Prof Responds- Death Eaters, Country Clubs, and the Cosplay of Power

Summary

Critical Magic Theory: An Analytical Harry Potter Podcast

Episode Summary: Prof Responds- Death Eaters, Country Clubs, and the Cosplay of Power
Host: Prof. Julian Wamble
Release Date: March 26, 2025

---

1. Introduction

In this episode of Critical Magic Theory, Professor Julian Wamble delves deep into the intricate dynamics of Voldemort as a leader and the nature of the Death Eaters within the Harry Potter universe. Responding to insightful comments from listeners, Prof. Wamble critically examines whether Voldemort can be considered an effective leader, drawing comparisons with other dark wizards like Grindelwald.

---

2. Voldemort as a Leader

Prof. Wamble begins by addressing a prominent discussion point: the characterization of Voldemort as a competent leader of the Death Eaters. He references a comment from Savannah, a listener known as "Snake Oil Salesman," who argues:

"Voldemort was only good at murder and threatening people. He maintained his numbers by intimidation, isolation, and control. He didn't care about his followers since he killed his own people too."
(Savannah, 05:45)

Prof. Wamble concurs, highlighting that Voldemort's leadership is rooted in fear rather than genuine respect or loyalty. He emphasizes that Death Eaters follow Voldemort more out of intimidation than true allegiance:

"Voldemort is so uninvested in Death Eaters as a group that it's clear he uses them purely for his own ends."
(01:30)

---

3. Comparing Voldemort and Grindelwald

A significant portion of the discussion contrasts Voldemort with Gellert Grindelwald. Mia, another listener, suggests:

"Grindelwald has a silver tongue and persuades people effectively, creating a worldwide movement. He acts more like a classical dictator."
(09:15)

Prof. Wamble expands on this by outlining Grindelwald's visionary leadership aimed at pure-blood supremacy on a global scale, contrasting it with Voldemort's limited and self-serving objectives:

"Grindelwald seeks to enslave Muggles and reshape the magical world's power dynamics, showing a strategic depth Voldemort lacks."
(12:50)

This comparison underscores Voldemort's deficiencies in leadership, particularly his inability to inspire genuine commitment or long-term loyalty among his followers.

---

4. The Nature of the Death Eaters

Prof. Wamble explores the concept of the Death Eaters as more of a "country club" rather than a cohesive, ideologically driven group. He references Serena's input:

"The Death Eaters resemble a social club where members reminisce about past chaos, lacking a unifying ideology."
(22:10)

He further illustrates that many Death Eaters, such as Lucius Malfoy and Narcissa, are primarily motivated by status and personal gain rather than a shared vision:

"For figures like Lucius and Narcissa, the social prestige and influence within high society are paramount, overshadowing any ideological commitment."
(25:30)

---

5. Ideology and Followership

Delving deeper, Prof. Wamble discusses the minimal ideological investment of Death Eaters compared to Grindelwald's community-focused approach. He points out that Voldemort's followers are often more interested in the perks and power he offers rather than a genuine belief in his cause:

"Voldemort's lack of true investment in pure-blood supremacy means his followers are loyal more out of fear than conviction."
(15:20)

This misalignment between Voldemort's self-serving goals and the Death Eaters' superficial motivations highlights his ineffective leadership.

---

6. Nuances of Villainy

The episode also touches on the contemporary trend of humanizing villains through backstory and psychological depth. Prof. Wamble argues against this approach for Voldemort, asserting that his character lacks the redeeming qualities necessary for such nuanced portrayals:

"Voldemort made choices that irrevocably warped his existence. His actions speak louder than any potential empathy derived from his past."
(35:50)

He critiques the tendency in fanfiction and modern narratives to romanticize villainy, emphasizing that some villains, like Voldemort, are intrinsically irredeemable:

"Sometimes, villains are just bad, and that's a reality we need to accept without attempting to fix or humanize them."
(38:10)

---

7. Conclusion

Prof. Wamble wraps up the episode by reinforcing the distinction between genuine leadership and authoritarian manipulation exemplified by Voldemort. He encourages listeners to recognize the inherent flaws in Voldemort's leadership style and the superficial motivations of the Death Eaters:

"Voldemort is a true narcissist who only cares about himself, making him a fundamentally bad leader."
(39:45)

He urges the audience to critically assess villainous characters without the bias of seeking redemption or complexity where it doesn't exist, advocating for a more honest appraisal of such figures within the Harry Potter narrative.

---

Key Takeaways

• Voldemort's Leadership: Rooted in fear and self-interest, lacking genuine loyalty from followers.

• Death Eaters as a Social Club: More focused on status and personal gain than a unified ideological cause.

