sass-therin

[sass-therin]

harry potter and the year a literal teenager was blamed for not noticing his new boss was acting weird and was given loads of shit and was held responsible but staff of the safest place and the best school in wizarding world and the best wizard failed to notice the man they knew very well was actually a death eater in disguise and got away without a single complaint aka the year nobody got a haircut.

[sass-therin]

Short haired Ginny I drew for @arctickid’s DTIYS on insta!

[sass-therin]

Please share the receipts about Harry Potter being a colonial fantasy! Reading stuff like that is so interesting 🙈 have a good day

I’m glad you both asked!

This argument will be divided into threemain parts. The subject of magical creatures in the wizarding world, thesubject of humans other than English wizards, and the subject of Harry’scharacterization in the novels. But before I can discuss the novels andRowling’s (probably mostly unintentional) colonial fantasies, we must look atthe background information of those colonial fantasies. To do that, I willoutline and explain certain elements of the 1800-century cultural and politicalsituation, reflected in the literature of the time. (See! This is why you don’tdismiss history as the unnecessary boring subject Rowling!!!!)  

(In this text, I use the word wizard akin tothe universal man, as in mankind. I do this, because Rowling herself does this,referring to unisex groups of witches and wizards as “wizards”.)

Racial thinkingin the British empire was heavily influenced by pseudo-scientific theories likephrenology and race classification theory. Humanist sciences like sociologywere heavily influenced by “hard sciences” and there was a strong demand tofind a scientific justification for the existence of the empire. Thisjustification came with race classification, that was divided into twodifferent equally racist branches of theory. The idea that different human races were actually subspecies inside the human main species, and that these subspecies had evolved to fulfill different functions and behave in different ways. Roughly divided, the Anglo-Saxon subspecies had evolved into a rational thinker and a natural leader, the Asian subspecies into servile and effeminate role, and African subspecies into manual labourer. Now, in order for society to live in perfect harmony, that society has to be built in a way that each human species can follow their natural predilections and follow their species-natural behaviour. 

The other branch of scientific sociology argued that all humans had the same potential for civilization, but that all human societies were also in different evolutionary stages. Human societies were seen to evolve in a neat line, from promiscuity-matriarchy-transitional patriarchy-patriarchy. All human societies therefore started from hunter-gatherer tribes and would eventually turn into enlightened British style modern societies. As the British already had reached the top of the societal evolution, it was also their right and burden to protect the societies that had not yet reached this top evolutionary form. It is very important to remember that while the British empire was filled with straight up hateful and vile racists that saw genocide as a fun past-time, there were equally many people who condemned the mistreatment of the empire’s subjects and fully believed that the empire was in truth necessary in order to help their less-evolved human compatriots.

Another important note to make about the imperial mindset is how these rational leaders were created; in boarding schools. The future leaders of the empire were all sent to a boarding school, somewhere around the age of 10. These schools, rampant with bullying, pressure and straight up rape, were not places that a young boy was supposed to become a scholar or an athlete; his job was to make connections and learn to become charismatic. Doing too well in your subjects was not desirable, as a book-worm is not what the empire needed. Being good at sports was good, but not if you had to sacrifice time to practice too much. Sports and sciences were there to support the student’s growth into a proper English gentleman, not as an educational goal themselves. Debating, public speaking, and aggressive confidence were much more important skills to master for the future overseer of a colony. Your job as a student in, for example Eton, was to network and grow a stiff upper lip. A terrible educational system for sure, which caused damage to the British psyche that people today are still trying to understand; with Boarding School Syndrome and its consequences important when trying to understand the problems in British politics today

How do these facts then relate to Harry Potter? Well, let’s start working our way through from magical creatures. In the Harry Potter universe, the world is filled with creatures with human-sentience that however do not, at least in Britain, mix with the dominant human population. We know that there are house-elves, working as servants, goblins, working as bankers, centaurs, keeping away in their forest, as do merfolk in their lake. Dwarves were employed as cupids (entertainers) in Hogwarts by Lockhart, and there are veelas that work as exotic dancers in the quidditch world cup.

