It's "blood" that counts (Was: wizard geneology - Genius or Baloney?)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 148174

"richter_kuymal" (PAR) wrote:
<big snip>
> I think genetics probably is in the same league as math with JKR.

Carol responds:
I agree. JKR was certainly not thinking about genetics when she first
created the WW, which operates along the old-fashioned idea of
bloodlines. (Note the importance of "blood" to people as diverse as
Dumbledore, Draco, Mrs. Black, and Hagrid.) In simplest terms, it's
possible, and not all that uncommon, for two Muggles to have a magical
child. It's possible, but very uncommon, for two magical people to
have a nonmagical child (a Squib). Generally, if either parent is
magical, and especially if both are magical, the child is magical.
that, I think, is what JKR meant when she made her wholly unscientific
statement about the gene for magic being "dominant and resilient." It
doesn't matter if the genetics don't work according to known
scientific principles, Mendelian or otherwise. That's how it works in
the WW.

This idea of bloodlines (rather than genetics) has important
implications in the books, especially for certain purebloods. For
example, the "blood" of a Muggleborn, inherited from two Muggle
parents, in nonmagical despite the Muggleborn's ability to perform
magic, which is why Harry is a "half blood" despite having two magical
parents. A half blood, however, has magical blood from one parent and
is therefore almost as good as a pureblood in the Slytherin
view--"good" enough to become a Slytherin or even a DE, and possibly
even good enough to marry if no pureblood partner can be found.
Marrying a Muggleborn, however, makes you a blood traitor and you get
burned off the family tree (if the Blacks' reaction is typical).
Muggle blood, even in a Muggleborn, is "dirty" even though the
Muggleborn is magical because, in the WW view, there's no magic in it.
It's "common," to use Voldemort's word. He, however, is *uncommon*
(enough to glorify himself with an invented lordship). His blood is
magical and his father's common blood drops out of the equation. (Note
that LV used the bone, not the blood, of his father, and the blood of
another half-blood wizard, which was, like his own, unquestionably
magical.) I am pretty sure, too, that the Slytherin revulsion toward
marriages to "Mudbloods" stems at least in part from the fear of
producing a Squib child by marrying a husband or wife with no magical
blood.

There's a lot more to say about "blood" than I have room for here, but
I just want to point out the rather surprising views on blood of two
characters, Hagrid and Phineas Black. Hagrid abuses Mr. Dursley for
being a Muggle and Filch for being a Squib yet is himself a "half
breed," only half human (but magical). He also refers to the centaurs
as "nags" after an argument with them, surely no more respectful of
them than Umbridge except that he's not insulting them to their faces,
yet he's enraged when Draco calls Hermione a "mudblood" and gushes
over the importance of "blood" and cries in his beer over his lost
parents and the importance of "blood" when he's really thinking of
"Grawpy," his nonmagical, nonhuman half-brother. Apparently nonmagical
blood or nonmagical status is bad as long as it isn't his or his
family's or a friend's. Is he a hypocrite or is there a logic to his
prejudices and namecalling that I'm unable to find? Why is "Squib" or
"nag" an acceptable insult when "Mudblood" isn't? If Draco had called
her a "stupid Muggleborn" instead of a "filthy little Mudblood," would
that have been okay?

And Phineas Nigellus, proud great grandfather of both of Sirius
Black's parents (second cousins, according to the recently published
partial photograph of the Black family tree--which explains Mrs.
Black's "blood of my fathers" rants) abuses Mundungus Fletcher as a
"filthy half blood" yet strenuously objects whenever Harry shows
disrespect for Severus Snape, whom we readers know to be the
Half-Blood Prince. Would Phineas's view of Snape change if he knew
Snape isn't a pureblood? Or is Phineas simply throwing out a term of
abuse at an absent thief and pilferer which he wouldn't use toward a
Slytherin HOH regardless of his bloodlines?

Carol, who thinks that Muggle/Wizard genetics may be an interesting
mental exercise but throws no light on the books