• Contrast with Grindelwald: Highlights Voldemort's deficiencies by comparing him to a more strategic and ideologically driven leader.

• Villain Complexity: While modern narratives often seek to humanize villains, Voldemort remains an example of an irredeemable antagonist.

• Critical Assessment: Encourages listeners to evaluate characters based on their actions and inherent qualities rather than imposed narratives of redemption.

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• "Voldemort is so uninvested in Death Eaters as a group that it's clear he uses them purely for his own ends."
  (01:30)

• "Grindelwald seeks to enslave Muggles and reshape the magical world's power dynamics, showing a strategic depth Voldemort lacks."
  (12:50)

• "For figures like Lucius and Narcissa, the social prestige and influence within high society are paramount, overshadowing any ideological commitment."
  (25:30)

• "Voldemort made choices that irrevocably warped his existence. His actions speak louder than any potential empathy derived from his past."
  (35:50)

• "Voldemort is a true narcissist who only cares about himself, making him a fundamentally bad leader."
  (39:45)

---

Final Thoughts

In this thought-provoking episode, Prof. Julian Wamble challenges listeners to reconsider commonly held perceptions of Voldemort and the Death Eaters. By dissecting leadership qualities, ideological commitments, and the inherent motivations of these characters, the episode offers a nuanced critique that adds depth to the understanding of villainy within the Harry Potter series. It serves as a compelling invitation to engage critically with beloved narratives, encouraging fans to look beyond surface-level characterizations.

Transcript

[Professor Julian Womble]

Ch Ch Ch.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

Chumba Looking for excitement? Chumba Casino is here. Play anytime. Play anywhere. Play on the train. Play at the store. Play at home. Play when you're bored. Play today for your chance to win and get daily bonuses when you log in. So what are you waiting for? Don't delay. Chumba Casino is free to play. Experience social gameplay like never before. Go to Chumba Casino right now to play hundreds of games including online slots, Bingo, Slingo and more. Live the chumba [e-mail] no purchase necessary. VGW Group void where prohibited by law.

[American Express Advertiser]

21/Terms and cond from Taco night in Tulum to Sushi in Tokyo, every bite is rewarding and postworthy with MX Gold's 4X Membership Rewards points at restaurants worldwide. Wherever you dine, points are piling up. So bring your friends along for your next course. Because it's not all about the posts, it's about the company and the memories. How can Gold from Amex sweeten your next food moment? Learn [e-mail] Explore Gold terms and points.

[Professor Julian Womble]