At first glance, you might think that Harry Potter and Dumbledore are on the side of the creatures. Dumbledore is noted for being a great advocate for non-humans when defending their right to exist, as opposed to the more genocide-minded goons at the ministry. Voldemort is happy to employ creatures that he deems “dark” and ignore the rest. At first glance it would even look like the narrative is advocating for tolerance, and it is, but it is not advocating for equalitybetween humans and non-humans.      

The centaurs and the giants have lost their native lands to humans, and have been forced to live in reservations, as most notably pointed out by Dolores Umbridge in Order of the Phoenix. “Ministry of magic permits you certain areas of land.” (p.665) At the same time, the books do not portray either the giants or the centaurs in particularly sympathetic light. Centaurs are shown to be violent and even unreasonable towards any humans who would want to have contact with them. Giants are shown to be simply so stupid that they are killing themselves into extinction. (Order of the Phoenix p.377) Meanwhile, the races that do mingle amongst wizards all have something to offer to humans who allow them in their society. Goblins are useful to have around because of their hold over the banking industry and their superior metal-working. House-elves are useful as domestic servants. The creatures that wizards label as “dark” are all creatures that do not have any filled role that they can perform for the benefit of humans, (vampires, hags, werewolves), segregated from the wizarding society proper, and are therefore shunned as undesirables. Veelas on the other hand are blatantly fetishized, and they are only shown in two roles in the books. Either as entertainers or as married to wizards. The narrative does not even hint that a veela might have any non-sexual role in the society. It would seem, that all the magical races have either been pushed out of the wizarding community, or they fill some niche purpose in society that the wizards find useful, and that the wizards themselves do not want to perform.This structure of society, built upon the assumption that there will always be creatures fulfilling certain roles for the society, is not questioned by any of our heroes.

Dumbledore is happy to advocate for tolerance, but not inclusion. He is happy to create a dialogue between humans and centaurs- aslong as it is not humans who have to make any concessions in theirrelationship. Same goes for merfolk. Dumbledore advocates for their right toexists in their own segregated patches of land, and in return they will helpDumbledore. Merfolk will allow themselves and their home to be used as obstacles in the tri-wizarding tournament and the centaurs will let wizardstraipse through their forest. Inside the centaur society, we are supposed tosee territorial Bane as the “bad guy” and the meek Firenze, who argues thatcentaurs should take sides in a human war, and eventually accumulating into the human society (by becoming a teacher in Hogwarts, but only after he has been banished from the Centaur society and therefore is not a centaur culturally anymore), as the “good guy”. After all, Firenze placed the needs ofhumanity above the needs of his own species.   

The same happens with goblins. They are at every turn shown to be unpleasant, unreasonable, and impossible to work with, and when Harry Potter shows the bare minimum of respect- acknowledging that goblins have their own legal system that defines ownership of an object differently than a human would, it is framed as the greatest height of progressiveness that anyone could ever show towards a goblin. Never-mind the fact that the books explicitly mention that goblins are denied the use of a wand by the dominant human government, which is neither an interest nor a concern to any of our heroes. Note of interest is also that most non-humans taking action against the status quo are antagonists. There are no creatures in the order of the phoenix fighting against the dark lord, (Remus Lupin identifies as a human with an unfortunate condition.) but there are several under the command of Voldemort. (Order of the Phoenix p.88) The most positive attitude towards non-humans comes from the heroes who show tolerance towards non-humans, but who also do not try to reach any deeper understanding about non-human experiences in the wizarding society.

The house-elves are the most blatant piece of yikes when it comes to the issue of creatures. The enslavement of house elves is explained away as a natural order of the world.  At the end the series, even the protagonist Harry Potter accepts this natural order and becomes himself a master of the house elf Kreacher (Half Blood Prince p.55). Harry’s slave-master position is accepted,because we trust Harry to treat his slaves decently, there is never anyquestion what the condition of being a slave-master can psychologically do tothe master, or that slavery as an institution is too immoral to accept, nomatter the conditions. The reader is shown that the elves are not capable oftaking care of themselves without a master by examples of Dobby and Winky, the only freed elves shown in the books. Winky, after being freed, becomes an alcoholic. (Goblet of Fire, p.564) Dobby, while enjoying freedom, would be unable to support himself without the help of benevolent Dumbledore, to whom Dobby works in the same way as the other slaves in the castle, even if he is namely free. (Goblet of Fire p.400) (Both alcoholism and “frivolity” were anti-abolitionist talking points in the southern states in the antebellum era). Theimplication is that some races are simply born subservient, and the morally decent thing to do is to keep them in slavery but treat them kindly. 

