Bloodlines and talent (Was: To the Extreme)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 165151

Carol earlier:
>
> Neville was using his father's wand for the first five years and was
suffering from lack of confidence. He's at least good in Herbology and
not bad in Charms and DADA. I don't think we can fairly judge him from
what we've seen so far. Ron is exactly on a par with Harry in every
class except DADA, and he made a E in that. Draco made an O in Potions
(no help from Snape on the OWL) and is also evidently gifted at Charms
considering the flashing badges that he made in GOF ("Support Cedric
Diggory, the real Hogwarts champion" changing to "Potter Stinks."
<snip> Draco may not get quite the marks that Hermione does, but she
seems to be the only one who does better, at least the only one that
Draco or his father mentions.)

> Snow:
>
> I can always depend on you, Carol, to point out discrepancies in my
posts, and I quite appreciate it! This is exactly where and why
unlikely theories can play their significant roles; persons like
yourself, point out any holes in your theory. This is where I have to
produce some type of canon to either refute your statements or form
some further questionable evidence.
>
> You are very good Carol, which is why I appreciate your response,
(you make me think, and to a theorist there is no better place to be).

Carol:
Thanks!
>
Attributed to Carol:
>
> And, Hermione (a muggleborn) does outdo Draco in grades to the point
that Lucius scolds Draco for his lack of performance.

Carol:
Oops. I didn't say this. It might be your response to me.(?) Yes,
Lucius scolds Draco, but only in relation to being outperformed by a
Muggleborn, not in relation to anyone else (Harry, for example). And
see my examples above of the marks he apparently earns. (BTW, I forgot
to mention that he's in McGonagall's NEWT Transfiguration class, which
means he earned at least an E in that OWL. Unfortunately, he's lost
interest in mundane things like homework and Quidditch in HBP!)

Snow:
On to the subject matter, Neville has a background where he was
suspected, very early, of being a muggleborn. Not a squib, since at
least one of his parents was magical, but "all-muggle" (is written in
my book), which would mean that...?

Carol responds:
But he wasn't suspected of being a Muggleborn. Gran and Uncle Algie
know perfectly well who his parents are, and he looks so much like his
mother that Harry recognizes Alice Longbottom in a photo before
Mad-Eye identifies her. There's no question that Neville is the child
of two pureblood wizards, both Aurors (at least according to OoP, if
not GoF).

It's odd that Neville, a pureblood (identified as such by DD himself),
would refer to himself in SS/PS as being possibly "All-Muggle" when he
clearly means Squib. Either he doesn't know the term (unlikely) or JKR
hadn't invented it yet when she wrote the first book or she thought it
was too early to introduce the term in a book where it didn't really
play a role. (The concept of "blood" becomes important in CoS, when
the Basilisk is petrifying Muggleborns.) But the point of Uncle
Algie's dropping Neville out the window, etc., was to determine
whether Neville was magical and, luckily for Neville, considering the
danger involved in the tests, he was a wizard, not a Squib.
>
Snow:
> Ron being exactly on par with Harry seems to be a bit over the edge
to me...just look at the first flying lesson.

Carol:
I was talking about classes and OWLs, not Quidditch, at which Ron is
quite good, or would be if the Twins hadn't damaged his
self-confidence, and Harry is a natural, even better than Ron's
brother, "the legendary Charlie Weasley." Ron's performance in the
first flying lesson is not mentioned; it's Hermione and Neville who
have trouble. Just because Harry takes off after Draco, who steals
Neville's Remembrall, doesn't mean that Ron can't fly. IIRC, he's
already been doing it at home, as has Draco, who is quite good despite
holding his broom wrong.
>
Snow:
> Draco got an O in potions and I really don't recall where Snape
didn't help him in that. Where is it implied that Snape didn't help
Draco and he received this grade on his own?

Carol:
Magpie already answered this one. Students have no help on their OWLs.
Snape was nowhere in sight when Draco earned his O. Besides, it's
clear from the first Potions class that Draco is good in the subject;
Snape is pointing out how perfectly he's stewed his slugs when Neville
melts Seamus's cauldron.
>
Snow:
> When the Felix Felicis was the award, as far as I recall, Hermione
would have been the next in line to achieve the award and not
Draco...muggleborn wins again.

Carol:
Do we know that? I'm not sure that we know what Draco was doing--and,
as we know, his mind is not on his classes in HBP. But Hermione is not
a typical Muggleborn any more than she's a typical student. She values
learning, spends more hours studying (and takes more classes) than
anyone else. Just because Draco is not quite as good as Hermione
doesn't mean that he's not very good. As I said, he must have earned
an O on his Potions OWL (like Ernie Macmillan, three other Slytherins,
and three Ravenclaws) even to be in that class. Harry and Ron are the
only two E students there. I'm not denying that Hermione is a very
good student, even without Snape's improved Potions directions, but
it's not because she's a Muggleborn. The four Slytherins are either
purebloods or Half-Bloods (there are no Muggleborns in Slytherin),
Ernie Macmillan is a pureblood who can trace his ancestors back nine
generations (yes, of course, there's probably a Muggleborn or Squib
before that). We don't know about the Ravenclaws' ancestry, but it
really doesn't matter. Hermione's Potions performance is being
compared with Harry's when he's using the HBP's Potions book, not with
anyone else's. All that's really being proven is that she's not as
brilliant at Potions as the Half-Blood Prince, who turns out to be the
teenage Snape.

