Professor Julian Wambal (0:00)

Welcome to Critical Magic Theory, where we deconstruct the wizarding world of Harry Potter. Because loving something doesn't mean you can't be critical of it. I'm Professor Julian Wambal, and before we get into today's episode, we have to address the J.K. rowling of it all. I know that during the break we had people who may have joined us for the first time and are now caught up and ready to go. And I just want to re emphasize and reiterate that the fact that I do not in any way espouse, support or uphold any of the hateful, transphobic, misogynistic, patriarchal views of J.K. rowling. And it feels very important for me to say that because I don't want anything that we talk about on this podcast to be misconstrued in any way as support of the things that she says and the people that she hurts. It makes it difficult when the author of the text that is the subject of this podcast and the kind of conversations and the fun that we have in this community is someone who spews outlandishly hateful rhetoric. I think that there are lots of ways that people can go about navigating this reality. Some people believe in death of the author and just uphold the work as if she doesn't exist. Other people leave the community altogether and leave the fandom altogether to protect their peace and to feel safe. I think that the only wrong way that one can do this is to ignore what is being said and done by J.K. rowling. My personal perspective, as I said before in the first episode of this podcast, is that it feels imperative to me to speak truth to power and to speak truth to a reality that what she does is dangerous and what she does is hurtful. And I think that by thinking critically about these books and really diving in and not operating from a space that suggests that somehow she is infallible or that somehow these books are devoid of all of the problems and the hate that she has put out into the world since the conclusion of the canonical text is not in these books, because it is. It is not difficult to find. I think we see it in the relationships. I think that. That as we grow older, which is the journey that many of us are on with these books, it's easier to see that so much of her belief structure lives in this text. And by unearthing it, by excavating it, by calling it what it is and really dissecting it, I think it helps us to be better. It helps us to become Better people. For those of us who are cisgender or who subscribe to a very specific gendered norm, it helps us to become better allies. It helps us simply to grow beyond the space where some of the aspects of these books leave us. It helps us grow so that we aren't re emphasizing and implicitly or even explicitly supporting some of the claims made by J.K. rowling. One of the things that is true in these books is that so much of the reason why Voldemort rises the way that he does is because the wizarding population is made ignorant. They take everything at face value and they don't dissect a lot of the kind of implicit pure blood supremacist ideology that permeates so much of the culture. So that when Voldemort reappears and everyone is kind of afraid, but also not necessarily recognizing the kind of symptoms of the structure that allow for him to infiltrate the ministry in the way that he does and then take over. And so by dissecting these books and really kind of taking the scales of our childhood off of our eyes and seeing these books and these characters and these stories for what they are, we are preventing in some ways the rise of more misogynistic, more transphobic, more homophobic, more kind of cisgender, heterosexual centered ideologies from flourishing. And that's a tall order. And obviously this podcast can't do all of that. But I want this space to be a space where we can explore those things explicitly and call out the issues that are in these books. And I know that these are children's books. And so there's only but so much we're going to be able to do. But the reality of the situation is Harry Potter is the perfect vessel for this kind of action, exploration both of self, but also of just society. Because J.K. rowling wrote what she knew. She knows oppressive structures, she knows hierarchy, she knows patriarchy, she knows all of those things, and she didn't do anything to try to change it. And so, as we are on an exploration as a society in terms of figuring out how to be more inclusive, let's look at what exclusion looks like when it's not done on purpose. And these books allow us to do that in such a grand fashion. And so the journey that we are on is one that invites us to be critical, because loving something does not mean we can't be critical of it. And loving something doesn't mean that we turn a blind eye to the issues and the problems that exist. And so in that spirit, let's talk about James Potter, y'all. I missed you, and I hope you missed the podcast. If you didn't miss me, that's okay. I am so glad I took a break, though, y'all. It's a lot to do a podcast. Who knew? You know, it's. What a time. But I have so much fun with you all, and I just needed a moment. But that moment is over. We are back, and we are really about to get into it because James Potter is such a fascinating character, because we all have so many ideas about him, but we don't get to spend a lot of time with him. And so we spend a lot of time as a fandom, really kind of curating a story about who James is. And I think that there's a lot of space for us to dive in, because, like Sirius James is someone who is lauded as this very heroic, very altruistic, very, you know, compassionate person who also, in his youth, was very, very, very problematic and was a bully and a jerk. And so we have this interesting dichotomy introduced with James in the same way that we had with Sirius, except with Sirius, we had a lot more background to truly understand maybe what motivated the choices that he was making and why he was the way that he was. And in this way, it's fascinating because to me, you know, a lot of people make strong comparisons between Draco and Ron Weasley. And I think that there's a lot of parallels in that between Sirius and James. Right. And James introduces us to a really interesting perspective in the fact that James is, you know, a good guy who grew up in a good family that loved him, and yet. And still he is kind of a jerk. And so how do we reconcile those things? Right? And how do we think about what that means for Harry and how Harry comes to understand who his father is? And I'm so excited not only to be back, but to be diving into a character that is very, very integral to the way that our main protagonist understands himself and how he ultimately conducts himself. We see throughout these books that the more Harry learns about his dad, the more he's kind of struck by both the good and the bad. Have you ever wondered whether James is a good role model for Harry? How James and Lily even ended up together? Or how we reconcile the sacrifice that James ultimately makes as a young adult with his penchant for bullying when he was a child? Y'all, we are going to get into all of it, because that's what we do here at Critical Magic Theory. But first, you know what else we do, y'all? You know what else we do? Uh huh. You know, and I hope you're stretching. I'm trying to, like, you