Regulus Black Is The Highly Discounted Severus Snape. In Fact Hes Best Compared To A Much Braver Narcissa/Draco

Regulus Black is the highly discounted Severus Snape. In fact he’s best compared to a much braver Narcissa/Draco combo. But, some will say Snape “bullied kids and did a one off brave act, but Regulus was the kid that slipped through the cracks.”

Yeah I’ve read the books too, but people like the “brave Slytherin DE switched sides” only when it fits their cookie cutter view of them.

People who downplay Harry’s abuse are no different than people who justify Snape being harassed by the Marauders bc he invented “Sectumsempra.” No shit he deserved to defend himself just like how Harry should be able to react however he wishes without being undermined.

It is very odd to me when some people downplay what Harry went through with Dudley like Harry hunting pre-Hogwarts because Harry “baits him.” There are explicit parallels in the text between Harry empathizing with Snape after seeing SWM as he “knew how it felt to be humiliated” and the recounting of general humiliation both during SS and during Occlumency lessons.

Here is a friendly reminder that abuse victims don’t need to be “perfect” for their abuse to be valid and they can cope with it in different ways.

So good! I will also add that we truly see the roles between mentor/student change to one of equals especially during the Grimmauld Place scene in DH. Besides the instance you pointed out about Harry reminded Remus he’s a soon to be parent, it’s also the instance where Remus finally lets down his guard about what it means to be a werewolf in society and how he views himself as a dark creature (as seen by his exclamations vs his dry humor in OOTP). In text this behavior from him is only seen when he was in the company of close friends like Sirius and later Tonks (implied).

Nearly Always Right: Remus and Harry

By @thecat-isblogging-blog , me, featuring inputs from @dragonlordette

I have talked about Harry and Remus' relationship before in Resurrection Stone meta, where Harry sees Remus as a mentor. A mentor who consistently equips him with tools - his favourite subject (DADA), his strongest spell (Patronus), a connection to his father and godfather. But there are themes in their conversations in POA that sets off seeds in Harry's arc. This conversation for example:

Harry sat stunned for a moment at the idea of someone having their soul sucked out through their mouth. But then he thought of Black.

"He deserves it," he said suddenly.

"You think so?" said Lupin lightly. "Do you really think anyone deserves that?"

From the beginning of Prisoner of Azkaban, the moral theme is "do bad people deserve bad things done to them". It starts with Uncle Vernon saying Sirius deserves the death penalty:

"When will they learn," said Uncle Vernon, pounding the table with his large purple fist, "that hanging's the only way to deal with these people?"

And, of course, the delightful Aunt Marge about Harry's case in "St. Brutus' Secure Centre for Incurably Criminal Boys":

"Do they use the cane at St Brutus' boy?" she barked across the table.

"Er-"

Uncle Vernon nodded curtly behind Aunt Marge's back.

"Yes," said Harry. Then, feeling he might as well do the thing properly, he added, "All the time."

"Excellent," said Aunt Marge. "I won't have this namby-pamby wishy-washy nonsense about not hitting people who deserve it. A good thrashing is what's needed in 99 cases out of hundred. Have you been beaten often?"

[ Quick note, because I can't resist pointing out more connections the book sets up between Harry and Sirius from the beginning, apart from them being in innocents in these instances:

"No need to tell us he's no good," snorted Uncle Vernon, staring over the top of his newspaper at the prisoner. "Look at the state of him, the filthy layabout! Look at his hair!"

He shot a nasty look sideways at Harry, whose untidy hair has been a source of great annoyance to Uncle Vernon]

Justice and Mercy

Harry completely rejects the Dursleys as caregivers in this book by running away and he gains a mentor figure and a godfather in this book. The mentor, asks him a moral question that sets up an arc: "Do you really believe anyone deserves that?"

The question sets up seeds of mercy that Harry grants not only Peter, but also makes him the deliverer of justice to innocents: Sirius and Buckbeak. He drives the Dementors away from Sirius with a powerful Patronus, a spell Remus taught him and frees Buckbeak, delivering the justice promised at the beginning of the book.

Another notable factor is that Remus didn't answer the question for Harry (although it's clear he has his own feelings about it, especially since he brought up the idea of Sirius getting the Dementors' Kiss unprompted - a first for him in a book). He is opening space for Harry to process what he is thinking and feeling by asking the right questions, and trusting that Harry will make the right decision.