Cap apply Welcome to Critical Magic Theory where we deconstruct the wizarding world of Harry Potter. Because loving something doesn't mean we can't be critical of it. I'm Professor Julian Womble and today I will be responding to our post episode chat conversation about the one and only Voldiva Voldemort. Noseless Fiend Volzadi. Okay, that's who we are talking about today. As always, you all brought so much to bear and I really, really, really love the conversation that came out of it and so I'm excited to respond. But y'all, you know what we have to do first. You know what we have to do. You know these episodes are ones where we get right down to it. Not a lot of pomp, not a lot of circumstance, but a lot of bopping. Okay, A lot of bopping. You're stretching right now. You're really making sure the shoulders are loose because we're going to start our bop in three. In two. In one. We need to talk about Harry Potter. Oh, you all weren't expecting the bop to come that fast. I know you weren't. But someone reached out to me and told me that I said that we were going to get to the content of the episode faster and that I was still not getting there fast enough. And I said challenge accepted. And so now I want to do a little game where we look and see how long it takes me to get to the meat and potatoes of the episode. Because nothing gets me motivated more than proving someone wrong. All right. I love being right, y'all. Okay. I love being right. So I want to start this conversation off with a discussion about Voldemort as a good leader. Right. So in the episode we spent a considerable amount of time talking about him being a good leader of the Death Eaters and many people said that he wasn't. And so a lot of you brought some really cool stuff to the conversation in the post episode chat on Patreon. And so I want to start with a comment that was given to us by Savannah who wrote Snake oil salesman. Lol. That ticks me down. Snake oil salesman, in my opinion, was only good at murder and threatening people. Sure. Did he have people come to him because they agreed on things? Sure. But he maintained his numbers by intimidation, isolation and control. He didn't care about his numbers since he killed his own people too. I will get you before you get me. He did right by himself but only rewarded his followers with their lives, barely. And this is really fascinating because I didn't even think about the reality that like Death Eaters are afraid that he will kill them. Which is to say that like he is so uninvested in Death Eaters as like a group of people when. Oh, and Dumbledore meets him when he comes to try and get the Defense against the Dark Arts job. And he talks about like his friends and Dumbledore's like, you don't have any friends. Like, let's not pretend that this is what you have. You have followers and you don't really care about them. And I think that that's a really important aspect of this. Right? Like he cosplays someone who has people who care about him. And I think that the Death Eaters, I mean, do we think the Death Eaters actually care about Voldemort? I mean, I think that they care about what he represents. I think they care about, you know, the power and status that he offers them when he's not around. But there are only a few that truly care about him and his well being. Right. We spent a lot of time in Lucius episode talking about the reality that Lucius is very uninvested in a kind of resurrected Voldemort because it really messes with the thing that Lucius cares about the most, which is himself, his reputation, his familial reputation. Those are the things that he puts a lot of stake in. And Voldemort coming back and asking him to actually do things undermines that. And we know that Dumbledore. I mean, Voldemort. Oops, we'll get to Dumbledore later. Not right now. Not right now. We know that Voldemort criticizes and chastises and punishes Lucius for this very reason. And we know that he does, as Savannah pointed to, kind of rule with this sense of intimidation and fear so that it doesn't come from a place of, like, genuine concern. And I think when we look at, you know, the kind of foil to the Death Eaters, which is the Order of the Phoenix, there's something else that motivates a lot of why it is that people follow Dumbledore just as blindly as Death Eaters follow Voldemort. And it's not status and it's not power. It's something else. And we'll get into that later. But I do think that we can see kind of the uniqueness of how Voldemort operates relative to other people in these books who also have meaningful following. And Mia brought up a really great point when we were having this conversation about leaders and whether or not Voldemort is a good leader. And Mia wrote, I think in terms of what makes a good leader, even in a bad organization, I would be more likely to look at Grindelwald. He is said to have a silver tongue, a preternaturally good gift at persuading people. He created a worldwide movement that threatened the peace of. Of the globe as opposed to just menacing the greater UK area with that gift and acts more like a classical dictator. Now, many of us brought up Grindelwald when we were thinking about Voldemort as a good leader, Voldemort as someone who espouses pure blood supremacy. And I think that this is a really solid point because we can kind of juxtapose these two people. Now, we don't get a lot of Grindelwald canonically. We get some of him, you know, the mentions of him from flashbacks with Dumbledore, a little bit from the Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore. But most of what we learn about him is through kind of post canonical creations, right? So whether it be the Fantastic Beasts franchise or whatever. But if we take that and we kind of include this in our conversation, which I know is not something that we do often, but for the sake of this conversation, come with me on this journey. Hmm. Just come along with me. What strikes me about Grindelwald is that his investment is actually in pure blood supremacy. And the way that he goes about doing that is, again, infiltrating governmental Sources and spaces, which is what we see Voldemort do. But it's not really Voldemort that does this, right? Like, he doesn't want to be the person in charge. Grindelwald wants to be the person in charge. Like, he wants to be the one calling the shots. And what we also see as to Mia's point is the reality that he is wanting to do this everywhere for all magical people. He's going to international bodies and basically being like, look, there's no reason why we should be the ones that are cowering and hiding and Muggles are running amok. We meet him in the Fantastic Beasts series in America. And so that there is something to be said about the scope of what Voldemort wants to do and the extent to which this is an indication that his investment is fairly minimal. His investment is really only to give Death Eaters something to do and give them what they want because they are following him under the auspices that, like, he is someone who believes the same thing that they believe. And I think he does. I think he does believe in the inferiority of Muggles, but I think the only reason he believes that is because he hates his dad. And he believes that Muggles are easily susceptible to mortality, which is something that he himself is running away from. And so that a lot of what he is trying to do is get away from that. And so I think that fundamentally he does have a belief in the inferiority of Muggles and Muggle Borns by extension. But he, his justification, his reasoning for it, his sense of superiority goes beyond the scope of what it is that Death Eaters believe. And so I think Grindelwald gives us a sense of what a true, true pure