know, vamp a little bit so that you can really get yourself stretched and ready to go. Because the bop, the bop is happening. And you've had time, your muscles have had a month to relax and kind of get themselves together in preparation for this moment where we bop along to the theme song. So get room, make space for yourselves, okay? Take up space. That's what my therapist always tells me. Take up space, okay? And bop. Get ready to bop. If you're in the car, don't take up space. Stay in your lane. 10 and 2, 5 and 7. But the shoulders can do a thing. All right, let's go. We need to talk about Harry Potter. As always, I hope you danced. I think I might have, like, pulled something anyways. Sometimes you bop too close to the sun and it just doesn't go well. And this is one of those situations, apparently, but it won't stop me. We have an episode to do, y'all. I just want to say thank you to those of you who have been joining in on our post episode conversations on Patreon. So many of us are joining up. The numbers are growing, which we love to see, see. And if you haven't joined yet, just know that you can join for free and join in the conversation that we have on Patreon about the episode. I've been posting, you know, all kinds of rants and raves. It really is a blast. Again, even if you're just an onlooker, even if you just want to see the drama, trauma and absurdity that is the comment section. It is a lot of fun to both be a part of, but also to witness. And so if that's something that you might be interested in, please feel free to join. There's a link in my bio on social media, there is always a link after the episode comes out in the episode summary, so please feel free. There are also a ton of different perks that you can be a part of, whether it be exclusive questions for people on Patreon, both for free and other questions for those of us who have paid subscriptions. If you're a chronic overthinker, we get together once a month and chat. We just had our second meeting on Saturday where we discussed all things Slytherin House and it was so good. They even convinced me to like, as we are going in our exploration on purebloods, to like, include the founders, which I had not even thought to do. And so those conversations are gonna really inform kind of what we talk about in the episodes themselves. We had a great time. Although I will say, and I' not going to call out anyone because you know who you are, but somehow our conversation about Slytherin ended up being about Gryffindor. And I know that they are basically like the same word in different fonts, but all I'm going to say is that Gryffindors are like Leos, and so it's all about them. Anyways, no time for Leo slander. That's not right. Strike that from the record. You never heard it. One of the other things that we talked about before our brief hiatus was merch and the people have spoken. Okay. And we were on the Patreon talking about what kind of merch people might want. And so the ideas are percolating. Okay? But what we need now is artists, graphic designers, someone already put themselves forth in an act of self promotion, which we love here at Critical Magic Theory. And so if you or someone you know is a graphic designer or an artist, I think it would be great to kind of get a sense of what's out there for us and then we as a community can decide what we want it to look like. And that feels right to me because while this is a podcast that I run and produce, it is our podcast. And these are things that we do together as a community. And so if we're gonna be walking around repping it, then we have to make sure that it's something that the majority of us agree on. And that is important to me both as like a person, but also as a political scientist who studies democracy. It needs to feel democratic. And so while there are moments where I do act as a relatively benevolent dictator in the decision making process, this is not one of those moments. And so if you are someone who is a graphic designer or an artist and would be interested in potentially putting forth ideas for merch, please feel free to email me@criticalmagictheorygmail.com include your website if you have one or samples of your art and your work. Because I love the idea of having merch that is for us and other people later on down the line, but by us as well. Right. Any millennials out there will remember fubu, which was a clothing brand for those of you who are not millennials, that was very popular back in the late 90s, mid to late 90s, early aughts FUBU for us, by us. And so that's. We're going with a FUBU vibe. Okay, I have to be stopped. I'm a menace to society. Let's get into James Potter. Some of you are like, yes, please, let's get into James Potter. You're just talking nonsense. And that's okay. At this point, we're 16 episodes in. You know how I do. For the first time, this isn't really a moment that I think is a favorite one for me. I don't know that I have a favorite moment for James, but to me, this is a moment that really does embody a lot of who James is as a person. And it's a moment that many of you brought up in your comments and in your post on the survey. And it's the moment where James has decided that he is gonna take on Voldemort without a wand and he sends Harry and Lily running for safety. The Slytherin in me cringes at this because I simply cannot believe that there would be a moment where you as an individual would feel so safe knowing that the darkest wizard of the age is after you and your family that you would like not have your wand on you at all times. But I think that that's part of what makes James James. He had so much faith in his friends and so much faith in the Secret Keeper in the form of Peter Pettigrew that he felt comfortable doing that. And I think that there's something outrageously beautiful, albeit cringe worthy for me that he had that amount of trust in his friends. And to me it also indicates that you have that kind of faith in people when you believe that people can have that kind of faith in you. And one of the things that came up a lot in your comments on the survey was about kind of how James was as a person, how he was as a friend, and how loyal he was to the people that he loved. And this moment to me embodies so much of not only the bravery, which I think is pretty self evident, but it also highlights the fact that he is someone who just truly believed in the goodness of the people who he had in his inner circle. And it makes it all the more heartbreaking that that faith and that belief led him to have in some ways a false sense of security that ultimately cost him. And it is also outrageously beautiful when we think about Gryffindors and we'll talk about, you know, whether we believe James is a good Gryffindor, but when we think about them and we think about the kind of hot headed, just go for it, think about the consequences later vibe. This embodies that. It embodies also, though, such a beautiful amount of faith in the people that you've entrusted with your life. And I think that there are lots of things that this moment characterizes when it comes to James. And so while it may not be a favorite moment of mine, it is a moment where I feel we really understand who he becomes as a person. We get to see him as a child, and we get to see him even as a teenager, but then