BADD ANGST TBAY, Part II

[bluesqueak]

No: HPFGUIDX 81659

Remnant:
> Now let me get this straight. JKR's been building us up for 5 
> books now to the *great* revelation that Dumbledore's *great*  
> goal, and Harry's super-terrific *singular* power, is to stop the 
> parade of evil, dictatorial wizards. And how has she done this?
> 
> By mentioning LV about a thousand times. By mentioning other evil 
> wizards at best 3 times??? Huh? 

Pip!Squeak:
I take it you don't read Agatha Christie [grin]. JKR does, 
incidentally. Interestingly, the UK adult cover of OOP has a photo 
of JKR in front of a bookcase containing several Christie mysteries.

She does a pretty Christie-ish trick in PS/SS, where the villain, 
Quirrel, is mentioned on a total of 18 pages before he is revealed 
as the villain. That's 18 pages out of 153 (his first appearance is 
on page 55 UK paperback). And in over half of those 18 pages, 
Quirrel only gets a one-line mention. 

Snape, who is the misdirection in PS/SS, appears 39 pages later than 
Quirrel but still manages to clock up mentions on 38 pages, with at 
least 5 scenes longer than one page (including the first potions 
lesson, which is four pages long).

So it's not wise to go by 'screen time'. Quirrel gets about one-
third the attention Snape gets. Nonetheless, Snape in PS/SS is the 
distraction, Quirrel the real villain. If LV is mentioned about 1000 
times, then it is in fact a reasonable supposition that he may not 
be the real problem.

Because JKR has shown she *uses* that trick. She puts the 
distraction in plain sight, and mentions him a lot. [Sirius and 
Peter Pettigrew, anyone?]

Remnant:
> Let's list your baddies again.
> 
> 1. Grindelwald, check.
> 2. Emeric the evil, maybe (one passing reference and we have no 
idea whether he was human or in what way he was evil).

Pip!Squeak:
Uh, well, he has a human name. Harry remembers Goblin wars and Giant 
wars as just that - Goblin and Giant wars. 

As for one passing reference - do you have any idea how important 
you have to be to get mentioned in a European school history lesson? 
[grin]

English history in English schools is a gallop through about 1000 
years, using a maximum of 3 hours a week, over 5 years. Wizarding 
history also seems to cover around a thousand years (judging by the 
founding of Hogwarts). Generally, in order to get a mention, you 
have to have either been a monarch, won or lost major wars, led 
major rebellions, written major literary works, or imported strange 
overseas vegetables that completely changed the UK diet. 

[There's a well known English book called '1066 And All That: A 
Memorable History of England, comprising all the parts you can 
remember' by W.C. Sellar and R.J. Yeatman. It satirises school 
history, and the little of it most people can remember.  ]

So Emeric the Evil was almost certainly a major historical 
character. To get a mention in a school history lesson, he *has* to 
be a major historical character.

Remnant:
> 3. Rackharrow, maybe (a reference to his portrait and that he 
> created an evil curse).
> And we don't know whether any of these were racist. Or pure-blood 
> prejudiced. Or tried to take over the WW. Or anything.

Pip!Squeak:
Salazar Slytherin only wanted students brought up by 
wizards/witches, preferably pure blood (CoS and OOP)If you read the 
few references to history, you will find Harry skipping the 
question 'did wand legislation contribute to, or lead to better 
control of, goblin riots of the 18th Century?' In the formation of 
the International Confederation of Wizards (Question 10) we find 
that the Goblins tried to attend and were chucked out. The wizards 
of Liechtenstein didn't want to stop troll-hunting and were opposed 
to giving trolls rights. [OOP Ch. 31, pp639 -640).

Earlier in OOP Professor Binns lectures on Giant Wars. In PoA 
Hermione excitedly remarks that Hogsmeade was the headquarters of 
the Goblin rebellion - in the 17th Century. (1612, to be exact. PoA 
Ch. 5,p. 61). In GoF Ron remarks that his exam mentioned Goblin 
rebellions (he couldn't remember all the names and had to make up a 
few) [Ch. 31, p. 537]

So we do know that Goblins felt oppressed in both the 17th and 18th 
Century. We do know that Liechtenstein wizards didn't want to give 
trolls any rights, but thought they should be allowed to hunt them.

