Mudblood as Racial Epithet: Another take on the "stomp" /Re: Malfoy on the train

[ladjables]

No: HPFGUIDX 35035

It's just fascinating how we Potter fans see everything so 
differently.  I see nothing wrong with the twins' actions on the 
train, but then, I adore Fred and George.  Uncmark's excellent post 
got me thinking, however, as I declare something to be uncmark's 
again let me quickly apologize to Devin, whose "Godric's Hollow as 
site of final showdown" theory I mistakenly attributed to uncmark.  
In the words of Pumbaa, Devin, "I gravel at your feet", sorry 'bout 
that! That said, I want to address the train incident from the point 
of view of moral outrage as well as provide some more support for F&G.

Draco Malfoy gets the prize for violating the most taboos in one 
mouthful.  Now I know insulting the memory of a dead boy and 
revelling in the future deaths of his classmates are the factors that 
pushed everyone over the edge, but  

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "uncmark" <uncmark at y...> wrote:
>He jerked his head at Ron and Hermione. "Too late now, Potter! 
>They'll be the first to go, now the Dark Lord's back! Mudbloods and 
>Muggle-lovers  first! Well--second--Diggory was the f--"
>snip<

> Malfoy's taunts got worse through the book until in my opinion he 
> got what he deserves on the train home.

Mine too.  Please note the use of mudblood, because it's the key to 
how Malfoy's insults develop not just in the book, but the series. 
JKR explained the term in CoS, where she devotes the 
chapter,"Mudbloods and Murmurs", to the incident when Draco first 
uses the term.  Ron says to Harry that "it's about the most insulting 
thing [Draco] could think of" to call Hermione (CoS, CH.7, pp.115-
116, US Edition).  JKR reiterates in GoF, after the Quidditch Cup, 
where Draco also refers to Hermione as mudblood, that "Everyone 
present knew that "Mudblood" was a very offensive term for a witch or 
a wizard of Muggle parentage" (GoF, CH. 9, pp.122, US Edition). Then 
Draco uses it again on the train, that's twice in the same book.      

My point?  Mudblood is comparable to a racial slur.  It's not 
analogous to calling someone common blood, please, who cares?  No, 
"mudblood" applies to a specific minority, (not necessarily a 
numerical minority), it marks a group for the purpose of humiliating 
them.  Mudblood is not a slur familiar to us, but I'm sure we can 
think of some.  Someone who uses an ethnic slur, especially if it's a 
favourite addition to their vocabulary, is a racist.

uncmark again:
> Fred and George's part? In my opinion they were watching the back 
> of their brother and his two friends against a trio that they knew 
> to be the sons of Death Eaters. 
> 
> To make it more personal, Lucius Malfoy had almost killed their 
> little sister in CofS with the Tom Riddle Diary and his son is 
> threatening that "They'll be the first to go, now the Dark Lord's 
> back! Mudbloods and Muggle-lovers..."
  
 
Thanks to uncmark, we can now simply move the train incident into our 
reality.  Who is Draco?  The son of the man who had a hand in your 
sister's/friend's abduction, who comes from a long line of 
illustrious KKK figures and is unrepentant about it.  For whatever 
reason, what does he say?  He speaks ill of the dead, someone who 
died on Sept 11th, glorifies in it, and on top of that, calls your 
friend a, say, n*****.  Now, how do you FEEL?  Pretend you're Draco, 
and say these words yourself.  Imagine insulting someone in this 
manner.  Than imagine you're the one insulted.  How would the 
recipient of the slur react?  You, his friend?  The sibling of the 
abductee?  And so on.  Everyone will be offended but may not react 
similarly.  By specificallly giving mudblood an alter ego in our 
reality, I'm trying to illustrate just how morally offensive Draco's 
remarks are, and what his use of them implies about his character.  
Then we can examine how different people respond when confronted by 
these statements.