we see who he becomes. And that, in this kind of glimmer of a moment, is something that I think really, really, really resonates with me. What words best describe James Potter? You know, it's so fascinating because so many of these words are also words that we had for serious as well. The first word is loyal, followed by arrogant and cocky. I think in a lot of context, we would assume that somehow someone who is arrogant and cocky couldn't be loyal because arrogance and cockiness kind of bring to bear this idea of selfishness. And I think James really challenges that idea in a really interesting way because James is outrageously loyal to his friends. And part of his arrogance and his cockiness is this sense of kind of untouchability that we're going to talk about. That's, I think, probably going to become a theme for us throughout this episode. And I think that, you know, there are lots of things to think about as to how it is that he got to be so loyal while also being so sure of himself. And people, in their comments about James, had a lot to say about this. But I think it's also an interesting facet of kind of just the marauders in general, particularly James and Sirius, that there is this arrogance, this kind of infallibility, this untouchability that they all seem to have, whether it be coming directly from them or just kind of by association that they have in terms of the things that they're able to kind of get away with, the feats that they are able to do, and how it is that they understand who they are. It's really fascinating to also take kind of James and Sirius and juxtapose them to Fred and George, because, you know, Hagrid talks about how Fred and George would have given Sirius and James a run for their money, or maybe it's vice versa. But either way, there is this parallel that's drawn between the kind of four of them. And we don't describe Fred and George as arrogant, though I think if we tried our best and really not have to try that hard, we could also see it for them. And so I wonder what the distinction is here. Like what is the thing that makes Sirius and James, you know, for both of them, arrogance and cockiness and loyalty were the words kind of used to describe them. Although for Sirius there was a recklessness. And some could also kind of place it onto James as well. But Fred and George don't have any of that and yet they kind of exhibit similar things. And so as we move through the rest of the episode, I want us to kind of keep these words with us and I also want us to think about not what the similarities between James and Sirius are, but what are the differences. Because I think one of the things that came up for me a lot as I read through your comments was that even though James and Sirius have a lot of things in common, there are really meaningful differences. And those differences, I think are the reasons why we're more willing to kind of extend grace to Sirius than we are to James. In a lot of ways, many of us brought up the fact that he was a bully and what that meant, but again, it was a very similar conversation about Sirius. And yet I think because Sirius grew up the way that he did, a lot of the things are explained away through his socialization in a way that we are not willing to do for James. But we'll get to that because I think that that's what my reflection is going to be on. So stay tuned. It is time for the arithmancy lesson. For this episode's arithmancy lesson, we had 267 responses. The first question is, is James Potter a good person? About 62% of us said yes, 11% said no, and 27% said don't know. Someone wrote, ultimately, James turned out to be a good person, but the years leading up to that mostly showed him to be as big headed as Lily said he was. Whatever your views on Snape, bullying him like that was the work of an immature idiot I know. Bringing the chaos. Thank goodness this is anonymous. However, once we get to the event Harry survived, he's clearly changed for the better. Whether that was enough to redeem him completely, I can't say, as we don't get enough to go on. Though I guess that if Lily could marry him, he must have been half decent by that point. At the very least, someone else wrote, I'm not sure if James is a good person, considering how he abused Snape and supposedly several other people. He seemed like a spoiled rich kid who was good at sports and popular most of his life. But I also think we see he was brave and loved his wife and child so much that he died trying to protect them. And that says a lot about a person. He had to have at least a minor redemption arc off screen if Lily ended up falling for him and someone else wrote. I think people put James Potter on a pedestal because he has this tendency to put everyone before him and to tame down his own feelings in order to prioritize others, which makes him look like the most altruistic person who is also fundamentally good. So good he's almost perfect. People forget he's human and can be good while also screwing up. I'm censoring this. He makes mistakes. His biggest quality is also his biggest flaw. He loves too much and he's impulsive. Therefore, any depiction of him being on the morally gray part of the spectrum, rather than the perfect hero who never screws up, tends to irritate people, which I think is harmful. What's interesting about this is the way that we arrive at whether or not James is a good person for two of those comments. It really had not a lot to do with what he did. And that's due in part to the fact that obviously we don't get to see him do a lot because he is someone who we don't really get to experience a lot of in these books. But we look to Lily, who we get even less of than James, to say, well, if she married him, he must have done something. And that is fascinating to me, and I don't quite know what to make of that. So in our post episode conversation, let's talk about this. Like, why is Lily the barometer here? Is it because we trust Lily's judgment? Which to me, I'm like, well, she was best friends with Snape, so I have questions. And Snape was himself not the best. And so there are questions about, you know, even her own judgment. And yet somehow her desire and willingness to marry him is something that we allow to be our guiding light to determine whether or not he's a good person. Personally, I think James is as good of a person as one can be with the upbringing that he had. I think that absent him marrying Lily and thus kind of having had a massive kind of character overhaul, using what we have about James alone, I think that there are strong indications that he can be a good person to the people who he likes. And this was a conversation that we had about Fred and George as well. Right. That their treatment of certain people kind of dictate the way that we understand them. And I know you know, this is one of the evergreen commentaries on the way the questions are worded, right, that no one is all or nothing. And I think that James embodies for me at least, you know, as good as one can be. When you are brought up in a space where you are always told that you are the best and that there is very little accountability for your actions, especially when you are exceptional, both in terms of your lifestyle but also in terms of your magical acumen, that there are a lot of things about James to me that even