[HPforGrownups] Wizarding Genetics (WAS: Re: Mark Evans)

[Taryn Kimel]

No: HPFGUIDX 85045

Berit replied:
> 
> No need to be sorry :-)
> I'm aware of said quote by Madam Bones. As you say, it could be 
> explained :-) For instance, we don't know when a child 
> is "discovered" being a wizard, or when he/she is officially and 
> irrefutably magical.[...]
> Maybe magical children aren't registered in the Ministry records 
> until they're, let's say 11 years old? That's when they get the 
> letter from Hogwarts, and that's when it would be "official" whether 
> they're magic or not. Maybe Hogwarts knows more about the wizard 
> children than the Ministry does... Just a thought :-)
> 
> Berit

Annemehr:

JKR did say something about this in response to a question.  As I'd
just read it again last night, I actually remembered where it was! 
So, for anyone who's interested:

>From the Scholastic chat of Feb. 2000:
--------------------------------------------------------
Question: How can two Muggles have a kid with magical powers? Also how
does the Ministry of Magic find out these kids have powers?

JKR: It's the same as two black-haired people producing a redheaded
child. Sometimes these things just happen, and no one really knows
why! The Ministry of Magic doesn't find out which children are magic.
In Hogwarts there's a magical quill which detects the birth of a
magical child, and writes his or her name down in a large parchment
book. Every year Professor McGonagall checks the book, and sends owls
to the people who are turning 11.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Taryn:
Y'know, that brings up an interesting question of how exactly wizarding skill is transmitted from person to person. JKR seems to imply here that it's genetics, using the example of two parents with dominant genes passing recessive genes to a child--hence, two black-haired people producing a redhead and "no one knowing why." But we /do/ know why. The thing is, recessive genes /were/ recieved from someone. I would imagine (I'm not a geneticist, so I don't know *g*) that recessive genes can be transmitted for several generations without appearing. So wizarding would, obviously, have to be a recessive gene in order to pop out from "nowhere" as it does with Muggle-borns like Hermione. However, it would seem (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that most all children with ONE wizarding parent seem to get the gene, which would work more for it being dominant. And just how many Muggles HAVE the recessive gene? Because if the ALL had it, I'd imagine it would show up a lot more often. (Maybe I should stay away from that--don't want to start another thread about Wizarding numbers. Numbers never were my strong point. ^_~) And then how do SQUIBS happen? It certainly isn't realistic to believe two people with a recessive gene someone have a child with a dominant one. More impossible than unrealistic.

So it actually seems that wizarding /can't/ be a genetic thing. Maybe it's more...well...magical. ^_^;;

Or maybe JKR has decided to not work it out exactly positively to the letter.

Or maybe I should just stop rambling about it. ^_^;;

----------
Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]