Carol earlier:
<snip>
> As for Perkins, I always thought, given the smell and decor of the
tent, that he bought it secondhand from Mrs. Figg. He's not a Squib,
however, or he wouldn't be working for the MoM, even in a department
that's not highly regarded. He's "an old warlock named Perkins,"
according to OoP IIRC). And a warlock, as far as I can determine, is a
male wizard.
>
> Snow:
>
> Why can't a squib work in Arthur's area of expertise even if he is a
> non-magical product of a wizard? Arthur has never veered from the
> truth a bit on occasion.... ;) ...especially for a fellow employee.
>
Carol again:
Considering that the MoM doesn't even know of Mrs. Figg'w existence, I
seriously doubt that they'd hire a Squib for any position (except
perhaps janitor). Filch is lucky that Dumbledore is headmaster at
Hogwarts (until the end of HBP) or he most likely wouldn't have a job.
(Both he and Mrs. Figg are under DD's protection, IMO.) If Perkins
were a Squib, he wouldn't have a Hogwarts education, and he certainly
wouldn't be a "fully qualified wizard" like Mr. Weasley (surely a
prequisite for the job). He wouldn't be a wizard at all. In any case,
it's canon that he's a warlock (CoS, chapter 4). And a warlock has to
mean male wizard (we never see women referred to as warlocks, only as
witches, but "wizards" can be used for a mixed group of magical
people, as when DD in PoA refers to Harry and Hermione (getting
Hermione's age wrong) as "two thirteen-year-old wizards." That
warlocks are wizards is indicated by the International Confederation
of Warlocks, Dumbledore as Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, and
"Madcap Magic for Wacky Warlocks." IOW, a warlock is magical. Perkins
is a warlock. Therefore, Perkins is magical and can't be a Squib,
regardless of the smell of his tent. (Maybe he bought the tent from
Mrs. Figg or they were once married and she changed her name?) I did
see a Mrs. Figg/Perkins connection, as did the not-very-observant
Harry, but the connection can't be that a warlock is a Squib. It's a
contradiction in terms.

Snow:
>
> The only thing I haven't already responded to would be the twins and
I remain bound to my theory that not all Weasley's are Weasley's.
Dumbledore's parentage is up for grabs but I would lay odds that he
is muggleborn.

Carol:
Erm, uh, I don't know what to say. Not all Wesleys are Weasleys
despite the red hair and the physical resemblance between the Twins
and Charlie? (In terms of personality, they resemble Ginny.) Despite
Mrs. Weasley's Boggart, which includes Harry only because he's an
unloved orphan? Where's the canon to support this bit of speculation?
(It's not a *theory* unless it can be supported by evidence.) To
suggest that they're not purebloods despite canon to the contrary is
to weasel out of the argument. (Sorry. I couldn't resist the pun, and
I really do think that you're using speculation to support speculation
rather than going by the available evidence.)

As for Dumbledore, I think he might have been a Half-Blood given his
interest in Muggles, but the odds of two Muggleborn brothers, both
wizards, are small. The only example in canon is the Creevey brothers.
But I'd lay odds that he's a descendant of Godric Gryffindor, given
his ownership of the Sword of Gryffindor and a Phoenix whose colors
are those of Gryffindor. There's a Godric's Hollow connection as well,
probably.

BTW, Salazar Slytherin, a pureblood who wanted only purebloods like
himself in his House, was quite powerful considering that he built the
Chamber of Secrets and placed a Basilisk in it. And saying that Sirius
Black and James Potter aren't really purebloods because there aren't
any real purebloods is to make the whole discussion pointless. True,
the Squibs get burned off the tapestry, but none of them is a direct
ancestor of Sirius Black.

It's also important, it seems to me, that JKR has her Trio consist of
a Pureblood, a Half-Blood, and a Muggleborn. (She also gives them each
a different wand core, Harry's being canonically a Phoenix feather and
Ron's canonically a unicorn hair, with Hermione's revealed to be
dragon heartstring on her website, so that all three of Ollivander's
"powerful magical substances" are represented.)

I think that JKR's presenting some Muggleborns as talented or powerful
serves only to show that the pureblood superiority ethic is false, not
to show that Muggleborns are *better* than purebloods. Lily isn't
better at magic than James. They're both powerful and talented in
their different ways. And Harry, the product of the two, is not weaker
than Lily but more powerful than James. His Quidditch talent seems to
be inherited directly from his pureblood father. His more unusual
gifts, e.g. Parseltongue, are the result of that unfortunate encounter
with Lord Voldemort. That he's alive at all is the result of his
Muggleborn mother's sacrifice. But he hasn't inherited her talent for
Charms or Potions (Slughorn to the contrary regarding Potions) any
more than he's an Animagus like his father.

Yes, Voldemort chose the Half-Blood like himself over the Pureblood.
But that doesn't mean that Voldemort's reasoning is correct or that
Half-Bloods are more powerful than Purebloods, with Muggleborns the
most powerful of all. It doesn't work that way. Talent and power vary,
with Crabbe and Goyle on one end of the Pureblood spectrum and the
Crouches, father and son, on the other. (Neville will show that he's
no Squib in Book 7, I have no doubt, and Draco may also have a chance
to show off his powers, which he's already demonstrated to be above
average with his various badges and in the duel with Harry.) It's not
that blood prejudice is backwards, with all purebloods being like the
inbred Gaunts (my apologies to those who are offended by the
stereotype; I didn't put it in the books). It's that the prejudice is
baseless, with Muggleborns and Half-Bloods being just as magical as
Purebloods, some being more talented than others without regard to blood.

Carol, noting that Neville's apparent lack of power and talent stems
from childhood trauma that he will need to deal with in Book 7 and not
from his genetic heritage