Harry=halfblood?

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 76040

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yairadubin"
<two4menone4you88 at a...> wrote:
> How come no one refers to Harry as a half-blood?  If his mother is a 
> mudblood, as Snape's statement seems to imply, then Harry should be 
> referred to as a half-blood. However, on the train to Hogwarts in 
> PS/SS, Malfoy tries to warn him not to hang out with mudbloods and 
> Weasleys - as if he's better than that. Considering the fact that 
> Harry is exceedingly famous, it seems logical that the WW would know 
> his lineage.
> *Yaira*

bboy_mn:

Your 'blood' is not absolute, it is in the eye of the beholder. To the
Malfoys and others obssessed with pure blood, if you have any muggles
or muggle-borns anywhere in your family history, you are not a pure
blood and therefore, automatically a mudblood.

Techincally, a half-blood would be half muggle and half wizard (Tom
Riddle), NOT half muggle-born witch and half wizard father (Harry Potter).

But the terms are defined, not by formal definition, but by the
prejudices of the person who is making the judgement. You will note
for the paragraph above, that Harry is more of a pure blood that Tom
Riddle. Both of Harry's parents are magical.

Mudblood - anyone whose blood isn't ancestrally pure back to the
beginning of time. (Something I see as very unlikely)

Muggle-born - magical person of non-magical parents.

Half-blood - Half muggle; half magical.

Full-blood - both parents magical, but not necessarily pure-blood.

By the most techincal definition, Harry is a Full-blood, but not a
pure-blood.

Again, techincal definitions mean nothing, when it is the prejudice of
another person that determine who and what you are in their eyes.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn