#because jkr is very much alive and influential and she's part of the reason for the recent anti trans laws and court rulings in the uk | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

uthseikoashx-inflamedme · 4 years

Text

How can everyone find their true-love and still be in love after years in HP? (”magic-soulmates” theory and conservative society)

(I do apologize for the mistakes! I did my best and have been help by websites and things like that, but I’m afraid I’m still not a native speaker. I hope it’s not that bad though. Sorry again!) (when I started writing this I thought “it’s going to be short, I’m gonna explain things quickly”, and well, nope)

Isn’t it curious that a lot of character in Harry Potter meet his true love at school, marry to them, and love them until the very end?

Just a quick list: Harry and Ginny, Ron and Hermione, Lily and James, Molly and Arthur, Frank and Alice, Neville and Hannah Abbot, James’ parents, Remus’ parents, the Malfoys, the Crouchs... It’s definitely a lot of people who are in love for ever (and I’m sure I’ve forgotten some couples, like Newt and Tina or Luna and Rolf, even if they didn’t meet at school?).

Plus, there are other characters which had a “true love”, and despite the fact they are not (anymore) together, they still love this same person - and they never have been able to move on. Minerva McGo fell for a muggle who died, Severus Snape was obsessed with Lily until his very end - literally -, Albus Dumbledore met Gellert Grindelwald at 17 (or 18) and loved him during decades despite everything his charismatic murderous ex-boyfriend accomplished (and Albus was probably Gellert’s true love), etc.

But in real life, most of the people don’t marry to their school crush and most importantly, don’t love them deeply and unconditionally during decades (or I think so at least). So, why isn’t it working the same in the wizarding world?

Well, it could be because JKR didn’t want to include divorce and wanted to present a (quite unrealistic) model of relationships (and Harry Potter was intially a book for kids, so ok); but couldn’t we find a real reason?

So here are several theories, to fix this... inconsistency?

Again, it’s theories, so there are probably questionable points and things like that. Feel free to say what you think of it!

1. Magic “soulmates”

This one is my favourite, and it’s probably - to my opinion! - the most believable, the most convincing, at least the one with the most potential. (it’s not perfect at all though)

Muggles and wizards/witches aren’t the same human beings. It’s a fact: there are diseases which affects only magic people (the Dragon pox?), magic people live way longer than muggles (Bathilda was older than Dumbledore, who was born in 1881 and died in 1997; Gellert, Elphias and Muriel were still alive in 1998...). Magic seems to have an impact on the body, on the constitution (*).

The assumption is: what if the magic through the body of every wizard or witch was able to... “recognize” or “match” with the perfect person? Because of something muggles don’t have, magic people are able to truly bind themselves with a... soulmate, something like that?

It might be plausible (maybe believable), I have several arguments.

Firstly, magic people are able to feel the surrounding magic - like forces, something immaterial but which has a strong influence. Albus is able to feel the marks of Riddle’s spells in the cave (and I’m strongly convinced that his magic and Gellert’s were... connected, that they were capable to feel and recognize each other magic, because both of them were bloody brilliant, but it’s not the subject). We can perhaps also talk about how Newt was able to detect the prints of magical creatures and Tina after they left the streets, in FBCOG. It shows that magic is everywhere, and it has a strong influence on the physical world.

Secondly, we have proofs that magic is far more complex than spells and things like that: Unbreakable Vows or Fidelius Charms imply magic contracts that we don’t understand, students can study things like Arithmancy or Divination, which are subtle arts... But the greatest example of it is certainly Lily’s protection. Magic is complex.

Thirdly, we can suppose that every witch or wizard has a very personal magic - a reflection, a part of their personality, of their soul (which exist in Harry Potter). Maybe souls are entirely a magic thing, after all (it’s quite sad for muggles though): I mean that each soul is perhaps the magic energy of a witch or a wizard, the source of their power (but again it’s not entirely the subject here). So each magic, each soul, is able to “scan” other’s soul - other’s magic - and find a perfect match: after all, magic is soul, and consequently, it’s the most intimate part of someone’s personality. And then, people fall in love (because magic and personality match).

I really do appreciate this theory, because I fairly like complex and mysterious magic systems and things like that in HP (that’s why Albus’ and Gellert’s interactions and relation can be utterly interesting btw). Plus, it actually explains why someone is truly in love with the same person for ages.

But, what about wizards or witches which fell in love with muggles - Remus’ dad, Queenie Goldstein, etc? If their partner isn’t a person with a magical soul and stuff, how can they be truly in love and all?

Yes, indeed, it exists; however, we can... fix that.

On one hand, maybe soul and magic are separated, souls have their own energy, and wizard’s or witch’s magic acts to tie the two souls despite the absence of magic through muggle’s bodies. Plus, muggles are affected by magic (we can cast spells on them, but most importantly they also feel subtle magic things, like Dudley with the Dementors (even if we can argue here that the chill we feel when there is a Dementor is something physical and not magic)).

On the order hand, in the muggle world, there is people which are truly in love without magic: so perhaps it is not a question of magic here, they are just... in love. (I hope I’m clear?)

