Narrator (22:58)

You can make a difference in someone's life, including your own, with a job in home care. These jobs offer flexible schedules, health care, retirement options, and free training. They also provide paid time off and opportunities for overtime. Visit oregonhomecarejobs.com to learn more and apply. That's oregonhomecarejobs.com.

Professor Julian Womble (23:27)

And I think that that's why he's able to fly under the radar. Because the other thing about villainy, right, is we create a narrative for ourselves about what it means to be a villain. And in this, in the wizarding world, it is Voldemort, right? Like he's the bad guy. It's Dark Wizards, it's Death Eaters. So that when you see other people who don't have a dark mark, who are not espousing, you know, radical pure blood supremacist ideologies, it doesn't always hit the same. And so then in your society, when you've defined it in such a very specific way, you miss all the signs. You completely ignore all of the evidence and you are looking at someone who's like, well, he can't be a bad guy, right? Look at him. He has a nose. Look at him. He wears beautiful robes, gowns, beautiful gowns, right? Like, he looks good. And that's not what evil looks like. Evil doesn't get to be pretty and evil doesn't get to be charming and evil doesn't get to be any of the things that we associate with, you know, good things. And it only works. And he's only successful at it because he is able to manipulate a society that is already predisposed to like him. They're already predisposed to want to believe him. And in that way, he's successful at making them feel like he's a good guy, even though he is not. He is a villain. And I think a question that I would kind of pose for us to think about is, you know, what, in our own societies, what do we think a villain looks like? And are there ways in which those definitions are too stringent or maybe too broad? And how are people kind of flying under the radar of our villain detector? One of the things that I said in the episode was about Memory Charms and talking about the fact that they are not illegal, right? Like, we see people use them all the time. And many of us had lots of thoughts on this, right? Like whether or not they are kind of a tool or a violation. And how do we understand the ethics of Memory Charms? And you know, asking larger questions about, like, what does it say about a society when one of its most casually used spells can erase someone's entire identity? Right. We tend to excuse right. Hermione's use of Memory Charms because her motives feel pure. But should intent matter more than outcome? How do we understand this idea of memory modification as it pertains to how ethical it is? Does it always contain this notion of control and domination? And I think people had a lot to say about this because I kind of give us this illegal versus legal dichotomy in terms of our understanding and how do we map that on with whether it's right or wrong? And many of you had some really great things to say about this. Matthew said the Memory Charm's usage by Lockhart is so egregious because it was used against wizards. Most of the time it's used against Muggles. And even then it's for protection. We're going to come back to that. Nadia says Memory Charms shouldn't just be illegal. They should be amongst the unforgivable curses. They all remove agency and none of them are okay. I think that this is a really fascinating way of thinking about it, right? Because some of you did present the idea that Memory Charms are okay. When we think about their usage on non magical people, we tend to believe. Or some of us, I should say, I won't put it on all of us, but some of us have the belief that if it's used against non magical people, it's fine because it's for the sake of protection, but when it's used on magical people, that's when we have to start seeking out some sort of regulatory practice because that's when it becomes an issue. And the reason why that's the case is because memory charms on non magical people are for the sake of protection. Here's the thing though, and this is where I get a little uncomfy when it comes to the usage on non magical people is that the effects that they have on magical people are the same that they have on non magical people. Right. And we are assuming that the usage is for protection and thus used with some level of discretion, however, simultaneously, concurrently. And I'm not convinced that that's the case. What we see, and we have a number of cases, but the one that always stands out to me the most is the Roberts family. In Goblet of Fire at the Quidditch World cup we see that they have absolutely addled the minds of these individuals. One, because they kept doing the Memory Charm on him throughout the registration for the Quidditch World cup when they were coming onto the campground, and two, because they had to do it on their whole family in order to remove the memories of what had happened the night before with the Death Eaters March. And so what we're able to see in this moment is that the usage of Memory Charms on anyone has really, really significant implications and impact on their lives. And if we're talking about doing things in the form of protection. Right. Like