So, no, I suppose our evil wizards might not have been racist, or 
pure bloodist, but it seems that they would have stood out a bit if 
they weren't. Because from the history we are given, the WW itself 
is largely racist. Other races feel extremely oppressed - so much so 
that they revolt more than once over a period of centuries. And note 
that when Binns explains about Salazar Slytherin's pure-bloodist 
views, he does not condemn them [CoS Ch. 9 p.114 ]. 

Besides, if our evil wizards are *not* racist, and *not* pure-
bloodist, and *don't* seek power - well, what sort of WW is it that 
calls them evil ? [grin] 

> Remnant:
> And as for the references to LV being the strongest in a century, 
> isn't it more likely that there's just no one around who could 
> tell whether he was the strongest *ever*? Almost no one has lived 
> long enough to say more than that he is the strongest in their 
> lifetime of about a century.

Pip!Squeak:
Dumbledore is 150. [Interview with JKR for Comic Relief 
http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2001/0301-
comicrelief-staff.htm]. Professor Marchbanks in OOP is old enough to 
have examined Dumbledore for his OWLs.  Wizards live longer than a 
century.

And no, it's not likely that there's no way of telling that 
Voldemort is the strongest in a century. Cricketing batsmen are 
regularly judged against the great W.G. Grace - even though there is 
probably no one alive today who saw Grace in his heyday (he died in 
1915). Historical records. 

> Remnant:
> And yes, there have been other evil wizards. Just as there are 
> evil people in the real world. So the fact that there were others 
> is just a reflection of the real world. But did they do what LV 
> is  trying to do? Never mentioned. IMO, he is unique, the perfect 
> storm of unparallelled evil, power, and intelligence. 

Pip!Squeak:
There is no canon (as far as I recall - I could be wrong) that says 
Voldemort is 'unique'. Far from it. 'Greatest', most powerful, 
strongest - all the terms applied to Voldemort suggest that he is 
far from unique. The terms used suggest that he is the worst of a 
bad lot. No one ever says 'it had never happened before'. Instead 
they talk about 'times like that' [Sirius in GoF Ch. 27]. In 
Hagrid's explanation to Harry in Chapter 4 of PS/SS, in Mr Weasley's 
explanation of the Dark Mark in GoF Ch. 9, neither of them sound 
*surprised* about this history. 

<Snip>

Remnant:
> And if the whole point of the books is to get Harry to break the 
> cycle, then would JKR really have left us so in the dark about 
> this cycle for so long? Doubtful. She could have had Binns mention 
> it. She could have had Hermione mention it (from all her reading). 
> She could have had Dumbledore or another teacher mention it. Or 
> perhaps there would have been some discussion via Arthur or Percy 
> of a time when the MoM was destroyed in the dark ages by the evil 
> wizard Bandicoot or something. Or that attack in 1573 on 
> Hogwarts.  But nothing like that has happened in canon. So it     
> seems unlikely.

Pip!Squeak:
Except that JKR has already left important facts to later books. We 
first find out about the Death Eaters (which are slightly important 
to the plot of the series, wouldn't you say?) in GoF. Snape as a 
former DE is also revealed in that book. The fact that there are 
genuine prophecies is left until PoA. The fact that Trelawney's 
first prophecy *was* about Harry was only revealed in OOP. Harry 
doesn't discover that his parents were betrayed to their deaths 
until PoA. Hagrid's half-giant background is kept secret to GoF. 
That Sirius Black was from a family of Black magicians is not 
mentioned throughout PoA, despite the fact that it would have added 
immensely to his character status as 'official misdirection'. JKR 
wanted to save that one until OOP :-) 

I will pass over Scabbers the perfectly innocent rat, and James the 
bully - except to mention that the clues *were* there. They were 
just very few and far between.