2. Conservative society and appearances

Nevertheless, is it possible that those perfect couples... aren’t absolutely truly in love with each other? So, why didn’t just they broke up?

Perhaps the witchcraft society (can we name it like that?) is actually quite conservative, and not quite open-minded about divorces. Several things we learn in the books support this idea.

First of all, most of the married couples we know promised themselves to each other rather young (Lily and James, Molly and Arthur, Bill and Fleur, Alice and Frank...). I don’t know if it’s because I’m French and I live during the 21st century, but I don’t know a lot of people who chose to marrying before 25 (in fact, I know no one which is younger than 70 today). What if serious relationships in the wizarding world were truly accepted only after a marriage? Almost every person with children is married (the exceptions are Dean’s mother (but she’s a muggle), Bellatrix (she's married but not with the man she had a baby with (****), but it’s in HPCC and honestly, how could this happen), and... I think that’s all?). Marriage is maybe a big deal, an unforgettable and necessary stage in a wizard’s of witch’s life who wants to be recognized as a person in a relationship with legitimate kids.

(to be honest here, they could marry early just because of the war, the fear and all, like Molly said it in HBP (if I remember right); but people of Harry’s gen also married, and Molly complained because Bill is marrying (according her) to the wrong woman, too young, as the overprotective mother she is. We can keep that on mind though. Anyway, back to the point.)

Next, it appears that pure-blood families and traditions are still influential during HP books - racism and how it is not punished (like it’s ok to casually say “mudblood”? we never see people except outsiders or very brave people protest against it? there isn't any law who punishes it?), the representation of pure-blood in the Ministry, the capital owned by some of them (**), ect. And we all know how the purity of the blood is important in those families. What if marriage was initially organized and crucial in the upper classes (pure-blood families) to keep their blood pure, and because they rule the society, they imposed this social convention decades - maybe even centuries - ago? That’s why marriage could be that important. (***)

Finally, there might be so many couples which seem in love... just because they act like they truly were, they accepted they must love the people they were binded with, despite the passing years? Divorce might consequently not an option.

(Also, what if marriages contracts were actually a way to... “create” and assure the love between the two persons? It’s much sadder than the soulmates’ theory, because we can think that the love between two people is artificial, even if it exists originally. I do not like this idea)

This theory (marriage-creating-love excluded) doesn’t exclude the first one though, so why not?

3. Destiny and things like that

We know there are prophecies, destiny and things like that in HP - we know it for sure, with Trelawney’s predictions (even with Grindelwald now). What if there is actually a destiny for everyone, a personal path for everyone, which everyone follow, and which allows to meet a perfect person to be together with?

I don’t have elements to prove this point, and actually, I’m not quite convinced - but it’s possible. However, are really all the characters dominate by a destiny they have to fulfil? Like yeah, Harry is concerned by a prophecy, but 1) it could have been Neville, 2) there is not so many prophecies we know and it’s almost every time about Harry or Voldy.

Plus, it can be seen as... an absence of freedom, and without freedom, how can someone choose how to build himself, how to act ethically, etc? (I know some philosophers said destiny doesn’t exclude freedom and all) My point is that a world entirely conduct by a destiny/future already written (so which also determine true love’s people) is a bit out of HP system and narrative: Harry has to do choices to follow the path of the good, it’s crucial through the books and a lot of characters are determined by their ethic choices (Albus, Draco or Severus in particular?) (I’m trying my best to be understandable)

(all in all, I’m not fan of this theory)

4. There isn’t any “true love”, we only have this impression because of Harry’s pov: arguments and counter-arguments

Here are counter-arguments to the idea of “true love” in Harry Potter. Indeed, our analysis can be biased by Harry’s pov and by the people he chose to be friend with.

Many of true-love-couples are Harry’s friends (or persons he likes). We can think that he likes people with the same opinion on love and relationships; consequently, his friends and the surrounding adults marry because they all like this way of life.

What I want to say here, is that there is probably many persons who haven’t found their truelove, but we don’t met them, or we ignore them: what about Moody, what about Sirius, what about Peter, what about Kingsley, what about all the teenagers who aren’t with the love of their life before 20? We know countless characters, most of them didn’t seem to be together with their soulmate or something like that.

Plus, perhaps we think everybody can find their true love because we just see perfects couples and not messed up couples - because of Harry’s pov. (I swear I’m actually trying to be as clear as possible)

Nevertheless:

single persons can be aro/ace persons;

singles can choose to not be in a relationship, even if they found their perfect match: Moody, Sirius and all have a quite particular story and had suffered from losses, war, injuries - what if Moody lost the person he loved during the war? what if Sirius didn’t want to hurt the person he loved by his eventual death, when he was James’ and Lily’s Secret-Keeper? (it also work if his “true love” is Remus actually);

several persons could have chosen to ignore their feelings, for a reason or another. It could be because of a bad timing, like the war, as we already mentionned it; but also because of personnal reasons (family, denial...); or even social ones: all of the pure-blood don’t have the bravery of a young Andromeda Black on one hand, and the other hand, homosexual relationships don’t seem to be quite accepted in canon - the only two man that we know for sure were involved in a relationship, Albus and Gellert, kept it secret. (***)

actually, there are probably a lot of people who are in a relationship, but we don’t know it (who knows, for example, if Stan has a gf/bf?). Again, Harry’s pov isn’t an omniscient pov; and forgettable characters’ private life is generally not quite important throughout Harry’s epic adventures;

we still can’t deny there is way more married and happy couples (so people who are together with the same person a very long time) in the wizarding world than in the muggle world. Even if there are exceptions and if we know single persons, we still have the same problem: people are able to find their true love very young and stays with the same person the rest of their lives, pleased - even entirely blooming.

