Grab a butterbeer and think about what if… Join Karoline, Sophia, and our guest Matthew as they philosophize about the differences in girl’s and boy’s upbringing in the wizarding world.
In this episode:
- Fanfiction informs culture
- The inevitable demise of Cedric Diggory
- The gender-specific nuances of Dursley-abuse
- Would female Harry have done better at school?
- Harrietta and Ginny <3
- Looks change everything for Snape
- A little bit of Hagrid bashing
- Gender swapping Fleur turns into Lockhart
- Archetypes with fixed genders
- Polyjuice potion transitioning variation
A couple of random follow-up thoughts:
Obligatory “long time listener, first time commenter” preamble! 😀 This was a very interesting conversation, really glad you gave so much room to all these topics you managed to touch on through the original gender swap premise. (And that you rightly chose to not waste any more breath on what she who shall not be named thinks.)
I found the argument interesting that a female Death Eater group wouldn’t have worked because society is too sexist for it. I don’t disagree, but at the same time can’t help but wonder what society we are talking about. Our own, or the in-universe society? The latter does invite the classic “Oh so you can suspend disbelief for MAGIC but not for kick-ass evil women, huh?” reaction to a degree. But I’d say that “this aspect” of the in-universe society is clearly modelled closely enough to our own society that your argument holds true. Nothing in the books indicates that besides having magic, this world also is significantly less sexist. Which is unfortunate, because the female death eater group sounds very intruiguing to me. What would have been needed to make it work? Exploring that question and delivering a good answer would have been quite the feat, but I guess the books were too 90s for that.
PS.: I could not help but think of this song every time you said Harrietta: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gpMlAiqcjU
It’s simultaneously very frustrating that the wizarding world is mired in the same sludge of social failures that exist in the real world, and extremely important that this is the case because of the relatability element. When you change one variable (magic is real vs. magic is not real), you get to experience the escapism/wonder of it all while also learning a lot about your own life and your own world. When you change too many variables, you only get the escapism. The whole “similar but different” phenomenon has a particularly powerful effect on us because we’re so much more easily transported there and we feel every part of it: the good, the bad, the ugly — it’s not only relatable, it’s personal.
Upon rereading my comment, I feel that I should clarify. You can read about a world that is entirely different from your own, and get much more out of it than escapism. But you might have to work much harder at it. The connections to your own life and experiences are a shortcut to the soul — you’re liable to respond to it less analytically and more emotionally. And there’s no doubt that humans learn much more easily when something cuts deep.