Further, Harry's awareness of prejudice and racism is increasing. In 
PS/SS he's hardly aware of it. In CoS he doesn't understand why 
Hagrid is the perfect scapegoat for Tom Riddle, or why Fudge is so 
quick to imprison Hagrid in Azkaban. He thinks that Dobby is badly 
treated because he is owned by the Malfoys. By PoA we are introduced 
to the idea that a werewolf finds it hard to get a job, and that 
there was a very real doubt that he would be able to attend school. 
By GoF we see that Rita Skeeter is delighted to 'out' Hagrid the 
half-giant, and that Madame Maxine is scared to even admit her 
parentage to another half-giant. We also see that another House elf 
is badly treated by more than one wizard.

In OOP the theme is becoming full blown. There is another badly 
treated House-elf, the Goblin riots of history are becoming present-
day goblins who feel 'pretty anti-wizard'. The centaurs are so 
annoyed at humans they consider killing two children who they think 
are 'using' them. The giants are having genocide practiced on them.


> Remnant:
> Instead, we have been led to believe that the WW is an imperfect 
> society with an imperfect government in much the same way that 
> modern society and government are imperfect. 

Imperfect? 'muggles' have their memories altered routinely? [GoF]. 
Giants are driven into mountain areas when 'they're not made ter 
live bunched up together like that'. [OOP ch.20 p.378]. House elves 
are shouted at, beaten, told to acquiesce in illegal activities? 
[CoS and GoF - as well as OOP]. Hagrid is taken to prison without 
even appearing in front of the WW's equivalent of a magistrate, and 
with no chance to apply for bail? Sirius spends twelve years in 
Azkaban without a trial? Harry is reprimanded for illegal magic in 
CoS without anyone bothering to hear his side of the story ?[the 
floating cake]. Then in OOP he is nearly expelled without a hearing? 
When he does get a hearing, the time is changed so he almost doesn't 
attend.

This is *not* imperfect. Societies which brainwash, enslave, 
discriminate against, and commit genocide against 'lesser' races are 
not *imperfect*. Societies who think that prison guards who *enjoy* 
sending inmates into a suicidal depression help them sleep 'safe in 
our beds at night' are not *imperfect*. [Fudge's words in GoF]

Yes, the WW has many problems which could be defined as *imperfect* -
 but no. You are deceived, as Harry is, by the undeniable fact that 
the WW is 'cute'. It's funny. It's full of eccentric wizards, in odd 
costumes. It looks harmless. It's comic-opera.

And Harry has found that it is a dangerous place, full of dangerous 
people, some of whom are trying to kill him, and others, 
theoretically on the good side, who are prepared to discredit him, 
expel him, torture him and abuse him.

Remnant:

> Some wizards are bad just as some people are bad. Sometimes unfair 
> things happen in the WW as in our world. And how we handle these  
> real-world failings is our choice, just as they are Harry's choice 
> in the WW. JKR is just teaching life lessons drawn from the real 
> world, IMHO. 

Because sometimes it is the society that is evil, not just the 
people. In fact,in a bad society, you will find that many, many of 
the people are perfectly nice, kind people. If JKR is teaching life 
lessons drawn from the real world, why do you think her lessons have 
to be about the difference between good and evil people? Why not 
have a lesson about the difference between the sort of world you 
want, and the world you've currently got? A lesson about what you 
should do when you find the society you love has turned to evil?

Remnant:
> Since the real world will likely always have  
> prejudice and evil, why suddenly in two books tell the reader that 
> it's possible for Harry to set everything right in the WW?

Pip!Squeak [on her soapbox]:

Why must the real world always have prejudice and evil?

Who told you that?

What are you supporting when you say that?

What 'side' do you help when you say 'it's never possible to set 
everything right'.

Why must JKR accept that view in her books? 

> -Remnant
> Nope, there will always be bad guys (this one is Voldemort), and 
> sometimes it's up to you to stop them.
> 

It's up to you to stop evil. Full stop. Whether it's a bad guy, 
singular, bad guys, plural, or bad guys as in an entire society. And 
in fact, in history, you will find examples of people trying to stop 
all three.

Real life. Real worlds. Real societies. 

Pip!Squeak