Question about Harry Potter.

[conuly]

What are the wizards so afraid of?

They've got law after law to keep them from being discovered, but why? What are they scared will happen? They make a point of teaching that muggle attempts to kill witches fail because muggles can't recognize witches (and anyway, witches and wizards can't be killed by muggles), so they're in no danger. Hagrid's idea that "well, then everybody would want magical solutions to their problems" doesn't ring quite true. So what if everybody wants a magical solution to their problems? Shouldn't it be up to the individual witch or wizard to decide if they're going to sell it? And if you don't want to give magical solutions to your problems, okay. Don't. End of problem. In fact, a substantial number of muggles already know about the wizarding world, it doesn't seem to have caused any real problems.

I don't see how the muggle world is a threat to the wizarding world, but because of this fear we've got: you can be arrested for using magic where a muggle can see, or if you're underage (I think this almost *must* be related, and I have a separate rant about this as well). There's a non-insignificant market of charmed muggle objects, this would probably be smaller if muggles knew enough to be wary. And there's an entire department or two of the government devoted to keeping people hidden.

Remember McGonagall's words in PS/SS? About how "it'd be a fine thing if the muggles found us", something like that? Well, what if they did find out about wizards and witches? What would happen?

The first, most obvious thing is that a lot of people would lose their jobs. Not only had they failed miserably at hiding the wizarding world, but it's all a moot point now anyway.

Secondly, muggle science needs some dramatic rewrites.

Third, society changes drastically.

Okay. I can see how this would be a problem, but where's the inherant harm in any of this? A little upheaval, and then we're all back to normal, business as usual.

Comments

[interactiveleaf.livejournal.com]

'Non-insignificant'?

OK, but to the point, here's a theory for you: The rules aren't there to protect the magic-users, but to protect the muggles. It's a benevolent way to keep an extremely powerful society with some pretty bad elements in check. That's why the special emphasis on controlling children, who often find immature ways to assert power--the adult wizards recognize this, and come down hard on young 'uns who can do real damage if they let loose. The same is true of adult wizards, of course, but the assumption there may be twofold: that they're better at self-control because they're older, and that they're more indoctrinated with their society's laws. Whether or not these assumptions are justified is as questionable in the wizard world as it is in the muggle world.

And let's posit that the rules were *sold* to the wizarding world as protection for them, not protection for muggles, because fear is a great motivator. Also, I suspect that the consequences of the two worlds colliding would be more severe than you've considered. We know that some humans are mad for power. How long would it take before a wizard baby was kidnapped for dissection/indoctrination/brainwashing? How long would it take before people's fear and suspicion of 'others' took over and the lynchings began?

[conuly]

1. Hush you.
2. OK, but to the point, here's a theory for you: The rules aren't there to protect the magic-users, but to protect the muggles.

I've already thought of that. Wow, one post in and already I'm not alone!

3. How long would it take before people's fear and suspicion of 'others' took over and the lynchings began?

Remember Wendelin the Weird? Muggles can't burn witches and wizards. Witches and wizards don't die easily, even with magic problems. How're muggles gonna kill random wizards?

[eclectic-1.livejournal.com]

I bet before the end of the series, this will be brought up and everyone will realize that it's not such a great rule and muggles & wizards will learn to live together in not-quite-harmony.

They may even realize that the wizards will *need* the muggles to defeat Voldemort.

[conuly]

Not likely. The series will end before the present-day. Let's have some realism and not pretend that we've all decided in the real world that there are real wizards and witches.

[adiva_calandia]

I agree. (Actually am working on a fanfic along those lines. . .) Now that it's pointed out, the whole Statute of Secrecy does seem a little illogical -- though protecting Muggles from beasts like dragons (and vice versa) makes sense to me. Maybe Rowling is emphasizing the "MUGGLES WIll KILL US" aspect so that the characters can debunk it.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Well, remembering things likes inquisition, witch-hunts and other friendly historical facts, I find it pretty understandable the wizards don't want to be discovered. There are still more than enough religious fanatics to seriously cause them trouble for several reasons. I doubt Hagrid's "well, then everybody would want magical solutions to their problems" idea has much to do with it.

On a superficial level, the muggle world indeed cannot harm the wizards much. But imagine the muggles becoming aware of the wizards, and
a) considering them a threat
b) deciding to counteract that threat
c) doing their best to eradicate the wizard population, or at least to control them.
Actually, it's a lot like in X-Men.
At that points, the muggles most decidedly might try to harm the wizards (pre-emptively), and by the state of modern technology, they'd probably succeed.
Imagine a George W. Bush, deciding that the wizards are something like potential weapons of mass destruction.
Imagine muggles fearing that the wizards might harm them with their 'supernatural' powers.
Yes, a substantial number of muggles already knows of the wizarding world - but they are still single persons, not a mass of people. Single persons are reasonable, but a mass of people is only as reasonable as the most unreasonable part of this mass.

"A little upheaval, and then we're all back to normal" would be the utopic, ideal solution; but it's just not likely. Witch hystery, bans, some sort of system to register and control witches, camps or whatever sounds, unfortunately, much more realistic...

[conuly]

Well, remembering things likes inquisition, witch-hunts and other friendly historical facts, I find it pretty understandable the wizards don't want to be discovered.

I do. What did Harry's essay say? Oh yeah - muggles were really bad at recognizing witches, and anyway it's incredibly easy to not be killed, even if you are caught. Wendelin the Weird let herself be burned over 20 times, right?

[yuki-onna.livejournal.com]

Well, my little lit crit theory is that in Rowlingland, magic is an inherently chaotic force that MUST be institutionalized in order to keep it controlled and safe in the hands of a few.

This has no political parallels whatsoever.

[conuly]

If it did have political parallels, what would they be?

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

It's not that they're afraid; it's that they know "non-magic folk" would be afraid. It's the X-Men redux.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Witch hunts? Inquisitions?

Wizards in Harry Potter can't stand up against a concentrated force of muggles determined to put an end to their existence.

This has happened historically in the real world (well, modulo the existence of witches), and undoubtedly happened in the backstory of the Potterverse.

Muggles are safer (as noted above) and wizards are safer if the two don't mix together. Or so the theory goes, at least.

--Kynn

PS: Recall that there are millions of people in the world who DO believe in magic and the supernatural. Granted, they label these as "evil and demonic," but there are hundreds of millions of Christians who, unlike you and me, do NOT see wizardry a la Potter as a harmless fantasy, but as a dangerous description of evil forces in our world.

[conuly]

Witch hunts? Inquisitions?

Am I the *only* one who read PoA? Those things didn't work. They learn about it in school, about how muggles were pathetic at catching wizards and witches, and how anyway the witches and wizards they did manage to catch were never harmed.

[cielf.livejournal.com]

Society changes into one where by birth, some have powers and some don't, and there is no hope whatsover, no matter how much you try, of ever bridging that gap.

It is the end of dreams if you were born into what would, effectively, be an underclass.

Not a particularly pleasant thought, that.

[evilsibe.livejournal.com]

muggles are punks.

[arikatt.livejournal.com]

Punks who might seek out Voldemort or some other evil wizard as his disciples or henchmen, I would think.

[marveen.livejournal.com]

So burning doesn't work. And letting the witch/wizard know you're after him/her is a short route to the Obliviate solution.

The obvious answer is to shoot at the witch/wizard from a distance, when they're unaware that you're after them. Assassination, not to put too fine a point on it.

After a few episodes of that the magic community would be devising shield charms and living in armed camps so as to keep raving nutters from shooting at the kiddies.

(I will admit that I didn't come up with this entirely by myself, I was influenced by R. Jordan's Aes Sedai conflict with the Children of the Light and one character's warning: "Just one arrow....")

[conuly]

The obvious answer is to shoot at the witch/wizard from a distance, when they're unaware that you're after them. Assassination, not to put too fine a point on it.

Except... would that kill them? Witches and Wizards seem to be able to survive a lot of things that'd kill us. They can fall huge distances, lose bones, get into car crashes - nothing.

[innerbrat]

This is one of the questions I never ever ask.
The barrier between the Muggle and Wizarding worlds is made of Narrativium. The books wouldn't work is they weren't separate.

Of course, everyone else makes good points, especially about it being to protect the muggles, but I just don't think it's been thought through, just a fundamental cornerstone to the series.

one of my fics is dealing with the breakdown of the barriers after the war with Voldemort, but JKR's already said that's never going to happen.

[arikatt.livejournal.com]

Icon love.

[vampiric-mcd.livejournal.com]

hi, *euhm* ~waves~

If I may bring the attention to something? I might be totally out of line here, or saying something that has already been said, but...
*coughs*
Gwendolin the Weird, or whoever the witch that loved being burned was, had to perform a freezing charm to KEEP FROM being burned. Logically that means that should a witch/wizard be found out, be taken by surprise and hit over the head (it's possible), stripped off his/her wand while unconscious and tied to a stake = she/he'd burn like a normal human.
I agree that wizards and witches seem to survive a great deal more then muggles, but they are not invincible. They die. Wizarding History is filled with tales of battles, etc...

I agree with the afore mentioned that a mass/mob of muggles can easily overpower a wizard/witch when they put their minds to it. Aparating and spells are a possibility, of course, but again : lost wand????
From what I've read you need a wand to aparate as well. + it must be a skill that is hard-learned when we take into account the descriptions of those studying for it and splinching themselves. Ideally one would imagine not to be split apart when trying to escape. Of course the fact that they can survive such a state is a bonus for wizarding kind.
Also: There seems to be mention of wandless magic, when you take into account the manifestation of magic when witches and wizards are children, but that power seems to be nearly completely limited to rare outbursts of magic.

A nuclear bomb could also very well wipe out both muggles and wizardry. There is no mention of the survival of Japanese wizards/witches after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

*coughs*

Right,

*waves*

[arikatt.livejournal.com]

What about floo powder? Also, Dumbledore doesn't always use a wand when he does magic.

[interactiveleaf.livejournal.com]

'Non-insignificant'?

OK, but to the point, here's a theory for you: The rules aren't there to protect the magic-users, but to protect the muggles. It's a benevolent way to keep an extremely powerful society with some pretty bad elements in check. That's why the special emphasis on controlling children, who often find immature ways to assert power--the adult wizards recognize this, and come down hard on young 'uns who can do real damage if they let loose. The same is true of adult wizards, of course, but the assumption there may be twofold: that they're better at self-control because they're older, and that they're more indoctrinated with their society's laws. Whether or not these assumptions are justified is as questionable in the wizard world as it is in the muggle world.

And let's posit that the rules were *sold* to the wizarding world as protection for them, not protection for muggles, because fear is a great motivator. Also, I suspect that the consequences of the two worlds colliding would be more severe than you've considered. We know that some humans are mad for power. How long would it take before a wizard baby was kidnapped for dissection/indoctrination/brainwashing? How long would it take before people's fear and suspicion of 'others' took over and the lynchings began?

[conuly]

1. Hush you.
2. OK, but to the point, here's a theory for you: The rules aren't there to protect the magic-users, but to protect the muggles.

I've already thought of that. Wow, one post in and already I'm not alone!

3. How long would it take before people's fear and suspicion of 'others' took over and the lynchings began?

Remember Wendelin the Weird? Muggles can't burn witches and wizards. Witches and wizards don't die easily, even with magic problems. How're muggles gonna kill random wizards?

[eclectic-1.livejournal.com]

I bet before the end of the series, this will be brought up and everyone will realize that it's not such a great rule and muggles & wizards will learn to live together in not-quite-harmony.

They may even realize that the wizards will *need* the muggles to defeat Voldemort.

[conuly]

Not likely. The series will end before the present-day. Let's have some realism and not pretend that we've all decided in the real world that there are real wizards and witches.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Well, remembering things likes inquisition, witch-hunts and other friendly historical facts, I find it pretty understandable the wizards don't want to be discovered. There are still more than enough religious fanatics to seriously cause them trouble for several reasons. I doubt Hagrid's "well, then everybody would want magical solutions to their problems" idea has much to do with it.

On a superficial level, the muggle world indeed cannot harm the wizards much. But imagine the muggles becoming aware of the wizards, and
a) considering them a threat
b) deciding to counteract that threat
c) doing their best to eradicate the wizard population, or at least to control them.
Actually, it's a lot like in X-Men.
At that points, the muggles most decidedly might try to harm the wizards (pre-emptively), and by the state of modern technology, they'd probably succeed.
Imagine a George W. Bush, deciding that the wizards are something like potential weapons of mass destruction.
Imagine muggles fearing that the wizards might harm them with their 'supernatural' powers.
Yes, a substantial number of muggles already knows of the wizarding world - but they are still single persons, not a mass of people. Single persons are reasonable, but a mass of people is only as reasonable as the most unreasonable part of this mass.

"A little upheaval, and then we're all back to normal" would be the utopic, ideal solution; but it's just not likely. Witch hystery, bans, some sort of system to register and control witches, camps or whatever sounds, unfortunately, much more realistic...

[conuly]

Well, remembering things likes inquisition, witch-hunts and other friendly historical facts, I find it pretty understandable the wizards don't want to be discovered.

I do. What did Harry's essay say? Oh yeah - muggles were really bad at recognizing witches, and anyway it's incredibly easy to not be killed, even if you are caught. Wendelin the Weird let herself be burned over 20 times, right?