Hermione Granger, who in the books argues that slavery as an institution is by itself something that cannot be accepted, is presented with her views as ridiculous and misguided. On the other hand, those who argue for the institution of slavery appear as rational and reasonable. There is no way for anyone to think of her S.P.E.W badges as anything but childish and stupid. In Chamber of Secrets, the readers do see Harry freeing the house elf Dobby, after Dobby has personally helped Harry. However, the implication is that Dobby suffered from an unfit master, not from the slavery itself, and that his freedom came as boon after he had done a personal favour to Harry Potter. In the world of Harry Potter, slaves are happy to be slaves, as long as their masters are decent masters.

But if you stop and think of all this, it should not be rationally possible for a society like this to exist. If the giants truly are so stupid and violent that they are accidentally killing themselves to extinction, they should also not be sentient enough for humans to breed (and even create emotional bonds, as Hagrid’s family) with them. If these creatures have a society, they are sentient enough to realise the peril they are in and who their true enemy are. Same with the centaurs. Segregating an entire culture to a small reservation is not pretty, and it does not happen peacefully. Still there is never any indication that the centaurs would be actively fighting back to regain more land or that the wizards would be actively curbing their numbers in order to keep them in check. No creature segregated in their little reservation wants to leave that reservation, choosing to rather waste away amongst their own kind than pushing for their species to be integrated into the wizarding culture, or gaining more land from the wizards. The mythical tale of the noble savage who quietly goes into the good night, is real in the wizarding world.   

Those creatures who do live and work alongside wizards are equally content with their narrow roles. No goblin wants to work anywhere else expect the bank, no house-elf wants to open a business, no veela wants to study in Hogwarts. Half-breeds might be allowed in, if the headmaster is eccentric enough, and as long as they are able to “pass” as humans. The fact that their creature parents would never have that change is not even acknowledged as the tragedy that it is. It is easy for the heroes to appear as progressive, when the only thing the creatures want is to be allowed to exist in their pre-ordained roles and be treated with the most basic decency.            

We don’t know what Dumbledore’s answer would be if a young goblin wanted to apply as a student at Hogwarts. We don’t know what any of our heroes’ reactions would have been, if the centaurs demanded compensations for Hogwarts’ rights to use the Forbidden Forest. Or if Dobby would have been competent enough to actually start campaigning alongside Hermione for abolition. We don’t know, because the wizarding world is in perfect harmony, as long as the creatures are allowed to exist peacefully in their roles, without corrupt, dark wizards abusing them needlessly.

What about humans then. Not all humans are created equal either. We don’t really see about the state of the wizarding world outside of Britain, but we are given the implication that the political situation in Britain is equal to the fate of the world. Harry Potter is not fighting for a political cause in UK, he is saving the world. British politics are world politics. The international wizards we do see, are also almost as much stereotyped as the creatures are. The French boys and girls from Beauxabatons are vain and frilly, while the girls and boys from Durmstrang are brutish and coarse. And in the European stage, UK and France gets their own wizarding population, while the eastern Europe is apparently lumped together in a way that makes you suspect that the Soviet Union never fell in the magical world. (considering when Rowling was creating these stories, that is not impossible. Rowling started writing Philosopher’s stone a year before the Soviet Union was dissolved). In the world politics, these three are the only ones important enough to be included in the tri-wizarding tournament, (tournament that the British dominate easily in book four), and therefore clearly hold the political cards of magical Europe. What we do know is that British wizards have no trouble finding work overseas, while we do not see any foreigners living or working in the British wizarding world. Britain’s importance as the centre stage of magical world politics is simply a given fact of the world.

(Note that I havedecided to omit all nonsense that Rowling has added to Pottermore in her effortto world-build but rest assured that it makes the situation simply much worse.)  