we can see how that's so easily abused those of us who are old enough to remember a world, particularly in the United States. But I think probably around the world Right after 9, 11, there was a lot of, like there were a lot of governmental regulatory practices that were put into place for the protection of American citizens that were and continue to be abused a lot. Right. And so that the idea then that, you know, in the name of protection we forego certain aspects of people's humanity, I think is something that is easily, easily corrupted. And the reality is, and I, you know, I'm a firm believer in this, I understand the notion of needing to be protected in the 1600s during the witch hunt. I am not convinced though that in the 90s when these books are taking place canonically, that the need for protection warrants the usage of magic against non magical people in the way that we see it used. And I think that the belief that it's okay to use it on non magical people even in the name of protection is outrageously problematic. One because they don't use it on everyone so often. We realize that, you know, Hermione's parents don't have it used on them until Hermione does it at the end. The Dursleys have all kinds of magical things happen in their home. They are never having their memories modified. So there are clearly a lot of people in and around the space who have a lot of awareness of magic and nothing is done to them. And I find it strange that in the name of protection these things are occurring and yet somehow there is a level of discretion that they're clearly having which means that there are alternatives to using Memory Charms and so they don't need to do it. And they do. And I just, I don't know. I don't know. It strikes me as really, really problematic the usage of them at all anywhere. And I agree with the belief that they are wrong and I agree with the idea that, you know, just because they are seemingly legal that doesn't mean that they should be used just whenever a person wants it. I, I think that this is true across the board though. I don't think that they are a necessity for protection. I think that there are other ways. Like we see Rufus Scrymgeour and Cornelius Fudge, just Gaslight the Prime Minister. There are clearly other Prime Ministers who are running around. I mean, they can't be that worried about it. They reveal themselves left and right. I mean, think about the very beginning of the series when they're all just running around apparating in and out celebrating all of these things and not even seemingly worried about non magical people noticing them. There are owls running around, shooting stars, all kinds of things are happening and they don't do anything. They basically just gaslight the Muggle world into just being like, oh, you're being silly. You know what I mean? They don't have to do this. And I think that if we are going to argue that Memory Charms are not okay to be used against magical people, I think we have to invite the reality that they shouldn't be used on anyone. And part of the reason is, is that because there is seemingly no difference in terms of, you know, the effect that they have on magical and non magical people. If they can be, if they can lead to what was done to Bertha Jorkins in Goblet of Fire where she literally is unable to function because of the Memory Charm placed on her by Barty Crouch Sr. Then there is no reason for us to believe that that couldn't be the case for other people. And if those are the true dangers that are faced by Memory Charms, then we have to acknowledge the fact that the notion of protection does not preclude the dangers. And it seems like this is one of those things where, you know, J.K. rowling writes these books and she really does kind of lead us to be fairly callous about non magical people. And part of the reason why is because the ones that we meet the most are the Dursleys. And we all have very, very strong feelings about them. And so we don't really care that much about what happens to them. Right. We don't care about Aunt Marge. And so I think we have to be mindful though that these things, these charms are dangerous. They're dangerous for magical people. They're dangerous for non magical people. And I think we have to be truthful and we have to acknowledge that Savannah wrote he being Lockhart, was going to Memory charm them so bad that he himself was adjacent to a dementor's kiss when it backfired. Attempting to harm children. Nope. Right. I think that what we ultimately see the Memory Charm do to Lockhart is such an indication of how dangerous these charms are and the fact that there seemingly is no regulation on them. Right. Like he's doing them and nobody is any the wiser about it. Right. Like they're not tracking it, they're not trying to figure out what's happened. These people who he has, you know, modified their memories are just running around here. Right. Earl Earliest he said, if someone could do wrong against you and then wipe your memory like a file off a flash drive, that would be way too many horrible possibilities. No way. This isn't villainous. I agree. I agree. And I also agree that if we are going to take this hard line against them, we have to take the hard line against them.