In the Shrieking Shack scene, both Remus and Sirius defer to Harry's judgement on what must be done with Peter. Harry also similarly rejects Remus' stance in Deathly Hallows about using Expelliarmus on Stan Shunpike - "I won't blast people out of the way. That's Voldemort's job."

In the final book of the series, Harry will come to a position where he will grant mercy to many: Draco, Snape, and even Voldemort. Have a look at how he reacts to Voldemort's mutilated soul:

He was afraid of it. Small and fragile and wounded though it was, he did not want to approach it. Nevertheless, he drew slowly nearer, ready to jump back at any moment. Soon he stood near enough to touch it, yet he could not bring himself to do it.

And Harry does not believe that Voldemort deserves it, a mutilated soul, stuck helplessly in a limbo and unable to go on. He offers Voldemort a chance to heal his soul:

"But before you try to kill me, I'd advise you to think about what you've done... think, and try for some remorse, Riddle..."

"What is this?"

Of all the things Harry had said to him, beyond any revelation or taunt, nothing had shocked Voldemort like this. Harry saw his pupils contract to thin slits, saw the skin around his eyes whiten.

"It's your one last chance," said Harry, "it's all you've got left...I've seen what you'll be otherwise...be a man.. try...try for some remorse..."

[Another note: a soul is sacrosanct in the series. That specifically Voldemort's mutilated soul being stuck and unable to move on, and the question of whether Sirius "deserves" to be rendered soulless - it is a strong thread in the series, and as @artemisia-black pointed out to me, in keeping with ideas of annihilationism: "hell is not existing"]

The Idea of Shame

Another theme that comes up prominently in conversation between Remus and Harry are the ideas of shame (and self loathing).

"Why? Why do they affect me like that? Am I just-?"

"It has nothing to do with weakness," said Professor Lupin sharply, as though he had read Harry's mind. "The Dementors affect you worse than the others because there are horrors in your past that the others don't have. (...) The worst that has happened to you Harry is enough to make anyone fall off their broom. You have nothing to feel ashamed of. " - POA

Remus picks up on Harry's feelings of embarrassment and insecurity and just like how Remus plants the seed of justice and mercy in Harry's mind, he also starts it with getting Harry to be kind to himself. Harry feels really vulnerable and insecure about "weakness", and Remus gets him to forgive himself for it before he even fully articulates that he shouldn't feel that way.

The roles reverse in Deathly Hallows, and Remus runs to Harry with his deep rooted shame and self-loathing:

"How can I forgive myself, when I knowingly risked passing on my own condition to an innocent child? And if, by some miracle, it is not like me, then it will be better off, a hundred times so, without a father of whom it must always be ashamed!"

(...)

"If the new regime thinks Muggle-borns are bad," Harry said, "what will they do to a half-werewolf whose father's in the Order? My father died trying to protect my mother and me, and you reckon he'd tell you to abandon your kid to go an adventure with us?"

Harry, of course, can't solve Remus' problems or his own internalised shame and self-loathing due to the stigma he faces as a werewolf in the wizarding society. But Harry can remind him what's important - the feelings of the child that will be left behind ("Parents shouldn't leave their kids unless they've got to").

And Remus gets the message, and is grateful for it - and he names Harry godfather to Teddy in honour of it.

Like many mentor figures and fathers Harry surpasses in the series as part of his arc (James, Sirius, Dumbledore), Harry surpasses Remus as well and Remus chooses to display trust in Harry's moral compass and instincts:

"I'd tell him to follow his instincts, which are good and nearly always right," - Remus Lupin, Deathly Hallows

It’s a bit scary to me how much people deferred to Dumbledore during the war effort. It makes it satisfying when characters like Snape and Harry (in DH) question and challenge him.

This is coming from someone who actually likes Dumbledore-it’s both astounding and amazing how he has people wrapped around his finger.

