Beedle the Bard SPOILERS Babbity rabbity

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 185184

> Alla:
> 
> I agree with your description of Anderson's story of course, 
however 
> I am not sure I can agree with the description of Babbity where you 
> say that there is nothing metaphorical about it.
> 
> I mean, there are no wizards, right? And Babbity and Muggle king do 
> not actually exist. And JKR said that she of course does not 
believe 
> in magic. I mean, I am stating this, no matter how obvious it is 
for 
> you and me just to say that to me Wizards are metaphor for the 
folks 
> who can do amazing things, so to me Babbity is about well, people 
who 
> are fighting against stupidity and oppression and who are winning 
it.
> 

a_svirn:
Ah, but there are wizards in the Potterverse, and this book is 
supposed to exist in the wizarding world. And even if you want to 
take it separately, "Babbity" would still be the least "metaphorical" 
story of the lot. I can easily imagine "Fountain of Fair Fortune" – 
the all times favourite, according to Dumbledore – outside the HP 
Universe not only because wizards (or, rather, witches) and muggles 
triumph together in the end, but also because they triumph thanks to 
their human qualities – loyalty, courage, determination and love, 
rather than magic itself. "Three Brothers" is also heavily laden with 
symbolism while the "Hairy Heart" is one elaborate, if gruesome 
metaphor. It is not surprising to learn that it has become a code-
phrase for "wizards who wouldn't commit". But I have trouble reading 
the "Hopping Pot" or "Babbity" outside the context of the muggle-
wizard relationship. Yes, it is all about stupidity and oppression, 
but, also, about a very specific kind of oppression. This is not one 
of those cunning pauper vs. cruel King sort of stories, since Babbity 
got the better of the King through her magic rather than wits. 
Moreover, if we factor her cunning into the equation the whole thing 
would look like an elaborate piece of muggle-baiting. And after 
reading Dumbledore's notes one could even be pardoned for wondering 
whether she, perhaps, was a secret French agent who helped to reverse 
the fortunes of the English in the Hundred Years' War (wouldn't be 
the only witch to work for Charles V, come to think of it).  

> Catlady:
> It is not clear to me that the reputation that this wand can never 
be
> defeated in combat is false.

a_svirn:
That was Dumbledore's own conclusion and I for once in the agreement 
with him. 

> Catlady:
> Its latest
> transfer came from Draco casting Expelliarmus on DD while DD was
> making no attempt at wandwork

a_svirn:
Neither was Harry during his flight from the Dursley's, yet *his* 
wand felt like helping him at the time.

> a_svirn wrote in
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/185178>:
> 
> << Snape neither had the ring (Harry did), nor was tempted by it. >>

> Catlady:
> But if Snape had had the ring, he might have been tempted by it. His
> grief that Lily is dead is certainly move *obvious* than DD's grief
> that Ariana is dead, and if she came back to life, perhaps she would
> thank Snape for having protected Harry all these years.

a_svirn:
As I said, it is a moot point, since Snape could not have had the 
ring, even if he had tried to steal the snitch. 
a_svirn.