Is Harry Potter an Anti-Royalist Tract?

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 175667

Bruce Alan Wilson wrote:
> > Justin Fitch-Fetchly, who chose between Eaton and Hogwarts 
> > would be at least minor nobility or gentry, wouldn't he?
> 
> Geoff:
> If you mean because Justin could have gone to Eton then, no.
> 
> In times past, public schools such as Eton, Harrow or Rugby - to
name just a handful - would have been the preserve of the nobility or
gentry simply because they had the money. Today, there are enough
people prepared to find the money to send their children to a
fee-paying school who are from otber social backgrounds. 
<snip> 
> Presumably, for a family without Muggle links, this point would not
arise.
>

Carol responds:
Not to mention that we know that Justin Finch-Fletchley (with his
hyphenated name, which *does* sound as if he has aristocratic
connections) is a Muggle-born. He thought that Harry was the Heir of
Slytherin and had set the snake on him for that reason, and he ends of
Petrified by the Basilisk, which only attacks Muggle-borns (presumably
because Ginny knows who's Muggle-born and who isn't). I'm guessing
that even Sir Nicholas, the Petrified ghost, was a Muggle-born. His
backstory, given on JKR's website, sounds that way. As for the Bloody
Baron, he lived at a time when wizards were just starting to separate
themselves from Muggles, so he could have been either one. Offhand,
I'd say that JKR only meant that none of the British royal family have
been wizards, not even the present Prince Harry.

Carol, who thinks that history would have been rather different if
British or other European monarchs were wizards <wink>