There is also the clean divide between muggles and wizards. The wizards once again are honour-bound from their superior position to protect the muggles. The books make it clear that it was not for the safety of the wizards that the worlds were divided. It was simply that muggles in their ignorance kept burning other muggles during the witch-hunting times. The idea that muggles, if confronted with an existential threat like the death-eaters and their genocidal tendencies, were to win the fight, is not even floated as an idea. The moral implications ofkeeping the muggle world ignorant about a part of UK population that wants to kill them, and has succeeded in several terrorist attacks against the commonpopulation, is not discussed at all. The wizards simply have the right to sacrifice the lives of muggles in exchange of keeping their society hidden from the “common folk”. The wizards who do show any interest in muggles, do it in the most condescending way possible. Arthur Weasley, who has spent years working in the ministry of muggle-affairs, cannot pronounce the word electricity or know what a rubber duck is. How exactly does someone work for muggle-affairs if one is completely ignorant of said affairs? Why are muggleborn’s not automatically working for muggle-affairs? How is it, that muggleborns all simply choose to embrace the wizarding culture without there being any underground muggleborn culture running counter the pureblood establishment? Hermione Granger wants to be seen as one of the witches, not as someone whose cultural knowledge of muggles could in on itself be a strength. Rowling really wants you to believe that the British wizarding culture is naturally so desirable that no counter-cultures have born inside it, or that there ever could be any other problem expect that muggleborns are restricted from accumulating into it.

And then we come to Harry. Our hero. At first look, he appears to be the underdog fighting against the unjust establishment of the wizarding world. However, if one takes a closer look at the story, Harry Potter is not an underdog at all. In the beginning of the story, he acquires a great inheritance from his exceedingly wealthy parents. (Philosopher’s Stone p.85) In every other character exceeding wealth seems to be a negative trait, but curiously Harry’s status as an heir to a fortune is never properly addressed in relation to Harry’s moral character. Harry is also a son of esteemed and powerful magical parents, both highly regarded in the wizarding society. From his father’s side, Harry can claim a connection to an old pureblood house, making him part of the purebloodwizarding establishment. Both the wealth and the bloodline inherited from thePotter family guarantees a place in the upper class of the magical society foryoung Harry. Even the extremely racist Draco Malfoy in the first book seemseager to make friends with Harry. (Philosopher’s Stone p.120). It is only Voldemort who has robbed him of his natural heritage and privileges and forced him in to hiding with his brutish and cruel (muggle) relatives. 

The story of Harry Potter is not of someone who fights for acceptance, but of someone who returns to his rightful place on top of the wizarding society. characters who do not naturally have this privilege, gain prestige by being helpful and loyal to Harry. It is a deliberate choice by Rowling to make Harry a pureblood fighting for the rights of muggleborns and those lower than him in the wizarding societal ladder. He is the archetypical English gentleman hero, because he has both the privilege and the proper character to carry that privilege. Voldemort, Malfoy, and other “dark-siders” from the pureblood establishment have abused this privilege and are therefore unworthy of it.

Another important part of Harry’s character is that all his powers and abilities that help him champion against Voldemort are either inherited or inherent. Harry does no need to labour for his victory. His mother gives him “blood-protection”, his father and mentors give him magical items to help him on his journey, and he simply has skills that others don’t. His flying abilities making themselves known the first time he hops on a broom, and his inexplicable talent to resist the imperio-curse is never explained expect with “a strong heart”. What he is good at, he doesn’t need to work for, and what he is not good at, he never improves on. If there is something he doesn’t have the innate talent for, he has friends who will do it for him. When Snape claimed that all of Harry’s successes were due to luck and more talented friends…he wasn’t wrong. And the kicker is, that that’s the point. Harry’s main strength is the fact that he is good at networking and having a brave heart. That is the ideal that thousands of young Englishmentried to mould themselves into during the imperial days. Harry doesn’t need tobe the “smartest wizard of his age”, he needs to be charismatic enough thatothers will follow him into the battle. He doesn’t need to be shrewd, or ambitious,or smart, or even kind, he needs to know how to apply his inheritance correctlyand how to manage those in the lower position than him, in order to return thestatus quo into the wizarding world.