Back to HPverse: We could say Draco doesn't know any better, but 
while Draco thinks calling someone a mudblood is acceptable, he also 
knows it is hurtful.  He is using it specifically to cause pain.  I 
cannot like Draco for wanting to make people feel they are inferior, 
that's evil.  F&G like a good joke, even at their expense, for e.g. 
when they try to cross the age line and end up with matching beards.  
They're not cruel, and they don't get off on anyone's disabilities or 
differences.  They may turn Neville into a canary, but I'm sure 
they'd be among the first to help Neville if he's in trouble.  They 
certainly didn't steal his Remembrall.  They may leave a ton-tongue 
toffee for Dudley, not because he's a Muggle, but because he's a 
"great bullying git" (GoF, CH.5, pp.53, US Edition).  F&G have their 
own moral code, but Draco?  A victim of his parents' ideological 
inculcation?  Sure, but he is also a teenager who is exposed to 
diversity and CHOOSES ignorance.  He knows mudblood can scar someone 
deeply, even if he doesn't really understand why.  And yet it's a 
weapon he likes using.  

So F&G find themselves around Malfoy when he manages to offend just 
about everyone on the planet.  What happens?  Someone, I'm sorry I 
don't remember your name, said Draco crossed the line.  Actually, 
with each scathing remark Draco crossed EVERYBODY's line, but as we 
saw, everyone reacted differently, with a hex, curse or jinx.   And 
then, when Draco is rendered unconscious,  F&G step, not stomp, step 
on him, which is symbolic: Draco and his attitudes are beneath them.  
Stepping over may have meant they were over the incident and had 
moved on.  I think stepping ON implies a certain nonchalance but 
without forgiving Draco's words. F&G know while Draco isn't worth 
their efforts, letting off steam is.  It makes them feel better.  And 
one last dig is typical of the immature.  In an odd way, that's 
amusing, and that's F&G all over, cracking jokes as they roll them 
out the door.  It defuses the hex attack.  Now kicking would have 
exacerbated it. 

uncmark:
> Noone kicked them while they were down, although I 
> wouldn't have minded if F&G tried to make up by leaving the trio 
> some  of there ton tongue toffees or canary creams.
 

Frankly, if F&G HAD kicked M, C&G in a blind rage, I would have been 
upset, horrified, but it still would have been justifiable to me.  
When you cross someone's line, all bets are off.  But the fact that 
F&G et al didn't permanently disfigure those boys is significant.
   
> Cindy wrote about Fred,George, and HRH 
>Bad guys kick their foe when they are down and helpless and 
>unconscious.  Good guys do what they have to do and move on.  They 
>do NOT curse people just for saying something they don't like, 
>stomp them, and then leave them there powerless to rescue 
>themselves.  

Oh yes they do.  Good people often lash out and strike below the 
belt, attack, maim and kill when they're pressed to their limits, out 
of sheer frustration and an inability to deal with a foe who 
represents everything they abhor.  Not everyone is blessed with the 
inner fortitude to move on, that's what the strong man does.  Good 
men can be weak and can fail, simply because they are human.  That's 
why it's so hard to identify the good.  Every action yields a 
reaction; this is no less true when faced with evil.  But when moral 
outrage is the response, who are we to decide what is "good"?  Or HOW 
do we decide?   Good is complex.  Something JKR understands very well.

uncmark again:
> I'd like to see Malfoy redeem himself (a favorite theme among group 
> members) but I don't see any of them having the integrity or moral 
> fiber to make a hard choice. Still i hope someone might surprise me.

Much as I dislike Malfoy I'm also not averse to his redemption.  But, 
in that moment, he violated everyone's sense of decency and got what 
he deserved.  I choose to see the hexing on the train as an 
expression of righteous anger, and Fred & George reacted the way F&G 
are supposed to react.  On principle, I cannot judge them until I'm 
in their shoes.  And even then, how someone should react to a 
situation if they've been offended to their moral core is a deeply 
personal decision.
Ama