Petunia's Eyes/Snape, Snape, Snape

[Ken Hutchinson]

No: HPFGUIDX 169950

> 
> Magpie:
> She's never called anything else but a witch. The fact that she was 
> not able to do any magic due to her depression does not get her 
> called a Muggle by anyone that I remember. I think it would 
> absolutely be cheating for JKR to claim that Petunia was a Muggle, 
> and that she never has and never would do magic, when what she 
> really meant was the she was a witch, frightened by her first 
> accidental emission and blocking herself from then on. She obviously 
> did do magic if that's what scared her. You can't be a witch until 
> you demonstrate doing magic. 
> 

Ken:

Merope is never called anything but a witch, sure. She isn't called
much at all in that period when she lost or gave up her power because
the period is brief and it is seldom mentioned. I don't think it would
be cheating at all for JKR to call Petunia a Muggle if she had in fact
been born with magical power and then blocked it as soon as she became
aware of it. She did not actually have to "perform" magic to become
aware of it. For example if she were in London and realized that only
she and Lily could see the Leaky Cauldron she would know she had
magical power.

> 
> Magpie:
> I believe CoS says a muggle is someone with not a drop of 
> magical blood in their veins, and that this is what the Dursleys 
> (which includes Petunia) are according to the narrator, who in that 
> instance does not seem to be in Harry's pov. It's not even the 
> word "Muggle" that she seems to be dancing around when I read it. It 
> seems more like "Squib" is the thing she thinks reminds her of what 
> Petunia really is. 
> 

Ken:

I take those comments about "a drop of magical blood" to be colorful
language, not technically rigorous statements. Lily and Petunia share
the same blood after all and this is the key to Harry's continued
protection at the Dursleys. If the drop of blood definition is what
determines if you are a muggle then both Lily and Petunia have to be
witches or muggles, since they have the same blood. I think the most
accurate definition of muggle is one who has no magical power. That
fits the end of life Merope as well as a postulated Petunia who
refused to be a witch. Didn't Neville at one point say that his family
thought that he was "all muggle" for a long time? Neville certainly
had much more than a drop of magical blood in him even if he had
turned out to be a squib, which is really just a muggle born to
magical parents.

It would be nearly impossible to take the average muggle off the
street and determine whether or not they had a drop of magical blood
in their ancestry. And having that drop of blood would not then make
them a witch or wizard. The meaningful dividing line between muggle
and witch is magical power. If you don't have it you are a muggle, if
you do you are a witch. Canon gives at least one clear example of
someone who lost their power and mentions that there are others. It
does not give a special name to these people. To me, they have become
muggles. If you want to continue to call them witches or wizards you
are of course free to do so. They are odd sorts of witches that can't
do magic though.

> 
> Ken:
> > The thing is that Rowling seems to be dancing around something in 
> that
> > quote and for now all we can do is guess about what it might be.
> 
> Magpie:
> I agree. But that's why if I'm trying to figure out or guess what 
> she's dancing around it seems logical to start with the facts she's 
> giving me instead of doing my own dancing around exactly those 
> things. If she says Petunia is a Muggle, that she has never done and 
> never will do magic, how would I get anywhere near the answer if I 
> don't start with that premise? Why not start with the idea that she 
> is not someone who can do magic (and so not a Witch) but that 
> perhaps shares other things with Squibs, who have certain 
> sensitivities despite not being able to do so? She is a Muggle, 
> but... doesn't to me imply "She is a Muggle but really she's a 
> witch" or "She's a Muggle but that's only what she calls herself 
> because she didn't want to be a witch" or "She's a Muggle but in her 
> case only through choice..." Why not something that acknowledges the 
> first fact but goes on to explain why she's not like other 
> Muggles: "She's a Muggle but has experienced magic" or "She's a 
> Muggle but has been given certain magical objects to use..." or 
> whatever?
> 


Ken:

Perhaps I am not perfectly clear about what you mean by the above. You
appear to be skating up to the same sort of guess that I made but from
a different direction. Petunia is not a Squib, but .... Petunia is a
Muggle, but .... The author is hiding something here. She long hinted
at the importance of Lily's eyes. Carol is of the opinion that this
was a reference to Harry being able to worm that memory out of
Slughorn, partly because his eyes reminded Slughorn of Lily's. OK, I
agree that could be all there is to it but I was expecting something
more of a bombshell than something so mundane from the buildup the
resemblance got. Maybe it is something similarly mundane that she is
hiding with her Petunia dance. Or maybe there is a bombshell about
both Petunia and about Lily's eyes still to go off in DH.

It would not bother me in the least if she was hiding the fact that
Petunia could have been a witch but refused, or that she is some
hitherto unmentioned class of person that is neither fully witch or
fully muggle. It would bother me a lot if this elaborate dance about
Petunia is merely hiding the fact that she knows something she hasn't
told Harry yet. That isn't something to hide, that is dead obvious
from the text. Petunia knows tons of things about the magical world
and Lily that she has never told Harry. If it isn't something more
interesting than that, I can't see why Rowling was so careful in that
interview. But then I also still hold out hope that there is more to
the Lily's eyes thing than just batting them at Slughorn to get a memory.

Ken