When both Harry’s already existing place in the magical society, and the question of how the books treat the magical creatures are considered, the main conflict in the book seems to be reduced to an inner struggle between the higher classes of wizarding society. Voldemort and the death eaters are evil because they misuse their power over the lower classes, and because they discriminate against other witches and wizards. Therefore, it is the duty of Dumbledore and Harry Potter to return the wizarding world to its former and rightful order. The narrative supports the idea that now that the proper people, the naturally noble-minded heroes, are once again in power all the social issues of the wizarding world will disappear. Those on the top of the social pyramid will treat those under them with tolerance, and those at the base of the pyramid will stick to their place.In other words, the world of Harry Potter has fulfilled the colonialist fantasy of the British empire, where everybody has their place in society, and theinferior races truly are without ambitions or nuances.     

The wizarding world has the structures that the British empire had, but none of the problems that come with those structures. In the end, the wizarding world returns to peace. “all was well.” The house-elves are given laws that punishes a master that mistreats their slave. The goblins continue in their segregation. The centaurs and merfolk are given a promise of no genocide. The British muggleborns are promised a place in the dominant society, as long as they perfectly emulate their pureblood peers and don’t bring muggle culture with them. The superiority of British wizardingkind has been proven, and they benevolently reside over their less evolved subjects, making sure that they are allowed to fulfill their roles in the society, as they naturally desire, in peace. There are no troublesome creature-rights activists causing havoc on streets. There are no muggleborns who would wish to side with muggles against the wizards. There is no empire, there is only the natural order of things.  

Bibliography

https://www.academia.edu/26667941/Crowning_the_King_Harry_Potter_and_the_Construction_of_Authority

https://www.lib.latrobe.edu.au/ojs/index.php/tlg/article/view/162/161

https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/24083/H_and_F_book4print_final.pdf;sequence=1

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-phrenology-2795251

https://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/the-victorians-empire-and-race

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Jakob_Bachofen

https://kenanmalik.com/2014/05/15/the-forgotten-roots-of-the-first-world-war/

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5478

https://www.naturepl.com/stock-photo-tableau-to-accompany-professor-agassiz-opening-sketch-on-the-image01388344.html

https://until-darwin.blogspot.com/2012/09/darwin-slavery-species-question.html

https://www.britannica.com/topic/race-human/Scientific-classifications-of-race

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/11/hitchens200811

https://newrepublic.com/article/151232/britains-boarding-school-problem

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jun/09/boarding-schools-bad-leaders-politicians-bullies-bumblers

https://anotherwasteland.blogspot.com/2008/05/robinson-crusoe-colonialism-and.html

https://neoenglish.wordpress.com/2010/10/17/colonialism-in-victorian-literature/

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h3141t.html

[sass-therin]

Hogwarts School Unifrom

The other day I read a series of posts on the Hogwarts uniform and how book!uniform differs from movie!uniform, which is more canonical and whether there’s been/there should be some retconning to unify the books, films and illustrations from different sources. Since wizarding fashion is one of my favourite subjects (particularly since the word “corsets” was mentioned in HBP), I thought I had to write a post about it. So here it goes.

On tradition and unmuggleness

As much as I like the movie uniforms, the way I see it, they’re irreconcilable with those described in the books, which, both because they’re from the book and because that’s how I see them in my head, I consider canonical. Most people point out as proof of this that in a couple of occasions we are told more or less directly that the basic (I’ll talk more about this later) uniform does not bear any house indicator (see the Penelope Clearwater and Crabbe-and-Goyle’d Ron-and-Harry Cases, both in CoS). This is true. However, what I see as a bigger issue is the fact that the movie!uniform is basically a muggle school uniform with robes instead of a blazer, which, considering how often we see wizards struggling with muggle clothing, doesn’t really add up. And given that school uniforms tend to be on the conservative side of fashion, it would make much more sense to have the Hogwarts uniform resemble traditional wizarding attire.

On openings and trouserslessness

The movie robes are completely open at the front save for one (PoA-onwards) or two (PS-CoS) little clasps, which would take next to no time to do up and undo, so the movie robes would be put on and off like a bathrobe or a coat. However, most (if not all) of the times we see Harry changing into his school robes he’s described as pulling them over his head. To me that implies that the front is not open all the way down, that maybe there’s just a small opening with a few buttons, like a polo shirt. Either that or the robes are open all the way down but fastening and unfastening them is so tedious that students simply never do them up or undo them all the way. In a pre-zipper world, a front opening like that would most probably mean a metric tonne of little buttons, at least (look up some old-timey portraits, particularly of women’s fashion. They took their buttons seriously). No one has time to fiddle with that many buttons, so it would be easier to undo a few of the top ones and pull the robes over your head.