Narrator (34:48)

For you can make a difference in someone's life, including your own, with a job in home care. These jobs offer flexible schedules, health care, retirement options and free training. They also provide paid time off and opportunities for overtime. Visit oregonhomecarejobs.com to learn more and apply. That's oregonhomecarejobs.com.

Professor Julian Womble (35:20)

Non magical people as well. I think I understand that there is this kind of very seemingly antiquated notion of protection. When we listen to them talk about non magical people, there's a level of condescension. There's absolutely no fear. They talk about guns as if they're just like water guns. They Talk about policemen as if they are just what, like they seemingly, when we meet them, do not care about non magical people and don't necessarily believe that they pose any true threat. Amos Diggory and Arthur are talking about them as if they are nothing. Arthur speaks so like kind of weirdly about non magical people as if they're children that it seems weird to me that the justification for using them against using Memory Charms on non magical people is that they are dangerous when very little in the magical world when we meet it suggests that that is the kind of prevailing belief amongst the magical populace. And if that is the case, then what we are actually witnessing is literally just an abuse of power because you can. And if we are going to invite, if we are going to condemn Gilderoy Lockhart, and rightfully so, for his usage of Memory Charms, I think we also have to recognize that when they are used against non magical people, they are just as problematic, if not even more, because you are using it against people who cannot defend themselves. Like we can have a conversation, and I know we probably will, about what Hermione did for her parents and the justifications and the reasons why, but at the end of the day, the reality is that they had so little agency in the moment where she performs the charm on them to defend themselves. Right? Like they couldn't. And at least if you're doing it with magical people, they may be able to put up a fight. And I think that there's something to be said about that. And in addition to the broader conversation surrounding Memory Charms, I think we also have to be very clear about the dangers that they pose, broadly construed, but also the lack of agency on the part of people who are not magical to be able to go and even potentially have them repaired. Right? Like if someone in the magical world noticed that their friend was off, they could go to St. Mungo's and see what they could get done. Right? Like you can't do that in the magical world. There's no recourse for you. So if we're gonna condemn Memory Charms, which I think that we should because they are bad and are the justification for why many of us believe that Gilderoy Lockhart is a villain, then that villainy does not stop when it's only magic. The last thing that I want us to talk about is whether or not Lockhart is a good Ravenclaw. Many of us had a lot of questions about this because, you know, what does it mean to be a good member of any house? And someone brought this up to me and said that we should do like a series of episodes on the Houses. And I think, I think I like that idea and I think we're gonna do it. And I feel like what I want to do is before we get into our heavy hitters, before we really dive into the Snapes and the Dumbledores, I want us to take a little bit of a break and talk about the Houses. And I feel like that would just be a good primer. One for two reasons. One, because I can batch record those episodes because I'm gonna be going on vacation in a few weeks and I want us to still have things to be able to talk about while I'm away, but I'm not gonna have like my big fancy mic to do my recordings on. And so this would be cool to just have a couple of episodes that I can do that I can just record prior to leaving and then schedule to drop for you all. And then we can have our conversations later on our post episode chat about the Houses. And then when I get back from vacation, then we can dive into the nitty gritty, the madness, the absurdity that is some of the bigger characters that are at the end of our half blood list. So we're going to get into what it means to be a good member of all of these houses and all of you are going to be able to give your opinions and then we're going to maybe have some definitions. Probably not though, because you all never come to a consensus about anything. Nuance, nuance, nuance. But anyways, back to the task at hand. When we're thinking about the idea of what does it mean to be a good Ravenclaw. Right. There are lots of questions about whether Lockhart fits the bill and how do we understand it. And many of you came with your own definitions. And I said before that this question's a little bit difficult because we don't know a lot about Ravenclaw House. We know that it's kind of rooted in intelligence, but that can manifest in a lot of different ways, which is what we discussed when we talked about Luna. And we've also not had that mini Ravenclaws that we've discussed thus far to really get a sense of it. And the ones that we have talked about, except Luna, have all been bad guys. And so how do we reconcile that? Right? Like if Luna represents the heart of Ravenclaw, does Lockhart Quirrel, do they represent the shadow side, this notion of intelligence and brilliance without boundaries? Right. Sarah H. He had to put 10 toes down to pull off his scam. He researched, schemed, and used his wit for years. That's very Ravenclaw to me. Nadia wrote, he's incompetent and unintelligent. He's not a good Ravenclaw. He's a fraud who never respected learning. Just the image of being smart. Cassie wrote, being a good Ravenclaw doesn't mean being a good person. Lockhart fits the work, smarter, not harder mentality. And he did it with wit and charisma. And Emma wrote, he belonged there, but didn't buy into, but didn't do right by the house. He refused to put in the work of actually learning. He didn't grow into his