came up in a lot of your comments, right? He's rich, he is good looking, he was good at sports, he was always popular, right? And so when you have all of those things which we know socially opens up doors for you, the extent to which you believe that you have to be kind of altruistic and good, right, to be seen a certain way feels less important because it's like, well, why do I need to do that when I already have all of these other things that kind of pave a very clear path and trajectory forward for me as to how my life is going to go. Does being good really matter? And which isn't to say that I don't think he cared about being good, but I also think that there is a conflation that exists where being brave is seen as being good. And I think that, you know, a lot of Gryffindors do, not you Gryffindors, but like in the books. I don't. I've already done enough Leo Gryffindor slander for the day. I think that there is something about a conflation of like, bravery equals goodness. And even in these books over and over and over again, like the idea of being brave always has a good outcome. And so that when you couple that with all of the things that James privilege allow him, you can imagine a world where he's like, no, but I am good. Like I'm brave. Like I am standing up to people who are problems. I am picking on people maybe, but I have a justification for it, right? Like this kind of righteous indignation, this self righteous belief about the choices that you make. And when there are few people in your orbit to be able to actually hold you accountable in a meaningful way, you have no need to be good in whatever way you define that. And I think that for me, I think that James is as good as he believes he needs to be because I think in his mind, like this is part of the arrogance and the cockiness that came up when we described James, he's like, yeah, I'm great, I'm the best. Which is a derivative of good. It's the best good that you can get. And that's me. And I find that to be fascinating because I do think that there are questions that I have, both canonically and also within Fanon, about how we get him to change. Like, how does he turn out to be this kind of person that someone wants to be with, whether it be Lily or anyone else? Riddle me this. What would you need to see from James in order to believe that he wasn't the person that you saw him be at Hogwarts? Many of us wrote in the comments, I would hate him if he was at Hogwarts. So, okay, mind experiment. What would you need to see? Like, what is it that resonates with you that would say, oh, wow, he's a completely different person. Right. We don't get any of that in the canonical text. We have no idea. So let's kind of think this through, right? Like, what does it look like for us to see someone who acts and behaves the way that James does, and then we get to see him kind of in the end? What does that look like for you? Like, how do you think we arrive at that place? Make sure you put it in the comments, please. I'm intrigued. I'm going a bit out of order, but this feels like a really good place for us to talk about whether or not we believe James is a good Gryffindor. We know so much of his identity is tied up into Gryffindor. So someone brought up the fact that when he's on the train, when he's 11 years old with Sirius, he's like going on and on and on about Gryffindor. So this is a big part of who he is that we get to understand. And so when I asked this question, which was a patreon exclusive question, 91% said yes, 5% said no, and 4% said don't know. Sarah H. Wrote, the answer is clearly yes. I'm gonna get into a whole tangent on this, but stay with me. So naturally, one of the things we know, clear cut about him really from Canon, is that he faced off Voldemort with no wand to give Lily time to run. He probably knew that it was futile anyway, but he faces death at 21 with a straight spine. Hello, OG Harry. Like, if that's not Gryffindor, then what is? And the telling Lily to run and not running with her very Gryffindor Tory wrote, there is canonical evidence that James was not always a good person, but I don't think there is any evidence that he wasn't a good Gryffindor. Some people might bring up the fact that Snape claims that James would never go after him unless it was four against one. They might describe that as un Gryffindor like and cowardly. But even though we have evidence that James and Sirius went after Snape, we don't have any evidence that it was necessarily that big of numbers, of a numbers difference. Remus certainly did not participate and Peter was more of a sadistic spectator and hype man. It seems much more likely that it was usually two against one. Also, there may have been instances where Snape retaliated with his own Slytherin friends. We don't know. So this is interesting, right, because it introduces an idea of what bravery looks like. And in our conversation with the Chronic Overthinkers on Patreon, we talked a lot about, you know, the idea of bravery in direct contrast to kind of Slytherin's sense of ambition and the way that Gryffindors are much more likely to kind of go full tilt. You know, I said something along the lines of, you know, Slytherins are brave to an extent. And Erryk said something along the lines of, like, there is no stopping Gryffindors. Like, they will just go. And I think that there's something really interesting about that, particularly in light of what Torey says, because it highlights the reality that, like, James is never alone. I mean, he is when he faces Voldemort, but in these moments, he's, like, not necessarily being brave in his bullying of Snape, right? He is, not only because he is doing it with someone else, but also because he's not doing. He's doing it without any provocation. There's nothing particularly dangerous about this, right? And so I think when we arrive at what bravery means, it's a very fascinating thing to consider because as the kind of centered trait within Gryffindors, we don't really get a lot of particularly strong moments of James being brave outside of what we see happen in Voldemort's memory in Deathly Hallows. And so I just wonder, you know, where do we arrive at this bravery for James? And Eric actually wrote, I thought about this for a while and I came down on, yes, the kid, he was basically still a kid when he died, tried to take Voldemort without a wand. If that isn't brave, I don't Know what is. Again, we're back at this particular pivotal moment, which I think invites us to really think about just the houses in general and when one is meant to embody. Right. We've talked a lot about, you know, do you walk in with this thing? Is the sorting hat kind of noticing it maybe down the line? Like we don't understand how sorting occurs or where one's bravery is meant to kind of manifest and how we then are able to define it. One more comment from Amy, who writes, from the moment James is on the Hogwarts Express in Snape's memory in Deathly Hallows, he outright says he is determined to be a Gryffindor. He took on Voldemort without a wand to give his family more time. That's incredibly brave. Let's also acknowledge that Gryffindors can have a tendency to be arrogant and overconfident. If those words don't describe James, I'll eat a vomit flavored Bertie Botts. Every flavor bean. Amy, we're not inviting you