Personally, I think the left-hand version fits the description of “plain black work robes” better. And yes, there’s no indication anywhere in the books that the sleeves are flared or gathered at the top, but they look more wizardy this way, so. 

For an even more undeniable piece of evidence that supports the idea of having a closed front, look no further than Snape’s worst memory in OotP. When he gets levicorpused by James, we see his underwear. He’s not wearing trousers. Wh. Why is he not wearing trousers??? Because there’s no risk of accidental exposure of one’s undergarments when there isn’t a massive opening on the front of one’s robes, that’s why. Also, if for some sinister reason he had not been wearing trousers under open-fronted robes, everybody would’ve been able to see his pants already and it wouldn’t have been “funny” when James revealed them.

Moreover, it seems that trousers, even though they are worn in the wizarding world, are neither required nor part of traditional wizarding attire. See the old man in the Quidditch World Cup. Trousers have been adopted to some extent, but they are not considered wizarding clothing per se, but rather a garment borrowed from muggles. So if we go back to the idea that uniforms tend to be conservative, the Hogwarts uniform would have probably been designed to be worn with no clothes underneath other than underwear.

On hats gone with the wind and cloaks

Hats. “One plain pointed hat (black) for day wear.” Day wear. In the films (PS, basically), hats seem to only be worn on special occasions. And I can understand that; On set they’re probably a huge inconvenience as they like to fall off and have to be touched up constantly and may cover something/someone important. Still, canonically, a pointed black hat for day wear is part of the Hogwarts uniform.

Now, do not quote me on this, but I am positive that in one of the books there is a description of a windy day where students grab the brims of their hats so that they don’t get blown off. That’s the one and only time in the whole series (that I can remember) where the uniform hats are said to be brimmed. It makes sense, though, as traditional witch hats do have a brim. Modest brims seem adequate for uniforms. (I do think it is strange to make students wear hats indoors, but oh well.)

Then there’s the winter cloaks. Again, plain and black, this time with silver clasps. No crest, no house colours. And there’s also the protective dragonskin gloves, which seem to be used both as protective gloves for Potions/Care of Magical Creatures/Herbology and as regular winter gloves.

On house pride (or the lack thereof)

So far we have established that the uniform consists basically of plain black garments: a set of black robes (closed front), a black cloak, a black hat. Hence, by default, there is no way to tell what house a student belongs to just by their attire. Or is there? Here’s where the “basic uniform” I mentioned  before comes into play.

It is true that the robes, hats and cloaks are plain black when bought. And yet, there are many points in the story when Harry seems to simply know what house some students belong to, even when he clearly doesn’t know them. We get constant references to “a gorup of first year Ravenclaws” or “a Hufflepuff girl”, and since the story is told from Harry’s point of view rather than an omniscient narrator’s, there must be a way for Harry to tell apart people from different houses without knowing them personally. So how can we reconcile the ideas that some people’s house is recognisable at first sight while other people’s isn’t? It’s quite simple: CUSTOMISATION.

Bagdes, scarves, appliques, ribbons, hat ornaments, buttons, socks, belts, and a long etc, to show your house pride. Just as we can get jumpers and hoodies and caps and whatnot with the name and colours of our uni or specific college, kids in the wizarding world are probably able to buy (and make) house merchandise. These items would be available at Diagon Alley and Hogsmeade, and parents would send them to their children once they’ve been sorted or the kids themselves would be able to get them via owl order.

Some students may only wear a small badge on their chest. Others a scarf+turtleneck undershirt+bandana+animal-shaped hat bauble combo. I love to imagine some kids wearing ridiculously tacky things, like red-and-gold neck ruffles or bee-striped boots. And those kids who are not as inclined to show off their house? They can just wear their basic black uniform.  

[sass-therin]

I hate a lot about Snape stans, the way the try to blame things on Lily and call her a bad friend, the way they overlook bigotry and romanticize it, etc.