potential. But here's the thing, y' all, he learned something. I mean, again, the magic that he had to use is hard. And what we know, right, when we talk about the sophistication of memory magic, right, when we learn in Half Blood Prince about Voldemort imprinting memories or implanting memories, imprinting memories. What is this? Twilight? Implanting memories into other people's minds to make it look like they were the ones committing the crimes that he committed. Dumbledore acknowledges that that magic is very tricky. It's hard to get around. It's very, very, very sophisticated. And I think that what we're seeing here and what we're believing, right, is just that he just obliviated all these people. And maybe he did, but even still, you know, to cast a really charm memory, Good Lord. To cast a really strong memory charm, it takes a lot of magical ability and acumen and accuracy. Because part of what we can imagine, right, is that you have to remove a very specific part. And I don't think he's just blank minding these people. He's legitimately modifying these memories. And what we know, right, from the way that Voldemort talks about memory charms pertaining to Bertha Jorkins, is that these are charms that are easily broken and people can figure out what happened to you. So you have to cast a very strong charm. So the acumen is there, the ability is there, the knowledge is there. And maybe it's like, maybe he's only good at that one thing, but he's got to be a fairly decent writer or maybe as a ghostwriter, but either way, he's selling the story, right? He had to go and find these people. I think that, you know, his incompetence comes not from his ability to do these things. It's his ability to pretend like he knows everything. That's where he fails. Right? That, for me, is where I'm like, okay, but you're not a competent person. He's not a Defense against the Dark Arts teacher. Like, he just isn't one. He doesn't know what he's doing in that domain. But I think that we. I mean, we all have our specialties. We all have things that we're good at, and then there are things that we're simply not good at, like math. For me, I'm terrible at it. I just simply can't do it. Give me a calendar. See, I don't even know the word. Give me a calendar. Give me a calculator. Like, I. I'm not good at math. I'm good at a lot of other things. But, like, I don't know that I would say that I'm that because I'm deficient in this other thing. And maybe I'm being too generous, and I'm sure that someone will tell me that I am, but I'm like, no, he's good at the memory piece. And it takes a lot of work and acumen to be that adept. And I think part of the danger of a Lockhart is the perception that he is incompetent, because he isn't. And it's the same way that Quirrel was able to kind of fly under the radar of people in the castle with literal Voldemort on his back, and nobody knew because he was cosplaying this incompetent, like, squirmy kind of person. And maybe he was actually feeling all of those things, but people were just kind of like, oh, he's dumb. He doesn't know anything. And then it turns out he's actually pretty adept. And I feel like, again, part of the smokescreen. And I'm not saying I think that Gilderoy Lockhart is actually incompetent, but I don't think that that incompetence is like. I think that there are actual places and spaces where he is good at things. And we are led to believe that he's stupid. And he's not. Like, he survived this long, sold all of these books, told this story, wiped these people's memories, did all of this stuff, and no one was any the wiser. And yes, we can blame some of that belief on the gullibility of the magical world, but some of it is also on his ability to see, sell the lie. And that takes a lot of work. Like, lying is not easy. It is not something that you can just do very well and get away with, especially when you're in the public eye and he does it. And maybe it's pretty privileged at work. But I think we have to be mindful of the fact that being smart doesn't mean that you're smart in everything. Being wise is a completely. As far as I'm concerned, being wise and being smart are two different things. And we don't necessarily get a sense that Ravenclaws require wisdom. And I think, I don't know, I mean, I hope that we can get into this when we talk about Ravenclaws in more depth in a few weeks. But I am standing 10 toes down on the idea that I think he's a really good Ravenclaw. I think he is able to pull the wool over so many people's eyes by simply just not being smart, but also being smart. And there's something to be said about the ability to pull that off and fool a lot of people. Like, I don't know, like, did he fool Dumbledore? Cause it kind of feels like he did and maybe he didn't. But then that begs a larger question about a number of things. But, like, he got the job. So I don't know. I'm going to say he's a good Ravenclaw and I know the Ravenclaws are not going to like that. And that's okay because, you know, every house has people in it that we don't necessarily like or that we are not proud of. Except for Gryffindors. But that's propaganda and I said it. This has been another episode of Critical Magic Theory. I'm Professor Julian Womble and if you like today's episode, first of all, thank you. Please feel free to like, rate, subscribe and do all the things that one does where pods are cast. If you have not filled out the Umbridge survey, please feel free to do so. You can find it at criticalmagictheory.com you can find it on the Patreon. I posted it last Thursday. Y' all. I cannot wait to hear hear your thoughts. I cannot wait for the post episode chat on this episode. If you do not follow me on social media, please feel free to do so at Prof. W on Tik Tok and Prof. JW on Instagram. Y' all. I cannot wait for the post episode chat on this. I know the Ravenclaws are coming. I hear the, the wings flapping. I. I hear them and I'm ready. I'm not ready, but I'm excited, y' all. Thank you so much and I can't wait to hear your thoughts on Umbridge. Until then, be critical and stay magical, my friends. Bye.