to do that. We don't. Don't do, don't, don't. Amy, Amy, put, put the bean down. Okay. Do not do that. But I think this is a really good point. And again, one thing that all of these comments have in common is this reliance on this moment of self sacrifice that James participates in. Participates in probably isn't the right word, but you get what I'm saying. And this is kind of painting the picture of him. But what about the Hogwarts years? You know, I think that Torrey's invocation of the kind of bullying of Snape and the idea this kind of undermines some of this. And I think there are ways that we have to kind of figure out how we reconcile the notion of bravery with bullying. And how do we do that? And again, I think there's also an invitation for us to think about, okay, you know, at what point does one have to show bravery to live up to the kind of name of Gryffindor? Right. We know for King Neville, may he reign forever. It took a while, but he was always brave. It's just the manifestation of. It felt like it was. Didn't quite click for some of us, but James didn't even have that. They just had arrogance, which some, some might say is also a, a trait of the Gryffindors. Not slander, just pointing out what other people have said. I'm gonna get in so much trouble. I'm thriving in the chaos. But when does bravery come in? When does that become a factor and when do we. And how are we defining it? Many of us are invoking this notion of self sacrifice as the idea of, like, that is what bravery is. But, like, that feels like a tall order. I mean, Harry does it all the time, but Harry doesn't really have a choice in the matter. Right? Like, he has to. And so what do we. How do we understand the notion of bravery in the context of how one fits in as being a good Gryffindor? Well, we can start really diving into the kind of what makes a Gryffindor tick conversation as we begin to move towards a conversation about the Founders. Because this matters. And we talked a lot about it in the episode with Sirius, with Eric, who is a Gryffindor, proud and strong. And I think that there are lots of things about this particular house that matter because I said this in the Patreon Chronic Overthinkers discussion that I think that one thing that is true for both Gryffindors and for Slytherins is that there is a kind of toxicity that comes out. And we see a lot of the men really embody this kind of toxicity. And I think the notion of bravery, which is in and of itself kind of like, grr. Like, that's the sound I make when I do or think about manly things. That there's a notion of bravery that requires, like, sacrifice and all these other things. And I'm just interested in. In how we arrive at that and then how we apply it to the characters. So much of Harry's journey with his dad is through the lens of him wanting to kind of be like him. He stands up to Snape all the time who constantly reminds him what an absolute jerk James is. And he fights back and he's like, how dare you? We see in Prisoner of Azkaban all of these moments where he really, as he learns about his dad, is trying to kind of embody him. He hopes that it's his dad who's across the lake casting that Patronus had ultimately saved his life. And so as we were thinking about kind of all of those things and I was thinking about questions for the survey I couldn't ask the general question that we always ask, like, is James Potter a good father? Because, I mean, in theory, we only have one moment. We get to see him be one. But I thought, what about, you know, is he a good role model? Because I think for a lot of people, for Harry at least, you know, he tries to emulate the James who he believes is like his dad, right? And when the truth comes up, that's where he kind of goes into a place of. Of having a bit of a crisis. Right. And we see that in order of the Phoenix. And so, in asking the question, is James Potter a good role model? About 55% of us said no, about 23% of us said yes, and about 22% of us said, don't know. Someone wrote, I chose yes for James Potter being a good role model because although we learned that he was not a good person at times while younger, I think it's important to remember that he was just that young. He seems to grow up and improve his behavior towards others and play an active role in fighting against Voldemort. Someone else wrote, is he a good role model? Shockingly, I'm going to say yes, he is the bully turned hero trope. I just wish his arc had more time. And someone else wrote, as for being a good role model, I cannot call someone who was a bully a role model. I believe that James and Sirius instigated the animosity between the Marauders and Snape and took every opportunity to bully him. I think the way they treated him, ganging up on him and humiliating him in front of his peers, was unconscionable. Snape fought back, but they were the instigators. We're back here. We're back here at a place of really having to understand what a good role model looks like. You know, someone who Harry wants to emulate. And we saw in one comment this kind of focus on the arc, the space of where he began and where he ended up, and that that in and of itself is a space worthy of emulation. And I agree with that. I agree that there are things about the way that James moves and becomes the James that we see in Voldemort's memory that is worthy of being seen as something you want to kind of emulate. But I also see where everyone else is coming from, due in large part to the fact that, like, Harry doesn't need that. Like, Harry, whether because of his own choosing or because of the path put before him because of his destiny, really isn't a bully. Like, he's not someone who has to kind of overcome the worst angels that he has to kind of become a better person. And I think what we see with James in a lot of ways is Harry's desire to be like the dad he wanted James to be. And I think that that's something that resonates with so many of us. You know, none of our parents are Perfect. None of them embody all of the things that we absolutely want to be as we get older. Speaking from personal experience, I think I learn a lot about my parents the older that I become. And I imagine that for those of you who become parents, it also. It feels very true that you realize that there are some things that your parents did that you don't want to emulate, right? And so that there is, along with this idea of, you know, growing up, the notion that there are things that your parents do that you don't want to emulate. But I do think that there is a beauty in recognizing the shift and the change from point A to point B for James, and that that makes him a good role model because it shows that you are not someone who is stuck. And that allows us to acknowledge the ills of his youth. And also that that doesn't have to define who you are when you become older. And I think in a lot of comments we've talked about, you know, especially when we talk about Draco, when we talk about Sirius Black, you know, many of us made a point to say, like, I don't ever want to be held accountable for the things that I did when I was a child. And I think that that is true and fair and definitely resonates with me. And so I think that in a lot of ways, there are things about James character, even from the little bit that we get, that are worthy of