What probably upsets me the most is when they try to bring up their opinion in on the Nazi analogy and defend it by saying the death eaters didn’t do the same amount of cruelty (ie concentration camps, gas chambers). THIS IS A CHILDRENS BOOK?! Did you want Rowling if exploit Jewish trauma more? She did the analogy enough that if you have brain cells you can see it. Don’t care to claim about Jews and then want us to suffer even more in the same sentence. Also kindly if you aren’t Jewish, Romani, or have a family member directly impacted by the Holocaust, I don’t want to hear your hot take. It’s not your trauma to debate about.

(The obviously doesn’t apply to those trying to uplift Jewish + others previously mentioned voices. I appreciate everything y’all do)

[sass-therin]

Give Harry to me, Hagrid, I’m his godfather, I’ll look after him.

[sass-therin]

Lucius: Whenever Narcissa is mad at me, I tighten the lids on all the jars so she has to get help from me.

[sound of glass shattering in the background]

Lucius: It hasn’t worked yet, but it’ll happen.

[sass-therin]

Rita Dolores Potter, you were so named because after what I did to your brother it was only fair

[sass-therin]

This is really messed up but I’m laughing while thinking of a headcanon where James and Sirius wanted to fuck with Remus after a full moon so they made Peter hang out in the great hall while Remus came up to the dorm and when he got there, they started sobbing and telling Remus that he ate Peter by accident and Remus starts freaking out until he sees James and Sirius laughing. Yes I know this is twisted and would be a complete asshole move BUT it did make me laugh

[sass-therin]

Does anyone else find Molly wanting to have a girl so bad kinda weird? Like the only reason she had so many children was because she wanted a girl and she only stopped having children because she had Ginny. Imagine growing up learning that the only reason you exist is because your mom wanted you to be a girl and when you weren’t, she was disappointed. I understand wanting to have a girl but you should be happy nonetheless and it really goes to a far extent. So far that she treats almost every one of her children bad except for Ginny (bullies Bill’s wife and is always down on/yelling at Percy, Fred, George, and Ron)

[sass-therin]

Something that really bothers me about people’s hatred towards Ron is that unless you grew up really poor you have no idea what it’s like and how much it affects you. Especially if you grow up poor surrounded by rich friends. The jealousy seriously eats you alive and the way Ron acted was perfectly understandable. 

[sass-therin]

I am so grateful for another day to hate Molly Weasley with all my heart and soul.

[sass-therin]

Just wanted to let you know, tumblr suggested me your blog and what it used to describe you was “big in Bill Weasley.” I figured you’d want to know.

I'm flattered but when do I ever post about Bill?? huh??

#thank you for telling me this lmao #ig this is a bill weasley stan account now

[sass-therin]

Me: I hope the twins gave Peter Pettigrew absolute hell while he stayed at the Burrow disguised as Scabbers!

Also me: Ok but I hope they didn't torture Scabbers too much because Percy loved his rat and a sad Scabbers makes a sad Percy and a sad Percy makes a sad me.

[sass-therin]

Headcanon

The reason why Percy didn't want to believe Voldemort was back is because then he'd have to admit that Scabbers, his pet that he gave to Ron, was a full grown man the entire time, and he just couldn't emotionally deal with it or the deal with guilt of giving him to Ron

#this implies Percy knew Scabbers was actually Peter #do they tell him?? I highly doubt it #harry potter #percy weasley

[sass-therin]

[sass-therin]

Do you think Sirius was abused by his parents? I think this topic is pretty argued in the fandom, so i just wanted to know what you thought

 First off, before anything else: I get that people will have different thoughts when it comes to this. The nature of fandom allows for open interpretations, and those are all valid. I don’t want to force my beliefs on anyone else.

 That being said, I have some Very Strong Opinions™ on this, and I’m not going to shift from them.

 (TW: discussion of abuse)

 I’m gonna be honest. I have seen a lot of discussions on this, and a lot of arguments, and a lot of people who have equally strong but completely different opinions. And throughout it all, I’ve just been wondering one thing: Which goddamn books have y’all been reading?

 My opinion: Yes, Sirius was abused. If you think otherwise, you’re probably not going to appreciate this post.

 First off, there is the fact that Sirius’s childhood in Grimmauld Place is straight-up compared to Harry’s childhood in Privet Drive. Explicitly. It’s right here:

 “I don’t like being back here.” Sirius said. “I never thought I’d be stuck in this house again.”

