CHAPDISC: DH13, The Muggle-born Registration Commission

[Zara]

No: HPFGUIDX 181306

Thanks, lizzyben, for a nice summary and some really interesting 
questions!
 
>  lizzyben:
> 1. What do you think of the Trio's plan to infiltrate the Ministry?
> Was it well-planned, or could they have approached things a 
different
> way?

zgirnius:
I would say, overall, not that well planned. I felt the plan for 
getting in was quite good, but (as Harry himself admits) the plan for 
what to do once in was lacking. They did not consider how to find 
each other if separated, or the possibility Umbridge might have the 
locket on her person.

> 2. Numerous characters mention that Yaxley's office has been jinxed
> to create a downpour. Could this be a sign of low-level sabotage
> against Death Eaters within the Ministry?

zgirnius:
That seems likely. We were at the Ministry once before, when Arthur 
took Harry for his hearing, and there did not seem to be such little 
problems at that time.

> 3. Harry impersonates Albert Runcorn, a character whom we never
> actually meet. Based on other character's reactions to him, what 
kind
> of person do you believe Runcorn is? Do you believe he is a Death
> Eater?

zgirnius:
We're told Runcorn is a big, strong man, and from people's reactions 
I got he impression he uses this to intimidate. He also seems to use 
threats against people or their families. (Arhtur Weasley's reaction 
to Harry's warning in particular suggested this). I did not think he 
was a Death Eater, but definitely someone who has taken advantage of 
the new regime to indulge his worse nature.

> 4. Ron impersonates a Ministry official with a Muggle-born wife,
> Hermione a woman who assists Umbridge in the interrogation of 
Muggle-
> borns, and Harry a high-ranking Ministry official. Is there any
> thematic or character significance to the identities that they take
> on?

zgirnius:
I'm hoping to read what others come up with on this one. The only 
significance I could come up with was foreshadowing Rowling's own 
imagined futures for the Trio, as shown in the books or claimed by 
her in interviews. Ron marries Hermione, a Muggleborn, as we see in 
the Epilogue. Hermione, according to interviews, is imagined by 
Rowling as a Ministry employee. I thought this myself, and took her 
DH retort to Scrimgeour about wanting to do some good in the world to 
indicate it was, despite her denial, going to be a Magical Law 
department she would end up in. And Harry as head of the Auror Office 
(what Rowling imagines him as) would be a high ranking Ministry 
official. 

> 5. How in the world did Dolores Umbridge get Moody's eye?

zgirnius:
My guess was through her connection to Selwyn, a Death Eater I 
presumed was in the Seven Potters raid.

> 6. Harry takes a number of impulsive actions in this chapter: taking
> Moody's eye, stupefying Umbridge, and helping the group of Muggle-
> borns to escape. These actions create both negative consequences
> (tipping off the Ministry), and also positive consequences (freeing
> the Muggle-born wizards). Do you believe that Harry's actions were
> rash, or were his actions justified?

zgirnius:
Stealing Moody's eye was rash, but emotionally satisfying. I'd 
definitely call that a bad idea. The later actions were not thought 
out, but I'm less sure I would criticize them, because Harry is not 
naturally a planner, but his instincts tend to be good. This is not 
why he acted
but their impersonation of Ministry employees was bound 
to be discovered, which means they would not be able to come back 
another day. So in a sense, he did need to do something. And helping 
the Muggleborns to escape worked well to cover their escape, and also 
provide an explanation of sorts for what they were doing there.

> 7. The Ministry is producing propaganda pamphlets against Muggle-
> borns, registering all wizards with Muggle-born blood, interrogating
> Muggle-born wizards, and imprisoning Muggle-borns in Azkaban. Do you
> believe that this is meant to be an analogy to the treatment of Jews
> in Nazi Germany? Or is it a general analogy to bigotry and prejudice
> against minority groups?

zgirnius:
I believe it was meant to be a more general analogy. There are 
fundamental differences between Jews and Muggleborns that would 
prevent a perfect analogy-if Rowling were after one, she would have 
created a different minority. There are of course similarities, 
because Nazi Germany was an instance of a regime which instituted 
these types of actions against a minority.

> 8. Umbridge accuses Mrs. Cattermole of taking another wizard's wand,
> and the Ministry propaganda accuses Muggle-borns of "stealing" magic
> from pure-blood wizards. What does this mean? Does the Ministry
> believe that Muggle-borns are literally stealing wands; or that
> Muggle-borns steal magic by their very existence in the wizarding
> world? How could this propaganda succeed when all wizards had seen
> Muggle-born wizards perform magic on their own at Hogwarts? Do you
> believe that the Ministry propaganda has convinced the wizards, or
> are they simply too intimidated to contradict the Ministry?

zgirnius:
I am not inclined to believe that the Ministry believed wholesale 
that Muggleborns all stole their wands, because it seems likely some 
of them knew of instances of Muggleborn classmates getting theirs at 
Ollivander's in the usual way. But I think the explanation of 
stealing magic was one that could appeal to many wizards. I am 
reminded of what pre-Hogwarts Severus says to Lily in "The Prince's 
Tale", about how it does not matter that she is Muggleborn, and how 
*she* is so magical. This might echo a `folk' sort of belief about 
why Muggleborns are inferior that he heard somewhere, which the 
Ministry propaganda affirms.

The thing is, all wizards eventually meet Muggleborns, but the later 
in life they meet them, the less ridiculous it is to suppose their 
magic is `stolen'.