him being seen as a role model for Harry, because his arc tells us, you can start one way, but you don't have to stay that way, you know, and we can understand and see the way that he changes and moves. And so even in a very kind of truncated sense, that we get to understand him as a person and as a character, there is such development. And I think that there's something to be said about the importance of Harry seeing that through all of these memories, even if he can't talk to his dad himself, because it shows that who you are made to be or socialize to be or decide to be when you are younger does not define the way that you have to be in the future. And that, I think, is something that a good role model offers, even if only by lived experience and not through explicit statement. Is James Potter a good pure blood? Oh, the chaos that it brings. This is. You know, this is one of my favorite questions. So we have about 42% of us who said yes, 28% of us who said no, and 30% who said. Who said don't know. Someone wrote, using the E Framework trademark James is not a good pureblood. He does not seem to have an appetite for maintaining the pureblood supremacist order. Someone else wrote. Is James Potter a good pureblood? I don't know. I think this is an area where we see the most growth from him. When he's younger, his best friend is from one of the most important pureblood families. He ridicules smaller, weaker half bloods, in this case Snape. So that would make him a quote, unquote good pureblood. However, he does have friends who would be cast out in pure blood society and eventually marries a Muggle born. He's assuredly working with unconscious bias, even if those biases are loosely held and eventually abandoned. This is interesting because I love this idea of kind of unconscious or implicit bias, but I also think we could extend that a little bit further, right, that it is also kind of through that unconscious and implicit bias that he is upholding the pure blood supremacist order. I think what James introduces to us through this question and just in our own thinking, is the idea that you don't have to be actively doing anything to uphold a system of oppression. You don't have to be upholding it in explicit terms in the same way that we might see a Lucius Malfoy or a Bellatrix, right, by not necessarily doing anything and just allowing your privilege to dictate your behavior and not necessarily standing up against the thing you are contributing to it. And even when he begins the journey of going up against Voldemort, as we've said multiple times over the course of many episodes, Voldemort is not pure blood supremacy made manifest. He is a byproduct of the system itself. And so while even standing up to Voldemort suggests some belief, I don't know that we can, based on what we have in the text, extend it all the way out to believe that, you know, he doesn't necessarily like some of the benefits that he has. I mean, here's the thing about privilege, y'all, it's great. It's a wonderful thing. We can talk about the ills of privilege till we're blue in the face. And there are many ills, but most of those ills have nothing to do with the people who have the privilege. Most of it are the people who either want the privilege or don't have the privilege and are having to navigate the space without it. And so in a lot of ways, we can understand why James might be anti Voldemort, but not necessarily anti all that his pure bloodedness offers him. And so it's important for us to consider and think about that particular reality, not only just for James, but for all of the purebloods that we meet. He gender and identity the way that she believes is true. Then like, you know, why do I need to say anything? And by doing that, not only are you upholding her, but you are also propping up the system. And I think that there is a way in which James can be that. Right. That he can be someone who, yeah, goes up against Voldemort but still has such strong benefits. And you know how I feel about, you know, associating one's marriage with, you know, someone who's part of the out group. Right. In this case, you know, Lily being Muggle born as an instance or an indication of that, you aren't necessarily upholding the system. And that's due in large part particularly for James, because I'm like, yeah, James is operating in a different level of pure blood supremacy. Right. It's a much more passive understanding of the idea. And so, yeah, he may not hold the same level of bias at other people, but when you are not willing to necessarily forego your privileges for the sake of equality, we have to start asking ourselves some questions. Is James Potter a hero? About 62% of us said yes, 23.2% of us said no, and 15% of us said, don't know. Someone wrote, I don't know if you can call James a hero. While he fought for the quote, unquote good side in the war, he didn't do anything particularly heroic. He died, but didn't do much else to further the greater good, aside from helping to create the Chosen One. Someone else wrote, james is a hero and a martyr. He resisted Voldemort and gave his life for the cause. Seems pretty heroic to me. What was that? Seems pretty heroic to me. I'm not editing that. Someone else wrote. My most surprising response in this set of questions was to the is James a hero? Question, to which I had to say, don't know. Poor dude was going to die once Voldemort made his decision. And the Potters very much took precautions so they wouldn't end up dead. RIP I think his life was likely intense, full of love, and I'm sure he made every effort to fight for good and stand up for what is right. But I don't think that qualifies him as a hero. Ooh. Not contention, not disagreement. You know, we welcome that. Here at Critical Magic Theory, I find myself also kind of Torn about this question. And I know. I know that some of y'all are really about to make patreons so that you can come drag me. And that's okay. I welcome it. You know, I don't run away from disagreement. I know that James gave up his life. The reality of the situation is, though, y'all, like, they kind of didn't have a choice, right? Like, which doesn't take away from the sacrifice. But, like, if we're thinking about bravery in the same way, right? Like, so many of us evoked the notion of, like, self sacrifice, and, you know, he didn't have a wand, and that's brave, and that is true. Right. But what that evokes is the notion of, like, you know, even without a weapon, you're gonna do this thing because you have to. But even I guess he didn't. He didn't have to. I don't know what the recourse would have been for him if he hadn't. But the reality is, is that he didn't have a choice in the matter, right? Like, it was. He was gonna die. And this feels callous even just saying it. And I know. I know I'm gonna get in so much trouble. And, like, that's okay. That's okay. That's okay. I haven't gotten in trouble in a long time. I. And I actually am excited and interested in hearing what you all think about this, because I'm like, he didn't have a choice in the matter. Voldemort marked him and his family for death, and he did a thing in terms that was brave. Yes. In terms of protecting his family from Voldemort. In the end, though, when we think about heroism, it seems like, to me, at least, it involves a choice. Like, a