shouldn't we all be wizards?

Jun 18, 2007 10:52

so, here's something I just don't get, if the Harry Potter canon is to be believed ( Read more... )

hp

Leave a comment

Comments 10

marginalia June 18 2007, 14:57:03 UTC
yes. it doesn't make sense. i try not to think about it.

Reply


talcotts June 18 2007, 16:09:37 UTC
I'd wondered about that. I also find it hard to believe that even with magic, 2000+ years of wizardry could be kept so secret. I think that's why I liked the opening of book six, it at least made a slight attempt to address that.

Could a lot of it have to do with undiscovered/untrained talent? Hogwarts can't fit everyone (and, for some reason, it seems to be the only magic school in the UK), so it might have to pick-and-choose its students. Squibs get in through family ties, but low-talent muggle-born wizards might just never get an invitation.

You know the books better than I do, has anyone ever been rejected admission?

Reply

zaph June 18 2007, 16:25:04 UTC
It's not in the books, but according to Rowling, everyone who is at all magical in the UK and Ireland is automatically detected at birth and sent an invitation to Hogwarts in the year they'll be 11 before September 1. She does say, though, that some parents choose not to send their children to Hogwarts - clearly, the Gaunts are examples of this, so there must be others, as well.

And I think there must be other magical schools, too. Perhaps smaller, more local ones, too, because there's mention of inter-school competitions in HBP and Hogwarts having a Gobstones team, but I doubt that's meant to signify constant competition in Gobstones between Hogwarts, Durmstrang and Beauxbatons.

Of course, the idea of smaller wizarding schools then seems to contradict the idea of everyone in the UK and Ireland being invited to Hogwarts, so who knows?

Reply


happysteve June 18 2007, 16:23:31 UTC
"Uh, yeah, well, whenever you notice something like that... a wizard did it." -- Lucy Lawless in a Simpsons episode.

Reply


ellipticcurve June 18 2007, 16:42:16 UTC
JKR says that the magic gene is dominant, but I think it's pretty much got to be recessive or--you're right--we'd be overrun with wizards. As my contribution to the body of fanwankery, here's my theory: don't forget that we're seeing ONLY the magical half-bloods; there might well be three times as many half-bloods who are Muggles and just don't enter into the story. Muggle half-bloods probably wouldn't marry within the magical community, so the recessive gene is maintained in the Muggle population. Every so often, two carriers get together and poof! Muggle-born wizards! (The HP Lexicon notes that early drafts of the Potter oeuvre had a "lost Weasley cousin" who fits this theory very well--she was the daughter of Molly's distant cousin, the one who was an accountant.)

Or, alternatively: Voldy killed a shitload of wizards back in The Day. Maybe there's been an ecological response--more wizards were born right after Voldy's fall from power in order to maintain/rebuild the magical community.

Reply

zaph June 18 2007, 17:28:22 UTC
but I think it's pretty much got to be recessive

it can't be recessive. there would be no Half-bloods at all. I mean, I guess the obvious answer, as happysteve put it, really is "a wizard did it." The normal rules of genetics simply can't apply to the wizarding world.

there might well be three times as many half-bloods who are Muggles and just don't enter into the story.

I dunno. I kind of got the impression they'd be considered Squibs, too. But Rowling hasn't said anything specific about it, other than Ron's comment in Chamber of Secrets that most wizards now are Half-blood or less. I mean, with one magical parent, it would be hard to live a fully Muggle life, so either way, there'd be an awful lot more Muggles who knew about magic.

Of course, the 'Half-blood Squib' idea might be the full story behind Lily and Petunia's parents, who we know were non-magical, but I suspect each had at least one magical parent, or one of them was a Squib and the other a Muggle.

Or, alternatively: Voldy killed a shitload of wizards back in The Day. ( ... )

Reply

ryani June 20 2007, 16:36:18 UTC
> it can't be recessive. there would be no Half-bloods at all.

This isn't the case. Call w the "wizard" gene (recessive) and "M" the "muggle" gene (dominant).

All wizards are ww since wizarding is recessive. This also makes sense paired with the discussion of "purebloods"; no all-wizard couple will have a non-wizard child.

A "boring" muggle is MM. A boring muggle will never have a wizard child.

A "carrier" muggle is Mw.

Half-bloods wizards happen when a wizard has a child with a carrier muggle; half of those children will also be magical.

Also, two carrier muggles mating have a 25% chance of a magical child; if both parents pass on the w gene. This explains rare occurrences of non-magical parents having magical children.

Reply


dr4b June 18 2007, 18:17:23 UTC
Well, there's also the possibility that a whole lot of wizards don't have children, due to either being busy with work, or getting killed, or all other sorts of things.

Reply

horvendile June 18 2007, 18:53:53 UTC
There is that too. Think about it, we have never heard of any of Hogwarts faculty having children.

I'm not waiting for someone to correct me on that.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up