[yuki-onna.livejournal.com]

Well, my little lit crit theory is that in Rowlingland, magic is an inherently chaotic force that MUST be institutionalized in order to keep it controlled and safe in the hands of a few.

This has no political parallels whatsoever.

[conuly]

If it did have political parallels, what would they be?

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

It's not that they're afraid; it's that they know "non-magic folk" would be afraid. It's the X-Men redux.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Witch hunts? Inquisitions?

Wizards in Harry Potter can't stand up against a concentrated force of muggles determined to put an end to their existence.

This has happened historically in the real world (well, modulo the existence of witches), and undoubtedly happened in the backstory of the Potterverse.

Muggles are safer (as noted above) and wizards are safer if the two don't mix together. Or so the theory goes, at least.

--Kynn

PS: Recall that there are millions of people in the world who DO believe in magic and the supernatural. Granted, they label these as "evil and demonic," but there are hundreds of millions of Christians who, unlike you and me, do NOT see wizardry a la Potter as a harmless fantasy, but as a dangerous description of evil forces in our world.

[conuly]

Witch hunts? Inquisitions?

Am I the *only* one who read PoA? Those things didn't work. They learn about it in school, about how muggles were pathetic at catching wizards and witches, and how anyway the witches and wizards they did manage to catch were never harmed.

[cielf.livejournal.com]

Society changes into one where by birth, some have powers and some don't, and there is no hope whatsover, no matter how much you try, of ever bridging that gap.

It is the end of dreams if you were born into what would, effectively, be an underclass.

Not a particularly pleasant thought, that.

[evilsibe.livejournal.com]

muggles are punks.

[arikatt.livejournal.com]

Punks who might seek out Voldemort or some other evil wizard as his disciples or henchmen, I would think.

[marveen.livejournal.com]

So burning doesn't work. And letting the witch/wizard know you're after him/her is a short route to the Obliviate solution.

The obvious answer is to shoot at the witch/wizard from a distance, when they're unaware that you're after them. Assassination, not to put too fine a point on it.

After a few episodes of that the magic community would be devising shield charms and living in armed camps so as to keep raving nutters from shooting at the kiddies.

(I will admit that I didn't come up with this entirely by myself, I was influenced by R. Jordan's Aes Sedai conflict with the Children of the Light and one character's warning: "Just one arrow....")

[conuly]

The obvious answer is to shoot at the witch/wizard from a distance, when they're unaware that you're after them. Assassination, not to put too fine a point on it.

Except... would that kill them? Witches and Wizards seem to be able to survive a lot of things that'd kill us. They can fall huge distances, lose bones, get into car crashes - nothing.

[innerbrat]

This is one of the questions I never ever ask.
The barrier between the Muggle and Wizarding worlds is made of Narrativium. The books wouldn't work is they weren't separate.

Of course, everyone else makes good points, especially about it being to protect the muggles, but I just don't think it's been thought through, just a fundamental cornerstone to the series.

one of my fics is dealing with the breakdown of the barriers after the war with Voldemort, but JKR's already said that's never going to happen.

[arikatt.livejournal.com]

Icon love.

[vampiric-mcd.livejournal.com]

hi, *euhm* ~waves~

If I may bring the attention to something? I might be totally out of line here, or saying something that has already been said, but...
*coughs*
Gwendolin the Weird, or whoever the witch that loved being burned was, had to perform a freezing charm to KEEP FROM being burned. Logically that means that should a witch/wizard be found out, be taken by surprise and hit over the head (it's possible), stripped off his/her wand while unconscious and tied to a stake = she/he'd burn like a normal human.
I agree that wizards and witches seem to survive a great deal more then muggles, but they are not invincible. They die. Wizarding History is filled with tales of battles, etc...

I agree with the afore mentioned that a mass/mob of muggles can easily overpower a wizard/witch when they put their minds to it. Aparating and spells are a possibility, of course, but again : lost wand????
From what I've read you need a wand to aparate as well. + it must be a skill that is hard-learned when we take into account the descriptions of those studying for it and splinching themselves. Ideally one would imagine not to be split apart when trying to escape. Of course the fact that they can survive such a state is a bonus for wizarding kind.
Also: There seems to be mention of wandless magic, when you take into account the manifestation of magic when witches and wizards are children, but that power seems to be nearly completely limited to rare outbursts of magic.

A nuclear bomb could also very well wipe out both muggles and wizardry. There is no mention of the survival of Japanese wizards/witches after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

*coughs*

Right,

*waves*

[arikatt.livejournal.com]

What about floo powder? Also, Dumbledore doesn't always use a wand when he does magic.