Why brooms and not carpets?

[c_voth312]

No: HPFGUIDX 45775

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "James P. Robinson III" <jprobins at i...> 
wrote:
>          I will probably get flayed for voicing this opinion.  I 
think we 
> can reasonably posit a significant British flying broom industry 
from the 
> fact that the newest model is always on display in Diagon Alley, 
Which 
> Broom magazine, the history of the British broom industry given in 
QTTA, 
> etc.  On the other hand, there does not appear to be much of a 
British 
> flying carpet industry (although there is mention of Barty Crouch, 
sr.'s 
> father's Axminster, presumably a British product).  Flying carpets 
are an 
> import item.  What is more, they are an import item that would, to 
a 
> degree, compete with the native, British broom manufacturers.  I 
suggest 
> that the distinction is purely political and protectionist.
> 
>                                                          Jim

Actually, Jim, I was about to suggest this idea myself.  As was 
mentioned elsewhere, the reason why brooms would have been originally 
favored over carpets is simply that way-back-when, brooms were much 
more common and inexpensive (think about it, do you really want to 
expose that neat rug Uncle William brought back from the Crusades to 
the elements?).  But nowadays, I think it might have more to do with 
traditionalism and national pride.  There's some evidence that the 
MoM, or Fudge at the very least, is a bit--I believe "conservative" 
is the diplomatic term--in their ways; I can easily imagine them 
trying to curtail imports.

~Christi