blood, supremacist, dictator, authoritarian leader looks like. And that is someone who wants to basically enslave Muggles. And he seems uninterested in Muggle borns. He doesn't. Like, he just does not want to be in hiding anymore because he's like, we have the power. We can do this. There's no reason for us to be powering when we can actually just take them out and make them our slaves, right? Like, we can use our power against them. And I think that that's really fascinating because when you do that juxtaposition, you. You see how deficient Voldemort actually is. You see what he could be, and you see how different his approach is. And it really shines a meaningful light on what it is that he's actually after and what it is that he's actually doing. And I think the Death Eaters are more inclined to believe that he is their Grindelwald, right? Like he is going to be the savior of pure Blood supremacy, but really what he's doing is using them for his own ends and basically being like, yeah, we'll get to that stuff later. When I get what I want, you'll get what you want, and don't question me, because I'll kill you. Right? And so then there is this sense of, you know, of fear and intimidation that Savannah pointed to. But what also is interesting is that Grindelwald does the same thing that Voldemort does insofar that he exploits the existing structural prejudices that exist against non magical people and against Muggle Borns, right? Like, he leverages the historical perspective of like, you know, we were subjugated by them, they treated us badly, that's why we had to go into hiding, blah, blah, blah. But he also recognizes that they have power and that they are not using it to its fullest extent to kind of exact their revenge, but also move themselves up in the kind of hierarchy that exists between magical and non magical people. But what he does that is different from Voldemort is that his appeal is one of community building, right? Like this is for the well being of all magical people. This is what we as a group need to do. And that appeal appeals to this kind of group politic that we know is very much implicit and explicit in some contexts, but very implicit in the kind of pathos of the wizarding world, right? This idea of us versus them. We can't let them have magic because if they get magic, then they'll want to use it for everything. We can't let them know who we are, because if they know who we are, they're going to subjugate us, right? So there's a very strong undercurrent in all of the kind of politics and everything of the wizarding world that points to the reality that it is us versus them and that there are maybe places and spaces where we can come together and places and spaces where we have to, but on the whole we have to remain separated. And Grindelwald's like, I don't disagree with that particular reality, but the power dynamic suggests that in the separation we should be on top of the hierarchy, telling them what to do and dictating their behaviors and what they are allowed to do, and not the other way around. And we as a community of magical people should be engaging in this behavior together because we are the ones who are Subjugated, but we are also the ones who have the power. And I think in that way, Grindelwald really does speak to, like, not only pure blood supremacists, but also magical supremacists. People who are upset about the state of the power dynamic that exists with magical and non magical people. Voldemort does not do that. And I think this is a big failure on his part in terms of his ability to effectively lead, because he doesn't care in the same way that Grindelwald cares. He's not invested or kind of entrenched in the idea of what a magical supremacist society looks like. He is in it for himself. And he's, again, kind of doing the thing that we've been talking about a lot, right, which is kind of pretending that he is a pure blood supremacist and kind of cosplaying what he thinks they want. And that's, I think, why he also just is like, yeah, sure, do whatever you want. Like, what is it that you wanna do? Yeah, we'll facilitate that. We'll make that happen. Partially because he doesn't know and he doesn't care. And I think in this way, he's not a good leader because his values are not aligned with the people who are following him. His goal structures are not in line with the people who are following him. What he wants is immortality. And what he needs is a band of people willing to do whatever he wants them to do to help him actualize that. And I think that that is a really, really, really big and meaningful distinction between Grindelwald and Voldemort and also helps us really understand kind of some of the more nuanced ways that we can see the ideology of superiority having some levels of gradation between these two men who in theory have the same goal, but also very different desires. And I think it also shines an important light on Voldemort's narcissism, right? His selfishness, his lack of true investment in trying to raise magical, particularly pure blood people to a status that they believe that they should be at. And I think part of the reason why is because he simply cannot understand it. He wasn't socialized in that space. Right. Like, we're talking about the Lestranges, we're talking about the Malfoys, the Blacksmith families that for centuries have had the same political belief about their understanding of who they are and where they should be in society. And I think that it is really important for us to think about what that means for how they come to pure blood supremacy. It's the only ideology they know. Right? It's the only thing that they truly understand. And they have been learning that since they were children. And so it is the. It's all they've ever really understood about the magical world. It's all they've ever really understood about who they are in the magical world. In a way that's not true for Tom Riddle or Voldemort. Right. Like, all of this belief structure is something that he had to learn. Like, he had to be radicalized and come to this kind of conclusion himself. And so there was a lot of, like, programming that had to go into the way that he came to understand who he is and what he actually believes. And I think in his kind of insecurities and his desire to fit in, he took on the mantle of this ideology without having a full understanding of what actualizing it would mean. And so, so much of what he does post hoc, right, is him basically being like, well, I guess this is what we want. Or I've heard you all talk about this a lot. And so, like, these are the things that we can do. He doesn't know. He's. He is faking his way to the top, round and around. That's a Dreamgirls reference. If you don't know that reference, I invite you to go and watch Dream Girls, the movie with Eddie Murphy, Jennifer Hudson, Beyonce Knowles. It's a classic. It's incredible. If musicals are your thing and you haven't seen it, highly recommend. Anyways, anyways, Voldemort is doing that. That is what he is doing. He is faking his way to the top. And when you go as extreme as he goes in terms of the violence that he allows, what we're able to see is that people are much more willing to get behind the calls because they think that you are really about that life, when in reality you're not. You're just faking it and giving them the things that they want because you're actively smarter than them. And they have no idea about that either. And so you are manipulating them by giving them at least a morsel of what they want or believe they want without actually giving them the things that they could be having. But listen, you can't miss what you never had. And the Death Eaters never had a Grindelwald. They only ever had a Voldemort.

