Appropriate terminology

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 89203

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "punkieshazam" <punkieshazam at y...> > 
> Sorry if I'm a cranky old woman, but I'm a cranky old woman about 
> epithets.
> 
> Punkie
> 
> Petunia is a squib!

Why apologise for your personal beliefs?  There's no need for that.

This could get into explosive areas and that was never my intention;
nobody comes out satisfied when firmly held personal  beliefs are
transposed into a fictional world with manufactured epithets.
(Witness the thread from the summer when the same subject matter
upset the list Elves).

This post is intended as an exposition of the way I approach this
potentially contentious difference of opinion. I don't expect everyone
to agree, but that's only fair since I'm good at disagreeing myself.
It, and my original post are not intended as a swipe at anyone, apart 
from a small group mentioned below.

The way I see it, JKR needed to highlight tensions and *perceived*
differences between opposing groups -  a valid plot exposition IMO.
In such a situation epithets are inevitable, they become the short-
hand identifier of an individuals stance (real world as well as fantasy).
But to  impose real world ideology onto fictional make-believe
can lead to mis-apprehensions. I would point out (as I have before),
that the people at the bottom of the heap in the Potterverse are not
mudbloods - they are muggles; us in other words. It is muggles that
the purebloods want permission to hunt and kill, to torture and who
Arthur Weasley patronises. A neat  switch from the usual order of
fictional precedence that usually places us on top. We the readers
have become the victims of prejudice - how nice!

So why not complain about the term 'Muggle'? It  would be more
apposite to do so, don't you think?

The series was written about and aimed at a UK centred world. JKR 
had no idea it would be an international sensation;  at best, she 
expected sales of a few thousand, enough to supplement a teachers
salary. In the UK the problems the US suffered with enforcing
equality are seen as events from a different era in a different place.
Sure, we've had our own problems, but on nothing like the same
scale. The vast majority of the members of minority groups here
have arrived or been born in the last 50 years. There is no *history*
in the way that the US has. And  to presume that the tale is
intended as, or can be construed as a metaphor for *your* history
and should conform to your social mores is, IMHO more the result
of your own experiences than in the world reflected in the books.

I too am no spring chicken; there're only a few years between us -
WW II was still going strong when I was born. I too have seen many
changes in the society around me, mostly for the better. I like to
think that my prejudices are based  on the attitudes people take
than on religious or racial differences. But if there is a tribe
that I do view with despair, it is that small, self-selected, invariably
naive, caring and concerned collective who so desperately need to 
show their *right-on* credentials that they invent social solecisms
to rage against. Hence my post on appropriate terminology.

The 'sins' manufactured by such fanatics (you cannot say dog - it's
a companion animal!) are a long, long way from mainstream
liberalism (where I presume you are positioned) and in my opinion
they deserve parody.

For a different reason JKR has also invented a verbal sin, a term to
describe a specific sub-group. In the WW it is meant to be shocking,
but I am not in the WW and never will be; I will never meet a wizard
born of muggles to throw it at. So far as I am concerned it is a word
that is solely and deliberately invented for a specific effect in a 
specific fictional place. I have no qualms in using it, and doing so 
says absolutely nothing about my attitudes or societal stance in real
life. It doesn't insult anyone in the real world, only in the Potterverse.
To  assume otherwise is something I find incomprehensible; it's an
exercise in "let's pretend this means something nasty about real
people so we can stop them using it." As Ron would say, "Barmy."

I'm a libertarian; reasonable freedom of expression is a tenet that
is almost sacred. Unsurprisingly I deny others the right to dictate
or censor my use of a made-up word describing a fictional concept.
Sorry to get so emphatic, but it does make my blood boil. Others
may read into the word what they may, but include me out. 
And honestly, do you really think that anything said on this site will
affect or hurt Harry or Hermione in the slightest?

Kneasy
A muggle at the bottom of the pile