Muggle-borns

[Steve <bboy_mn@yahoo.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 49251

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lindseyharrisst
<lindseyharrisst at h...>" <lindseyharrisst at h...> wrote:
> 
> ...edited...
>
> I was wondering about what constitutes a muggle born and a half 
> blood. ...edited...
> 
> It would seem that Haryy can be a pure blood, even though his mother 
> was muggle born and racially the same as Hermione, who gets abuse 
> for being a mudblood. Harry  therefore has, if one goes back to his 
> grandparents generation, 50% wizard blood (from James's parents) and 
> 50% muggle blood. He is a 1st generation pureblood but a second 
> generation half blood.
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> Snapesangel

bboy_mn ponders:

Tricky business, this business of blood.

Here is my take on the issue, copied and embellished from a post in
October.

bboy_mn adds:
Boy this whole muggle/mudblood/pure-blood thing is confusing.

I'm not saying I'm right, but here is my take on the subject.

Pure-Blood = in the truest sense is someone who can trace their
magical heritage back through infinity with only magic blood
intermarriages. (Not likely in reality, but that's it in the truest sense)

Muggle = non-magical person

Magic person = anyone who is magical regardless of birth.

Muggle-Born = a witch or a wizard who's parents are BOTH muggles.

Magic-born or Wizard-born person = the wizard son or witch daughter of
a witch and a wizard. (perhaps even a squib) (As someone else pointed
out, in a sense, we could say that Harry is a first generation
pure-blood. If he and his decendants only marry magic people, in five
or ten generations, his family might qualify as a pure-blood in
general. Although, at the moment, he is only a pure-blood as a
technicality. Despite Harry being the son of two magic parents, Draco
wouldn't call him a pure-blood, at the same time, he is not likely to
call him a mudblood. See, I told you it was complicated.)

Mixed blood or Half-blood = the magical son daughter of a witch or a
wizard, and a non-magical muggle parent. As in Tom Riddle. Harry has
purer blood than Tom Riddle does because both of Harry's parents were
magic.

Half-blood - Tom Riddle again. One magic parent and one muggle parent.
His blood by lineage is only half magic despite the fact that he may
be all magic. See confusing.... half magical blood in an all magical
person.

Mudblood = is several things.
In the purest form, all muggles are mudbloods in that they do not have
any magical blood at all.

By another definition, the magical son or daughter of muggle parents
are mudbloods by virtue of the fact that they have no magical
heritage. They are magical but have no ancestral magical blood. That
would be Hermione.

Next, if your parents are a witch/wizard and a muggle, then your blood
isn't pure, therefore you are a mudblood. Some by some definition a
mixed blood or a half blood could be considered a mudblood. The blood
is contaminated by non-magical blood, therefore, it is dirty. Again,
Tom Riddle. Very interesting that by any definition Tom Riddle is more
of a mudblood than Harry.

Part of what confuses this, is that the concept of 'mudblood' is in
the eye (or mouth) of the insulter. If you are not of totally
pure-blood as the Weasleys and Malfoys are, then any impurity makes
you a mudblood in some peoples eyes. If you have one muggle in a 1,000
years of magical heritage then to some people your blood isn't pure
and therefore, you are a mudblood.

Harry could be mudblood in the eyes of some because his mother was
muggle born, BUT he could just as easily be pureblood in the eyes of
others by vitue of the fact that his parents are both magical; a witch
and a wizard.

Point- the is no absolute definition of a 'mudblood'.

Just a few thoughts on the subject.

bboy_mn