What's in it for Witches?

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 44034

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Emma Hawkes <ehawkes at i...> 
wrote:
  These details give a 
> fascinating glimpse of the structure of the magic world and it is 
> possible to chart the working lives of some of the witches and 
> wizards.  In Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, the 
following  jobs are undertaken by adult human protagonists:
> 
> 				Wizards				Witches
> 
> 								Nurse
> 								Robe Maker
> 				Gameskeeper
> 				Apothecary
> 				Wand Maker
> 				Innkeeper
> 				Teacher				Teacher
> 				House Head			House Head
> 				Headmaster			Deputy Head
> 				Banker
> 				Dragon Tamer
> 				Civil Servant
> 				Dark Lord
> 
> This is an interesting list.  Witches have a limited range of 
> employment possibilities, none of which stray too far from what 
is normal in contemporary Britain.  Witches may have authority 
over  children, but the top jobs are reserved for men 
(headmaster, Dark  Lord).  Although, frankly, I wouldn't hail a 
Dark Lady rather than a  Dark Lord as a feminist break through, it 
would be nice if some women  got to speak with authority or 
even work for the Ministry of Magic.<<
> 

This is a common topic on this list, and I see it unfolding in the 
usual manner, with people pointing out that we are in fact told of  
many important high status jobs for women in the wizarding 
world, ie headmistress, Minister of Magic (in the schoolbooks), 
world class Quidditch player and so on. I submit that lack of 
female empowerment is not the real source of reader 
dissatisfaction.

The real issue is that from the reader's perspective, the witches 
are so hopelessly mundane. From the wizards' point of view, of 
course, this is not so. They wouldn't think being a dragon 
handler is more exotic than being  headmistress of a wizarding 
school, or that teaching potions is more glamorous than 
astronomy. 

But let a witch show one sign of impressing the reader as exotic 
or extraordinary and Rowling moves at once to squelch it.

The most egregious example is yellow-eyed Madame Hooch, 
who drops  clean out of the narrative whenever Harry is attacked 
on the Quidditch field, just when you would expect her to 
demonstrate her flying skills. One begins to wonder whether  
she could be a secret ally of Lord Voldemort. <g>

There are many other examples. Professor Sprout is literally 
down to earth, Professor Trelawney never consciously does any 
magic at all, the ungendered but presumably female Professor 
Sinistra teaches Astronomy, the only mundane subject taught at 
Hogwarts. Molly uses her magic only to chop vegetables and 
make white sauce...we don't even get to see her Apparate or use 
Floo powder, though we're told she can. McGonagall has the 
delightful ability to become a cat, but she has yet to use it in any 
really dramatic way. 

Even Hermione doesn't use magic as much as you'd think she 
would...she doesn't need it to capture Rita Skeeter, for example 
(though she does use it to keep her imprisoned.) Most of what 
she does, lighting fires and opening locks, could be managed by 
Muggle means, and Rowling takes pains to show this.  There's 
the Time Turner, of course, but it's not really Hermione's, and in 
the end she gives it up. 


Rowling thus builds up an expectation in our minds that witches 
only do  what ordinary women do, but  she delights in upsetting 
such assumptions.

The  gender of the Irish Chasers is concealed just long enough 
for the careless reader to assume they are all male.   There are 
other hints that Rowling could be planning to surprise us.

 The sex  (or sexes) of Charlie's dragon trainer friends, the ones 
who rescue Norbert, is never mentioned. There's the possibility  
that McGonagall and Riddle might have a past. There's the 
queenly female Death Eater in the Pensieve. Was she  Mrs. 
Lestrange, or is there perhaps more than one powerful 
sorceress in the Dark Lord's camp? Also, there is, as Emma 
points out, no reason to suppose that Bode and Croaker, who 
*do* have exotic jobs from the wizards' point of view, are male. 

Above all there is Lily, who appears in the Mirror of Erised, not as 
a mighty sorceress, which she surely was, but as the Mother 
Harry longs to have. 

I think part of what Rowling is doing is twitting her female 
readers, and herself, for finding it so easy to identify with male 
protagonists. But also we know that she doesn't altogether 
approve of escapist fantasies, as Dumbledore's teaching about 
the Mirror shows.

Perhaps she wants to show us that real power, for women and 
men both,  does not rest in the ability to wield a wand, but in the 
ability to influence the hearts of others.

Pippin