Rereading the series as an adult HP has a lot of missing links within the depiction of class struggles. The author managed to achieve a superficial portrayal of socioeconomic tension-particularly with the Malfoy’s being able to bribe the ministry, the classism seeped in rich pure bloods James and Sirius as they humiliated poor, working class Snape, and the introduction of the Slug Club where Slughorn loved to bask in the company of the “famous, the successful, or the powerful” (HBP 98). However, the concept of privilege-especially as it relates to society is more nuanced in that it also deals with inherent biases or opportunities one might be afforded based on their race, sexual orientation, physical ability, etc. Part of creating a more equitable society is acknowledging blind spots and understanding the plight of marginalized communities in understanding how a proportionate share of them don’t have a seat in the top decision making bodies controlled by white, wealthy wizards (in this case) with the token minority. This ask does a fantastic job on breaking down the static hierarchy present within magical creatures in Harry Potter. It irked me that at the end of Deathly Hallows Harry wonders whether Kreacher would deliver him a sandwich (almost written as a throwaway musing) without any regard to Kreacher’s autonomy as a house-elf and the fact that he too participated in battle-further reinforcing the distinction between master and slave. The lesson the series presents with house elves in particular with the master only needing to treat them kindly is not only problematic, but also contradicts the author’s statements delivered via expositional characters such as Dumbledore and Hermione that they deserve their feelings should be treated akin to a human’s and their thoughts and wishes should be considered when making rules.

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 thinking in the British empire was heavily influenced by pseudo-scientific theories like phrenology and race classification theory. Humanist sciences like sociology were heavily influenced by “hard sciences” and there was a strong demand to find a scientific justification for the existence of the empire. This justification came with race classification, that was divided into two different 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 believed the science of the time and condemned the mistreatment of the empire’s subjects believing 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 take the time to portray either the giants or the centaurs in particularly sympathetic light from the point of view of our characters and this point of view is never questioned. 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 stupid and hostile, 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- as long as it is not humans who have to make any concessions in their relationship. Same goes for merfolk. Dumbledore advocates for their right to exists in their own segregated patches of land, and in return they will help Dumbledore. Merfolk will allow themselves and their home to be used as obstacles in the tri-wizarding tournament and the centaurs will let wizards traipse through their forest. 

Inside the centaur society, we are supposed to see territorial Bane as the “bad guy” and the meek Firenze, who argues that centaurs should take sides in a human war and make defer even more to the wizards. Firenze eventually accumulates into the human society by becoming a teacher in Hogwarts, but only after he has been banished from the Centaur society. Therefore Firenze becomes completely subserviant to Dumbledore, as his own people do not accept him anymore and Hogwarts is the only place he can go. He does not have the backing of his own community that could allow him to make demands towards his human peers, which makes him a good ally for Dumbledore. Firenze placed the needs of humanity above the needs of his own species and that makes him the ‘reasonable’ centaur.   

The same happens with goblins. Their prioritization of their own people is at every turn equated with them being 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, instead of the bare minimum. Never-mind the fact that the books explicitly mention that goblins are denied the use of a wand by the dominant human government, and actively have to fight for the rights they have even now, 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, a phase for  Hermione to grow out of. 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 managed to create a society, it should not be possible for them to be unable to “understand complicated matters” or “kill anyone who uses too big words” (Order of the phoenix, 429).    

 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 wizards were actively doing anything to keep the centaurs in their reservation. Even though, overtly and less-overtly violent actions and policies are in reality always working to keep indigenous populations at 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 either be integrated into the wizarding world, or gaining more land from the wizards. And assuming that the centaur population is too small and weak to do anything but accept their reservation, the heroes do not see anything wrong with this arrangement either. 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 started 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), 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 have decided to omit all nonsense that Rowling has added to Pottermore in her effort to world-build but rest assured that it makes the situation simply much 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, giving him a claim to the pureblood wizarding establishment. Both the wealth and the bloodline inherited from the Potter family guarantees a place in the upper class of the magical society for young Harry. Even the extremely racist Draco Malfoy in the first book seems eager 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 into 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 heir to an prestigious family 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 will”. He even learns the patronus, a spell that for adult characters is explained as a very rare and impressive talent, in a matter of days. What he is good at, he doesn’t need to work for, and what he is not good at, he doesn’t need to improve 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 Englishmen tried to mould themselves into during the imperial days. Harry doesn’t need to be the “smartest wizard of his age”, he needs to be charismatic enough that others 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 correctly and how to manage those in the lower position than him, in order to return the status quo of the wizarding world to what it was before Voldemort. 

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 the inferior 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 (or values) 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

snape as voldemort questioned him about why the elder wand didn't work for him