Perkins & the meaning of Warlock...

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 89036

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, mmm skyscraper <aorta47 at y...> wrote:
> Remember the Kwikspell letter:
> 
> 'Warlock D.J. Prod of Didsbury' (CoS p.127 American
> pb). This leads me to believe that Warlock is a term
> of respect perhaps like Mister in the RW. 
> 
> Mark  


bboy_mn:

Well, I certainly can't say you are wrong, but at the same time, I'm
not so sure you are right.

Let's look at Harry's two encounters with Warlocks.

- in the Leaky Cauldron, Harry sees "wild-looking warlocks".
- In the Three Broomsticks, Harry sees a "bunch of rowdy warlocks".

'Wild-looking' and 'rowdy', and my sense is that Harry knows a warlock
when he sees one. So, it has to be a little more than a term of respect.

Also, the wizard world has two unique organizations-
- - International Confederation of Wizards (SS4, GF17)
- - International Federation of Warlocks (PA3)

impying that Warlocks are a distinct entity.

I'm not saying my version is right either. However, the best I've been
able to come up with is that it is a regional/cultural thing. For
example, wizards being from Western Europe and Warlocks being from
Eastern Europe. That would mean that while Harry was a wizard, Viktor
Krum would refer to himself as a warlock. Although, in very general
conversation the two terms might be interchangable. In more precise
and formal discussions, they are distinct entities.

I speculate that there could be enough of a difference in physical
appearance, like dark hair, olive skin, accent, certain facial
features, clothing style, etc... that most warlocks could be
distinguished on sight. 

This seems to be the best solution I could come up with unless we take
it to the extreme and say that warlocks are a different species of
beings altogether, and are therefore identifiable by unique physical
characteristics. As an extreme example, maybe warlocks look like
Kingons. I'm not saying they do, I'm just using that to illustrate my
point.

In the end, I don't think we have enough information, to positively
make the distinction. But the evidences seems to indicate that warlock
are identifiable on sight by most reasonably knowledgable people, and
that they are a distinctly identifiable group, although, exactly
'what' identifies them remains a mystery.

Just a few thoughts.

bboy_mn