thing that you either can do or don't. Don't have to do. And I'm trying to think of what that choice could have been. I mean, the only one I can think of is, like, you just give up your kid to Voldemort. But I still think that he probably would have taken both Lily and James out. And so I'm not saying I don't think that he is a hero, because I think. But I. But I'm also saying I don't know that he is. I feel like this is one of these moments where my answer would been, I don't know, because I really. I'm like, yes, what he did, his sacrifice had a good outcome, but he didn't make a choice. Like, he had to do this. Like, there was no other space for him to go. And so I don't know what that means, you know, Like, I don't know. This is a hard one, even. And I wrote the question and I'm still like, I don't know. I feel like you all are gonna drag me. And you know what? Maybe I deserve it because I really am not sure about this. He is a martyr, but, I mean, he sacrificed his life for his child, but. And I know what the alternative is, but the alternative seems so unlikely to me. It's like, in some ways, he really didn't have a choice. And to me, you know, when we talk about, you know, heroism and we talked about it for other characters, I've often said, you know, it's when people who don't have to do something do something anyway, right? For people who have privileges and are operating in spaces and places where they actually don't have to. Like, we talked about all of the Weasleys and that was true for them, right? Like, they didn't have to fight against Voldemort. They could have stayed home, just been pure blood, been blood traitors, but had no part in, like, actively fighting against him and what he represented. But they did. In this case, though, James doesn't have the same ability to just say, nah, I'm good. Like, he. He doesn't like. It doesn't quite work that way. And so is it heroic what he did? I don't know. Maybe my definition of hero is too narrow. You all will tell me, I believe in you. Is James Potter a good friend? About 86% of us said yes, 7.5% of us said no, and about 7% said don't know. Someone wrote, and I'm only going to read one passage because it's very long, but it encapsulates a lot of things. I'm going to try to get through it in one take, but if I mess up, just know that it's my dyslexia made manifest and go on this journey with me. They wrote. The question that troubled me the most was, is James a good friend? I ended up saying, don't know, because I really don't know. I think James is that popular kid in school everyone wants to be friends with because on the outside it looks really cool being his friend, but it's actually not that cool because once you become his friend, he behaves all the time like he's better than you. I think we can clearly see that in his relationship with the Marauders, he is the, quote, unquote, leader and therefore the quote unquote best. Even with Sirius, it's clear that he thought he was better than him, even just for the fact that he came from a non problematic family and took him in and therefore became his protector. With Remus and Peter, this is even more emphasized because he is in the position of power over them, where Peter idolizes him and Sirius. But mostly, I think, because he's so close to James and Remus can't exactly drop them and make some new friends because of his condition and also because they're his first friends, he doesn't exactly have a standard to hold them to. This would all bring me to say he's not a good friend. But we can't forget about the fact that he risked his life and his place in the Wizarding Society to help Remus, which means he can't be all bad. I think his behaviors are perfectly consistent with the fact that he was a teenager. When we see him behave this way, I think that given the chance, he would have probably become a much better adult than he was a kid. But sadly, he died before he could even grow into his adulthood. 22 is not nearly old enough to realize how toxic your behavior was when you were a teenager, especially if you have a little kid to take care of and a war going on. Whew. There's a lot there to unpack. I think that this passage is a hot take. And I think a lot of people really believe, and even I am of the mind, that, yes, James was very loyal and we see him acting in a lot of ways. But I do think that we do get to see that arrogance and cockiness that many of us brought up in our discussion of words that describe him and the way that those things alter how we view him as a friend. And, you know, I think we tend to think of the Marauders as this kind of horizontal group, right? There's no hierarchy. But one thing that many of you brought up when we were discussing Sirius in the last episode was the fact that there is a bit of a hierarchy between these guys, right? That like James and Sirius kind of run the show. Remus is there and Luke, I mean, and Pettigrew is kind of just running behind everyone. And it's hard to be able to say whether or not, you know, the cockiness and arrogance led James to see himself a certain way. But a lot of these things that they do for Remus could be construed in terms of just kind of their own vanity. And I think, you know, and we talked a little Bit about the idea of, you know, even just naming Lupin's lycanthropy as, like, a little. A furry little problem. Right? It just minimizes in a way that I think is a bit problematic. But I think, you know, I think ultimately, James is, again, as good a friend as he knows how to be in the position that he is in. I think the fact that he doesn't turn up his nose at Lupin when he finds out he's a werewolf is really important. The fact that he doesn't turn up his nose at Sirius Black for being a member of the Noble House of Black speaks volumes. The fact that they even entertained Peter, who, for all intents and purposes and by all accounts offered very little to the friend group, I think also speaks to who he is. Again, it's really difficult when you are assessing someone at a very specific age where, you know, being a jerk is just kind of part and parcel of a lot of our journeys, especially when you are a person who had the kind of privilege that James had. And so I think, all in all, it's clear to me that, yeah, like, he is as good a friend as you can be in his position in the space that he occupies. But I do think that this passage offers us a lot to think about in terms of how we understand his relationship with the rest of the Marauders. Because we kind of. We get so many different pieces of their story from different places, but it's like, you know, at the end of the day, hard to be able to truly assess how close they all were and whether or not the feelings that we hear from Remus and even from Sirius were kind of reciprocated on the part of everyone else. Now, again, I know the Marauder girlies are probably gonna come for me, and I welcome it. This is apparently an episode where I'm just really going for broke. You know what? It's because I've been gone for a while and I've come back, and now I'm ready to start some stuff. So let the games begin. We have reached the part of the episode where I reflect both on my own thoughts about James, but also what you all have brought to bear in your comments and in the survey results. And the thing that strikes me the most about James