TBAY: Kirstini's big Theorising Adventure

[B Arrowsmith]

No: HPFGUIDX 78606

I'm not absolutely sure that this post belongs under this subject, but 
what the hell.

There have a spate of good thoughtful posts with different titles over 
the last couple of days and a theme that seems to link them is moral 
relativism.

I always look forward to a good TBAY, gets the juices stirred, look for 
loopholes, false canon deserving of a yellow flag etc. - all that good 
stuff. This  one caused me to raise one eyebrow - slowly. I've no 
problem with the premise of the blurring of moral  boundaries dividing  
good from bad with a symphony of greys taking over from moral 
certainties. What did surprise me was that Kirstini considered it to be 
a fairly recent phenomenon. I think it's  been there from Book 1, chap. 
1.
It just wasn't restricted to individuals.

The moral relativism that Kirstini et al explore in some detail is just 
the icing on the  cake; a final flourish on the top of a morally muddy 
confection. I've always been of the opinion that the books have never 
had a cut and dried moral divide outside Harry's limited teenage view. 
It also goes much further than any of the individuals that we have 
enjoyed dissecting and theorising about. The whole concept of WW and 
Muggledom is an exercise  in double standards and dubious tenets.

Consider, what is DD's first action? To drop a WW cuckoo into a Muggle 
nest. It doesn't matter that it's unwelcome, inconvenient or 
unreasonable, the WW has its agenda and Muggles are there to be used  
and abused.

The unwritten thread that winds its way unbroken through the books is  
that Muggles are the unconsidered  lumpen proletariat, with no say, no 
worthwhile opinion and are to be abused, patronised or laughed at as  
is appropriate. The need to enact  a Muggle  Protection Act should tell 
you all you need to know. The WW sees itself as an elite, a patronising 
elite, a possibly dangerous elite, who regard  Muggle laws or norms as 
totally irrelevant to their lives or behaviour even though they live 
within the society of Muggles. The point that Bluesqueak makes (78547) 
regarding the parallels between Anglo - Indian society and 
Pureblood/Mudblood social tensions  is only part of the story. There is 
no need for a Mudblood Protection Act - they can look after themselves 
if  need be, for they too have powers. If  Mudblood  is a deadly 
insult, the contamination of Wizarding blood by Muggle blood, where 
does that place Muggles in the hierarchy of the acceptable? At the 
bottom of  course.

Remember the Muggles we've met so far:

The Dursleys. Unsympathetic characters, to be imposed upon and laughed 
at  when they are unable  to cope with powers they cannot comprehend. 
Their function, quite clearly stated at the end of OoP  - look after 
Harry, or else! Any consideration of their feelings or agenda is 
brushed aside as of no consequence.
Aunt Vi;  another unsympathetic character. Inflated because Harry got  
upset.
Mr & Mrs Mason; (the Muggles invited to dinner in CoS), smothered in 
cake.
13 passers-by;  murdered by Pettigrew in a deception ploy.
Frank Bryce; murdered; a bit like putting down an old watchdog past his 
best.
Mr Roberts and family; mentally and physically abused at the Quidditch 
World Cup and not just by DEs.

Not one sympathetic or 'strong' personality in the lot. And Malfoy 
treated Dobby better than the way he wants to treat Muggles.

Arthur Weasleys' fascination may be well  meant, but you just know he'd 
love to put the Graingers under the microscope. Just like any animal 
behaviourist studying chimpanzees "Oh look!  they can do that!  It's 
almost as if they were human!"

Add on any number of magical 'jokes', from regurgitating toilets to 
nose clamping sugar tongs and you begin to get the impression that  if 
the WW had its way, Muggles would be better of in protected enclaves.

What does Harry think of Muggles? We assume he was glad to escape from 
their world, to become something special. That showed in The Hut on the 
Rock. Does he now consider Muggles an irritating irrelevance?

I'm sensible that in fiction just about anything goes, but this is 
beginning to show signs of deliberate type  casting, that to be a 
non-wizard is to be an untouchable. The rules of morality don't apply 
if you're a Muggle.

In my fervid imagination the HP  series  is taking on overtones of the 
Thirty  Years War.  An inbred aristocratic elite, split between 
ideologies, swapping sides as convenience dictates, telling themselves 
that only their squabbles matter in the overall  scheme of things.

Humph! I hope the tone eventually changes for the better.

Kneasy