Dating Muggleborns(was: Where does it say that Molly is a pureblood fanatic

[naamagatus]

No: HPFGUIDX 125444


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" 
<horridporrid03 at y...> wrote:
> 
> >>Naama: 
> >From what we've seen, Molly's attitude towards Muggles is the 
> prevalent, normal one in the WW (which we see in McGonagall's 
> description of the Dursleys in the beginning of PS, for instance). 
> It's kind of the premise of the books and the way *JKR* uses the 
> term. Muggles are clueless, magic-less, afraid of the different. 
The 
> divide between Muggles and wizards is unambigous and unproblematic.<
> 
> Betsy:
> But that's exactly the problem.  If you think an entire race of 
> people are "other" how would you look at their children?  Yes, 
> Hermione is a witch, yes, she's a good little assimilator, barely 
> visiting her parents over school breaks.  But she's been raised by 
> Muggles.  Who knows what wierd and immoral things Muggles may teach 
> their children?

But that's precisely the argument I made - that while it makes sense 
psychologically, it's not the way JKR has it in her Potterverse. You 
are continuing to apply RL common sense to a fictional world, that is 
specifically different in this regard.

>  
> >>Naama:
> >The thing that JKR portrays as problematic is the attitude to 
> Muggleborns. It may seem psychologically sound that if you look 
down 
> on Muggles (as the entire WW does), you would look down on 
> Muggleborns too. However, that is not the case in the Potterverse. 
> Some do that and some don't. Those who do are both wrong and evil.<
> 
> Betsy:
> I think you're reading the books in a much more black and white 
> fashion then I am.  Because I would say that the overall attitude 
> amongst the WW is that Muggleborns are not to be completely 
> trusted.  Fudge is a good barometer for prevailing Wizarding views, 
> and he distrusts Muggleborns.  He doesn't hate them, he doesn't 
> think they should be destroyed (I don't think he's been portrayed 
>as out and out evil, either) but he doesn't trust them.

Evidence? He is a snob in his regard for pure bloods, but I can't 
remember him expressing distrust of Muggleborns.

> 
> >>Naama: 
> >Basically what I've tried to say is that, yes, Molly shows the 
> normal condescending attitude to Muggles, but that doesn't 
> necessarily imply (in the Potterverse) that this "taints" her view 
> of Muggleborns.<
> 
> Betsy:
> But of course is does, and within the Potterverse.  Again, look at 
> Fudge.  He condescendes to Muggles, and his view of Muggleborns are 
> therefore tainted.  Rita Skeeter had already published lies about 
> the Weasley family.  Why did Molly so quickly and easily believe 
>her this time?  The only logical explination is that Hermione was 
>raised by Muggles, and Molly *knows* that Muggles (and therefore 
>their offspring) are somehow... different.

No, it's not the only logical explanation - but I've already made 
what I think is a convincing case, so I won't repeat it here. And if 
you want to make counter arguments, could you please base them on 
textual evidence? I am getting tired of reiterated opinions that are 
unsupported by cannon.



Naama