and our conversation about him thus far is the role of his privilege. James is one of, if not the only character who we meet who is pure blood, rich and socialized to be good. He does not have an obsession with blood purity at all. In fact, his parents are left out of the sacred 28 because of how common their name is and undoubtedly because of their politic. And so James is intimately familiar with the kind of bad side of Pure blood supremacy, but he still benefits from it in a lot of really important ways. And I wonder the extent to which, you know, because his politic is not exclusionary explicitly, he feels like he doesn't have to, you know, overcompensate in the same way that maybe a Sirius does, or other people who are trying to kind of combat particular beliefs about them because of where they come from. To me, James embodies what Ron would be if the Weasleys had money. And we see so much in Ron. A lot of the biases and kind of problematic beliefs about certain groups, it doesn't manifest in the same way as we see it with the Malfoys. Right. Like, it's not an all out. I believe you are inferior to me because I am pure blood and you are not. But there are these kind of socialized biases that he has, and I think that James has some of those as well. But James also has a privilege that Ron doesn't. Right. Like, Ron has to cling to his pure blood identity in a way that James doesn't necessarily have to because he's rich and pure blood. And so he is really at the top of the top, the creme de la creme, if you will. And I think it is fascinating to think about what that means for who James is as a character. So much of the way that we think about him, you know, when we talked about whether or not he was a good friend or whether or not he was a good person, you know, everyone brings up the bullying and everyone brings up the way he treated Snape, and rightfully so. And I think that what this shows for me is that pure blood, a pureblood society that prizes pure blood above all, even when you yourself don't buy into your own superiority, brings about a belief of infallibility and untouchability because everyone and everything around you reinforces the idea that you are the best of the best. And so when I said in the earlier parts of the episode, you know, James is as good of a person, as good of a friend as he knows how to be. It's because there is nothing in his world, nothing in his orbit saying you need to be better. He already believes and has been socialized to believe he is the best. And that notion isn't necessarily connected to explicitly the idea that he is better than Muggle Borns. No, no, no. He's better than everyone, even other pure Bloods, because he's rich and he doesn't come from, you know, the black family or the Malfoy families, right, where he is someone who has to like combat or deal with a bad ideology. He ostensibly doesn't have one. And so all he has, the only thing that we, you know, can really blame him for when it comes to thinking about him, his identity as a bully, right? Like who he is, is the privilege that he has, that society has bestowed upon him. And what's so fascinating about it is that generally when we look at people with this kind of privilege, they're all Death Eater or Death Eater adjacent Pure Blood supremacists who just have money. And that is not the Potters, that is not James. He does not have any of that. And yet instill he's a jerk. And so this tells us that like pureblood ideology and pure blood supremacy is only one part of the puzzle that explains why we get the Malfoys, why we get Bellatrix. There is a privilege that comes along with being a pureblood in a pureblood dominant society, or even maybe not a pureblood dominant society, but a society that prizes pure bloodedness. But even if you don't believe in all of the other negative aspects of that society, you still benefit. And this is why, you know, I went on, I would call it a rant about the fact that, you know, is he a good pureblood? In some ways? Yeah, he is, because he benefits from the society insofar that it tells him you have nothing to prove, you don't have to do anything for anyone. And yeah, he does beautiful things for his friends. You know, they become animagi and they do all these, that's great. But at no point is it undermining his positionality in society. James is what happens when you are someone who says, but I'm not like them. I'm not like the Blacks, I'm not like the Malfoys. Thus I am unproblematic and don't have anything to change. And that is why I'm so fervently not convinced that, you know, even though fighting against Voldemort meant something, I'm like, were you fighting against Voldemort or what Voldemort represented? And I think that's a question that we can ask literally everyone, including like Dumbledore, like all of these people. And I know the answer. They were fighting against Voldemort. That's how they were written. And they were written by someone who believes these things. But at the end of the day, James is like a cautionary tale about what unchecked privilege can look like even when your politic isn't as problematic as other people's. Because sure, like, he's not a Death Eater, he doesn't believe in the subjugation and derogation of Muggle born people, as many of you pointed out, right? Like he ultimately marries one, has a child with one, but at the end of the day, James is also a person who still believes he's superior. On what grounds? Who's to say is it better to be someone who believes themselves to be superior than other people if the premise of your superiority isn't based on like the wizard equivalent of race? Now I'm just gonna leave that question hanging in the air because I think it's a good one and I think it's one that we can kind of talk about in the comments. But I think that that's the real question is how do we reconcile someone who for all intents and purposes is not as bad as other pure blood supremacist, but still occupies a space of pure blood superiority? And maybe, and that superiority can be one that manifests even against other purebloods, but it's still a superiority complex that has led to really bad outcomes for a lot of people. We did it, y'all. We made it through an episode on James Potter. Thank you all so much for those of you who filled out the survey and for your comments. Thanks to everyone on Patreon for filling out the question about whether he was a good Gryffindor. I'm looking forward to our post episode chat on Patreon again if you want to join us. Patreon.com criticalmagictheory it's in the link and everything. It'll be on the chapter summary. Next episode will be on Horace Slughorn, y'all. You know we love a morally gray mess. Get ready. This has been another episode of Critical Magic Theory. I'm Professor Julian Womble and if you like today's episode, first off, thank you. Please feel free to like, rate, subscribe, Share Tell everyone you know, even strangers on the street, about the work that we are doing here at Critical Magic Theory. One second. I got a bop. I got a bop. It's coming to three, four. You get it? You get what I'm saying? Please remember that we are having a post episode chat on Patreon. I keep saying it over and over again, but I want you to join. Okay. It's good to be back, y'all. Until the next episode. Be critical and stay magical, my friends. Bye.