from exploiting The Troubles.  In the recent past 
the message board has explored and indulged the topic of HP and 
Christianity far beyond my comfort level, especially as I felt that 
Mr. Abanes had no interest in honest discussion, but merely wanted to 
proclaim "THE TRUTH" as he saw it.  I dealt with it by ignoring 
messages with that title, and left it for those who did have an 
interest in pursuing the discussion.  No harm done. That topic was at 
least as sensitive as the troubles in Northern Ireland.  My point is 
that drawing any inference, any parallel, or any conclusion from any 
portion of the real world outside the covers of the seven present and 
planned HP books will offend the sensibilities of someone, somewhere, 
at sometime.  Where do we draw the line?  I hope that noone feels 
attacked, because I am attacking nobody.  The bounds of discussion is 
a topic of great interest to us all. 

Haggridd