We can yet argue that nobody talk about a “soulmate bond” and something like that through HP stories. If there was actually a true-magic-allowed-love, witches and wizards should know it, right?

However, a magic link as complex, subtle, imperceptible, cryptic, primitive, puzzling as true-love-magic-bond could be far from easy to be analysed and understood by any enchanter of sorceress. It will be like... quantum mechanics or things like that. We might need brilliant people who work on it during their whole life and who are helped by complicate and modern instruments, impenetrable knowledge, etc. And we know that:

there is less magic people than muggles (seriously, I once tried to estimate how many wizards and witches lived in Great Britain and... so little), so there is consequently fewer people who have the abilities and the will to research things like "true-love-magic-link”;

a lot of muggles discoveries had been done during the 20th century, despite the war... however, wizards had to deal with muggle’s wars, wizardkind’s wars (hi Grindelwald and Voldemort), while maintaining the International Statue of Wizarding Secrecy, and it’s a lot. So perhaps nobody really had time to think about it.

Plus, it is possible that other countries in other continents had proved it, but European countries and US don’t care; also, perhaps it has been proved in the past - like 4000 years before our age - but then it has been forgotten.

Nonetheless, there is a serious counter-argument to the true-love-thanks-magic theory: love potions doesn’t exist. Amortentia creates a strong obsession but never creates love. Slughorn (and Dumbledore, if I remember well) explained love can’t be created with magic. Consequently, Slughorn seems to say that love between two persons in the wizarding world is created by... feelings, like in the muggle world. Plus, an important message of the books (and now in the movies with FB) is that muggles and wizardkind are equal, have to be considered as... identical, almost? Love is a strong power, and it's even stronger than magic - love's the real important thing to protect, etc. That's why a magic-soulmate theory might be debatable.

But if we suppose that attraction and true love between two people is based on magic/soul matching, a simple potion - and even a strong spell - has of course any effect on love and things like that: feelings and magic are far more subtle, personal, a spell or a potion can’t influence someone’s soul (or just Dark magic), etc.

I know yet that JKR wanted probably to say that love is more elevated than magic, she wanted to sublime humans’ emotions and things like that - or it’s what I understood when I read the books. So yes, the fact that love can’t be created by magic is a serious counter-argument: it goes against some of what seems to be author's ideas and characters explanations (Dumbledore's at the end of DH). It doesn’t throw away the theory in my opinion, but it questions it though.

Conclusion:

I can’t think about something which can actually answers to our initial question except what we already said. I want to believe that magic binds people together and helps them find the perfect match, because if I don’t believe it, relationships in Harry Potter make not much sense to me. (even if there are definitely debatable points) (and again it’s just my pov/opinion)

So there were the theories, etc!

Honestly, an inconstancy like that is not a that big deal, but I still do want to fix it. It’s in my mind since ages srly I can’t bear it anymore I need to talk about it. I’m glad it’s done.

Thanks for reading, and have a good day / evening / night / whatever!

* : ... magic seems to have an impact on the body, on the constitution: in fact, we know it for sure: Riddle’s appearance changed radically after he created Horcruxes. This point can also lead us to think that soul and magic are the same thing, or are at least strongly connected.

**: ... the representation of pure-blood in the Ministry, the money who owns some of them: if you’re interested, I developed a bit more this idea in the post: Why are the Weasleys poor? (eng&fr) (theories about pure-blood families, inheritance, etc)

***: That’s why marriage could be that important.: for several reasons (that I want to expose but not in this post bc it’s already quite long), I do believe lgb+ relationships (or transidentity, or everyone which is not cishet basically) are not accepted, and same-gender marriage is certainly not allowed in the wizarding world during Harry’s years at Hogwarts. If we think now about the pressure on teens and young adults about marriage if they want to have kids, to be accepted as “a person in a serious relationship” or be seen as accomplished adults, we can understand why many lgbtqi+ people never came out. It could explain why we don’t see outed lgbtqi+ people or couples at Hogwarts, in the Order, or everywhere else. (yep, i’m trying to “explain” in the canon a lack of representation, even if we all know why there isn’t lgbtqi+ ppl - JKR just wrote it that way. (i do not support what she said and she did recently.)) (futhermore it could support the theory of the several uses/significations of the blood pact between Albus and Gellert, an alternative to an engagement ring they couldn’t have but wanted to have? idk)

****: 3rd august edit : I did a mistake and I was unclear, because I previously said Bellatrix wasn't married, as someone gently tell me! It's now corrected. (if you want details, it's on the comments!)

(again, sorry for the mistakes, thanks for reading!)

33 notes · View notes