[Ryan Seacrest]

Hello, it is Ryan, and I was on a flight the other day playing one of my favorite social spin slot games on chumbacasino.com. i looked over the person sitting next to me. And you know what they were doing? They were also playing Chumba Casino. Coincidence? I think not everybody's loving having fun with it. Chumba Casino is home to hundreds of casino style games that you can play for free anytime, anywhere, even at 30,000ft. So sign up [e-mail] to claim your free welcome bonus. That's chumbacasino.com and live the Chumba life.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

No purchase necessary VGW Revo prohibited by law seat terms and conditions 18 from.

[American Express Advertiser]

Taco night in Tulum to Sushi in Tokyo, every bite is rewarding and postworthy with MX Gold's 4X Membership Rewards points at restaurants worldwide. Wherever you dine, points are piling up. So bring your friends along for your next course. Because it's not all about the post, it's about the company and the memories. How can Gold from Amex sweeten your next food moment? Learn [e-mail] Explore Gold terms and points cap apply.

[Professor Julian Womble]

1 of the other things that came up in our conversations was this idea that I put forth about Death Eaters being this kind of social club and the fact that, you know, for, for the longest time, for 13 years, these people are walking around covering up their arm because they don't want other people in society to know who they are, but also then having these kind of secret meetings where they get to wax poetic on the days of yore where they were running around being absolute menaces. And it was a fun thing. I honestly kind of think of Death Eaters in a similar way, but much more nefarious and insidious as marauders. We're talking about a bunch of young, mostly boys running around causing scenes, wreaking havoc, enjoying the mayhem that they're causing because it's fun. If we think about what we saw at the Quidditch World cup with the Death Eaters and their torturing of the Muggles, right? Like they didn't kill them, they were just literally toying with them and in like broad daylight for funsies. That and even I think, who is it? Either Arthur Weasley or one of the twins says something like this. I think it's Arthur Weasley who says, like this is their idea of a joke. Like they're having a good time. Like that's the kind of stuff that I imagine Death Eaters were doing, right? Like it wasn't this kind of governmental takeover. It wasn't any of those type of things. It was really just a fun time, right? Quote Unquote hash. Like not actual fun, okay, Quotes. Fun time. Where they were just kind of allowed to do what I'm sure they believe people were doing in yesteryear when wizards were at the height of their power. And so I think this is a really important thing to think about as well when we think about the relationship that Death Eaters have with Voldemort because his return really upends this particular thing because he is tasking them now with something that is much more kind of institutional, much more structural in that he's like, we need to take over the ministry. We need to do all of these other things. I need you all to go and stand sentinel and like get this, this prophecy for me. And I think that that is really, really fascinating because I think that it really shines a light on who these people actually are. And Serena brought up a really interesting point. One, Serena offers us the notion of a Death Eaters country club called Dementor Creek Hills. Which, you know, I'm not saying I would be a member, but I would like to go on a tour once just to see like what's going on in there. But also Serena makes a comment about how the agenda of the Death Eaters was largely the status quo. And I think this is really important because again, a lot of why people wanted to be in the Death Eaters to begin with was this kind of desired reclamation of what they believed they were entitled to from before, right? Where they thought, okay, this is what we used to be. We used to be powerful, we used to have influence in the government. We used to have all of these things. And now we've become more progressive. Sounds familiar. And we need to revert back, right? Like we need to make the wizarding world great again. But a lot of these people don't want their faces out there as people who fundamentally believe this. Hence the wearing of mask, right? Hence the putting on the hoods, hence the hiding of the dark mark, right? Because it doesn't do to be those people in a society where those things are not necessarily valued. And at the end of the day, if the desire is for the status quo the status quo in this context means, yeah, you can be someone who has these beliefs but like in certain circles you simply don't talk about it. But you get to be someone who is in high society. And Voldemort really upends that. He messes it up. And for people like Bellatrix, who never cared about the kind of social aspects of it, it doesn't matter. But for people like Lucius, for people Like Narcissa, the Malfoys. Like that stuff matters because that's who they are. They're socialites. They want people to like them. They want to have power. They want to be able to walk in the Ministry of Magic and do what they want to do and be able to say, like, I am that powerful. And so it's so fascinating to think about, you know, how this particular group of people were really kind of messed up when Voldemort returned and how, like, their true lack of loyalty to him is made manifest in the fact that only some of them went to go look for him and only some of them went to the ban for him. And so it's like what a clear indication of what this entire, if we call it an organization or a movement actually is, is really just some weird egotistical, like a group of people being like, remember when. Ha ha, ha ha. Like, look at what we did to those Muggles. And that's it. It's not an actual ideology. It doesn't actually manifest in any meaningful way. And again, if we think about what this means, if we think about Grindelwald, right? Like, he wouldn't. That would not work for him because that's not what he's interested in. And I think that a lot of this really does come from people select Slytherins, right? Which is, for all intents and purposes, like Country Club Light for many of these people, right? Like, it's the same people over and over again, same families over generations. Like in this one kind of common room place, kind of building on these ideas. Like when we think about Draco in Chamber of Secrets and the idea that he is in the Chamber, he's in the Slytherin Common Room with Ron and Harry, who are disguised as Crab and Goyle. And all he's doing is, like. Is talking ish about, like, how he hates Hermione, how he can't stand Harry, like that's the space, right? Like that is what the Slytherin Common Room feels like. And we know that they do that in other houses as well. But when we think about what that then morphs into once you leave Hogwarts, and we know that many people in these houses ultimately do join the ranks of Death Eaters, it stands to