“Harry understood completely. He knew how he would feel if forced, when he was grown up and thought he was free of the place forever, to return and live at number four, Privet Drive.”

 Like, the fact that this comparison is made at all in the text, let alone this explicitly? This is really all the proof that I need. (And, btw, Sirius and Harry’s situations are almost exactly the same in OotP. They both went through intense personal traumas and were forced back into hated childhood homes right after, which caused them to spiral really badly as a response. And, of course, they are both very invalidated by some people in the fandom, who refuse to show compassion and understanding for the circumstances they are in, but that’s another matter.)

   And now to get to Sirius and his parents specifically … let’s look at some of the things we hear:

“Traitor, abomination, shame of my flesh.”

“How his mother hated him, what a disappointment     he was”

“My brother was a much better son, as I was constantly reminded.”

“His mother swore he was no son of hers.”

 There are more, but I can’t remember them right now. Also, just for the record: this is all emotional abuse, and considering portraits essentially repeat common phrases that they’ve said throughout their life, it’s safe to figure that these were things he frequently heard from his mother.

   Then there’s the fact that Sirius literally ran away from home. He was a 16-year-old child who ran away from a home that has been explicitly compared to Privet Drive by the text, and there are still people who think that he wasn’t abused? What even?

 Oh, and his mother’s response? To blast him off the family tapestry and swear that he was no son of hers. Classic.

   And Sirius’s state of mind during OotP is actually … very disturbing, in its implications. The guy can survive 12 years in Azkaban and crouch in caves, but a month back in Grimmauld Place is what he can’t handle? That tells me everything I need to know about the memories he has associated with that house, and they are in the same category as the memories Harry probably has associated with Privet Drive.

   So … yeah. I think Sirius was abused by his parents, because there is literally textbook evidence of it in the story. I have thought this since the first time I read the story, even though I didn’t really know the proper implications of the word “abuse” when I was 10.

 I think, tbh, the question should be altered to whether Sirius was physically abused, and if he was, how far did it go. Because that is something that is open to interpretation, and something that people are free to have different opinions on. I personally think that he was (I mean ... it isn't explicit, but its Right There), but that’s a personal reading of it. It isn’t 100% canon.

 But to deny that he was abused at all? Yeah, we clearly have very different ideas of what is and isn’t acceptable in parenting, and we have clearly read the text very differently. Because the fact that he was abused is explicit in canon, to me. Everything I just listed above is emotional abuse. I literally don’t understand how people think otherwise.

   I think the reason this discussion began in the first place is because people … want the Blacks to have a more complex dynamic than a mere “they hated each other and were glad to never see each other again”? And, again, I just want to repeat: I’m not here to tell people the exact dynamic between Sirius and his family, or their exact feelings towards each other, or the exact circumstances behind Sirius running away. All of those things are very ambiguous and 100% open to different interpretations.  

 Because at the end of it, relationships are complicated, right? You can love someone, you can hate someone, and you can love someone and hate someone at the same time. And when it comes to abuse … I’m not an expert, but again, its complicated. Maybe you hate someone and want to hurt them. Maybe you love someone and hurt them. Maybe think you’re caring for someone, that you’re doing your best, but you’re hurting them instead. Abuse doesn’t automatically default to specific types of people and dynamics, even though it may gravitate towards them.

 Like … my point is, canon has 100% left the ground open for people to interpret Sirius’s relationship with his parents to be greyer and more complicated than what’s let on in the surface. Heck, canon has even left the ground open for fairytale reconciliations, and I’ve definitely read and enjoyed a few fics on those, (even though I don't agree with them at all). I love exploring dysfunctional family dynamics, and how characters work through them. Maybe it’s projection, but it’s fun. And again, canon has left it open to interpretation. 

 My only thing: Sirius was abused by his parents, and almost all his relatives were terrible people. That is canon. Don’t deny that, and don't invalidate that, however you personally choose to explore their relationship.

 (Also, since I think I probably sounded very harsh throughout this answer: none of this anger is directed at you, anon! I just have very intense feelings regarding this topic in general, and I took this ask as a chance to discuss them, because they’re all connected. So, thanks for giving me that opportunity!)

oh, and i'm tagging @blitheringmcgonagall, because I think we have similar opinions on this topic?? Feel free to add on if you want!