reason that the initial goal was to kind of just keep the Slytherin Common Room madness and absurdity going outside. And then we had a leader who was kind of facilitating these conversations. Alison S. Asks, do we think that the Death Eaters were a successful movement in general? And can any of that be credited to Voldemort, not necessarily for leadership quality reasons, but just as a pillar of the movement, right? And I think that this kind of dovetails nicely into this conversation that we're having about, you know, what the purpose of the Death Eaters actually was. I don't think the movement was meant to be a movement. I think it was literally meant to be like a social gathering. I think, you know, not to pat myself on the back, but I do think that the invocation of country club feels very apropos because I do think that ultimately all of these, like, mostly wealthy people who have nothing but leisure time to sit around and just chill and be together and like, you know, have a kind of shadow society where they get to be like, well, who's the best of us and who has the most, like, radical beliefs? Like, that feels very much like what the Death Eaters were trying to do. I don't think they even really cared that much about, like, the beliefs. And I think that part of the reason why I say that is when we think about the people who do have that fundamental belief, right, who are not being prejudicial for the sake of superiority, but for the fundamental belief that I am better than you and you don't deserve to be here. You're Bellatrixes, you're Barty Crouch Juniors. Although I'm not even sure that BC Junior really falls into this category. I think Bellatrix is really one of the few that we actually get who holds this particular belief. I think that when we think about her and we juxtapose her behavior, her engagement, her sacrifices with that of the bevy of other men, what we're able to see is that most of these people didn't buy in. In the same way, right? In the same way that Voldemort didn't really buy into this. In the same way, everyone approaches this from a perspective that is so lackluster and so unenthused. And I think that what's fascinating about that particular reality, right, is that it really does, again, when we look at Grindelwald, show us just how deficient this particular iteration of the kind of pure blood magical supremacy movement is, right? It's so locked into the UK British, like, magical world. It's so minuscule in its goals, right? Like, Voldemort doesn't care about the rest of the world. Neither do the rest of the Death Eaters. They're like, we got y'all and that's all we need. And it's like when you think about the kind of global takeover perspective that Grindelwald actually had. It really is like, you guys are literally playing checkers and he's playing wizards chess. And that is crazy to think about because throughout the. Most of the series, right? Like, this is all we know. And it speaks to kind of the relativity of terror, right? Where it's like, I don't wanna minimize what they do and the harm that they cause because I do think that those are things that are real and true. But when we think about what it could have been if any of these individuals had had the outlook that Grindelwald had, it becomes very clear to us that this could have been infinitely worse and that their lack of imagination plays a really large part in kind of what it is that they do. And it also shows that this is not about, like, world domination. It's barely about UK domination. They just want to be able to do what they want to do without being punished for it or being looked down upon, right? And that's what the 13 years where Voldemort was out really offered them. They were able to kind of do what they wanted to do and not concern themselves with, like, too much because most of them had gotten off before when they were accused of being Death Eaters. And so now they're in the clear and they were able to live their lives, cause their mayhem, do what they wanted. Lucius is literally running around dropping cursed items in children's cauldrons. Like, that's the kind of fun that the Death Eaters were getting up to, right? Like, that's the kind of mayhem that they wanted to bring to bear the rest of it. I just don't think that this was what most of them were actually looking for. And I think that that's really important because when we think about the efficacy and the goal structure of Death Eaters what we realize is that, one, it could have been worse. And two, a lot of what happened is, like, circumstance because many of them wanted to be Death Eaters and then turn around and walk back into society without having to deal with any of the kind of backlash that they would have faced if people knew who they were. And Voldemort said, I don't care about any of that. That's not my business. Get to work. Get to. One of the things that I talk about quite a bit in the episode on Voldemort is my desire for us to just recognize that, like, this guy is just bad. And I went on a bit of a diatribe about the idea that sometimes we are really looking for this level of nuance in terms of the why and the what and the when and the where and the why and the who and the all of that. And sometimes, like, villains are just bad people and we kind of have to just deal with that reality. Now, what is true in the Harry Potter books is that J.K. rowling, for most of our main characters, who we don't like or are kind of programmed to not like very early on, but then ultimately end up liking at the end, right, is that we get a level of nuance. We get a backstory, we get a narrative that lends us to this space of, like, wanting to sympathize and empathize with them and understand their plight and thus absolve them of some of the things that they've done. We see this with Draco. We see this with Severus Snake. We see this with Voldemort. For some people, I don't. I'm not a believer in that. I'm not a believer in that because I'm like, sometimes your actions speak louder than your words. And I think it's Dumbledore's. Like, it's not. It's our choices that define us or something like that, right? Like, he says something to that effect. And many of these people have made choices. Many of these people have decided to do things. Voldemort made choices very early on in his life that have defined what he has been able to become and who he is. And when we meet him in these books, those choices have completely warped his entire existence, both kind of metaphysically and also physically. And for me, that is all I need to see. But I also think that there is something to be said about kind of the implications of what we are looking for in our villains now. And I think that this contemporary space that we find ourselves in, particularly in the romance space, and I am couching a lot of our fanfic in that space. For those of us who are fanfic girlies, the thing that I believe is true is that most of what we are doing is romanticizing villainy. And in order to do that effectively, we have to have a backstory that allows for us to justify why the person does the things that they do, right? So we have to have an abusive background in order for us to say, well, that's why he does it, and that's why I can fix him, because I can show him that, like, what he experienced. And I'm using he very specifically because we don't get this for women and this kind of behavior and understanding of fixing is very heterosexually specific. And it is definitely women fixing men and men being problematic. Right? And so in that way, I'm using him, and I'm using that pronoun very specifically and very intentionally. And so that now what happens is, like, when you get a character like a Voldemort and you revisit them in this moment, where we are in this kind of morally gray space in terms of how we understand many of our villains, what we do is we apply the old paradigm into this new space that we're in. And it doesn't quite hit for me. And listen, listen. And this is important. This is an important caveat. I love a morally dubious love interest, okay? I love it. And I know that that's why many of our Jermione fans love a Draco moment. Right? I get it. I understand. That's not Voldemort, though, y'all. That is not Tommy Riddz. That's not Voldiva. That is not who he is. He's not that person. Now, listen, I don't dislike, fix or anything that invokes Voldemort, but, like, let's be honest and true, right? Like, he is a villain. He is a problem. And, yeah, he's got a bad past, but at the end of the day, the choices that he makes are his and his alone. And. And he does some things that are a problem. And I just want us to kind of recognize that as being true. Eric brought up a really good point, and he says, did the system fail Voldemort? Sure. Wizard Society was set up in such a way that his mother's family could live in abject poverty and squalor, too proud to do anything about it. The Muggle system failed him, too, putting him in an orphanage where genuine love and affection, perhaps the only things that could have saved, saved his or changed his path were simply not available. These things make him tragic. They do not make him innocent, and do not change the fact that the only solution to someone as dangerous as Voldemort is death. There you have it. And Nadia wrote, I wonder if the characteristics of a good villain are opposed to the characteristics of a good leader. Old Snake Eyes fits the characteristics of antisocial personality disorder pretty well, which makes him a good villain. This includes lack of remorse, deceitfulness, irritability or aggression, and a reckless disregard for self and others, amongst a number of other characteristics. These are not the characteristics anybody would want in a good leader. Moldy Voldy is either deceitful enough to trick his followers into believing he will look after them or he instills enough fear in them that they feel they have no choice. And this takes us back to our conversation about whether or not he's a good leader and what the goal structures of the Death Eaters are, right? It brings it all together in a very meaningful way. But at the end of the day, what it also highlights is the fact that Voldemort does not care about anything or anyone but himself. And that reality means that he can't be like, you know, the mob bosses in some of these romanticized books, right? He can't be like Draco in Manacles. Because those people, those men find a way to care about other people. And even though some of those ways are warped and messy and absurd, they still find it. Voldemort doesn't have that. Voldemort is a true narcissist. He only cares about himself. And so what we have to do then with this reality, right, and the recognition that he was written during a time where we were not getting the kinds of nuanced baddies that we're getting now, is that we have to suspend our desire for absolution. We have to suspend our desire for something that gives us a sense that we can fix him. He doesn't want to be fixed. Like, he doesn't believe that it's a necessity. He doesn't even want to be human. He wants to be devoid of all the things that tie him to mortality and humanity. That is who we're dealing with. And so the idea then that we would try and humanize him, even know that there are things that exist in the space that allow us to have at least a sense that this is possible, right? Like Eric points out, there are lots of systemic failures both on the part of the non magical and magical world that assist in who he becomes. But the reality of the situation is that there are lots of reasons for us to believe that this would have happened no matter what, right? And I have been on this hill and I'm going to stay right here, which is he has an entire genetic familial predisposition to this behavior that leaves him in this space and that no amount of fixing is gonna fix it, right? And I think that we have to kind of leave room for that and allow that reality to be true. And I know that this makes some of us uncomfortable because there's a desire, particularly for men to fix them, right? I should say us. I am a man. So there is this desire that exists, right? And I think that that is patriarchy made manifest. I think the fact that we never ever, ever, ever, ever really get the inverse right, where we have a really problematic woman who is then what, like saved, fixed, repaired, brought back from the brink by some man or another kind of romantic partner tells us a story about what this is meant to communicate to us. And I think that sometimes we just have to let bad men be bad men and allow that to be the thing that dictates the way that we view them. Y'all, thank you so much for joining me for another Prof. Response episode. I I keep saying it, but I really enjoy doing these. I think it just helps us dive deeper into these characters. I love being in conversation with you all explicitly and I can't always get to all the comments in the post episode chat. So I really enjoy the opportunity to be able to really take in what you say, revisit what I said. Because y'all, sometimes, most times, all the time I am just going and flying off the handle and just saying the things that come to my mind. And so sometimes you all remind me of what I said in the episode and I'm like, wait, was that me? Did I say that? And so it's always nice to revisit what I say because sometimes I gotta walk it back because sometimes I'm really just shooting from the hip. And these episodes really give me the opportunity to either clarify my point, deepen my point, or completely pretend like I never made a point at all. And so I wanna thank you all so much for that opportunity. Please remember to like rate, subscribe, do all the things that one does where pods are cast. Know that we're going to have a post episode chat about this conversation which I expect to be a lot of fun as it always is. Remember, for those of you who are listening and you haven't yet filled out the Peter Pettigrew survey that it is available on the Patreon. You might have to scroll down a little bit. You can find it in my link tree if you follow me. On social media Prof. J.W. on Instagram, ROFW on TikTok. Please feel free to email me at criticalmagictheorygmail.com y'all. Thank you all so much.

[Ryan Seacrest]

It is Ryan Seacrest here. There was a recent social media trend which consisted of flying on a plane with no music, no movies, no entertainment. But a better trend would be going to chumbacasino.com it's like having a mini social casino in your pocket. Chumba casino has over 100 online casino style games all absolutely free. It's the most fun you can have online and on a plane. So grab your free welcome bonus [e-mail] sponsored by Chumba Casino.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

No purchase necessary VGW Group Void where prohibited by law 21 plus terms and conditions apply.

[Professor Julian Womble]

This has been another episode of Critical Magic Theory. I'm Professor Julian Womble and if you liked today's episode. First of all, thank you. Please feel free to like, rate, subscribe do all the things that one does where pods are cast. If you want to follow me on social media, please feel free to do so. Prof. J.W. on Instagram, ROFW on TikTok. I am on Red Note but I don't remember what it is. Also if you're listening on Spotify, please feel free to comment in the in the episode I read them all. I love reading them and I love that you all can write them kind of in real time. I think that's really cool. Please join us for the post episode chat on Patreon. Y'all remember that the patient Peter Pettigrew survey is up. I will do a kind of last call sometime this weekend, but y'all get to it. I know you all have thoughts and I can't wait to hear them. Until then, be critical and stay magical, my friends. Bye.

[Ryan Seacrest]

It is Ryan Seacrest here. There was a recent social media trend which consisted of flying on a plane with no music, no movies, no entertainment. But a better trend would be going to chumbacasino.com it's like having a mini social casino in your pocket. Chumba casino has over 100 online casino style games all absolutely free. It's the most fun you can have online and on a plane. So grab your free welcome bonus now at chumbacasino. Com sponsored by Chumba Casino.

[Chumba Casino Advertiser]

No purchase necessary. VGW Group void we're prohibited by law 21/ terms and conditions apply.