Critical Magic Theory: An Analytical Harry Potter Podcast
Episode Summary: Prof Responds: LAVENDER BROWN
Release Date: February 12, 2025
Host: Prof. Julian Wamble

In the episode titled "Prof Responds: LAVENDER BROWN," Professor Julian Wamble delves into listener feedback from the Patreon post-episode chat, focusing primarily on the character Lavender Brown. This engaging session unpacks various facets of Lavender's portrayal in the Harry Potter series, addressing race, gender performance, and her role in pivotal events like the Battle of Hogwarts. Below is a detailed breakdown of the key discussions, insights, and conclusions drawn during the episode.

1. Introduction to "Prof Responds"

Prof. Wamble introduces a new mini-segment, "Prof Responds," aimed at addressing listener comments and providing deeper insights into topics that may not have been fully explored in previous episodes. This segment serves as a platform to continue rich conversations between main episodes.

Prof. Wamble [00:45]: "I was trying to think about what we could do to remedy that because I'm a solutions-oriented person and the thing that I came up with was this kind of mini-episode segment, I guess we would call it, that's like Prof. Responds."

2. Changing of Lavender Brown's Race

A significant portion of the episode examines the controversial decision to portray Lavender Brown as white in the film adaptations, differing from her depiction in the books. Listener comments, particularly from Will, Brit, and Neisha, raise questions about racial representation and its impact on character perception.

Key Points:

• Miscommunication Theory: Some argue that the race change was a miscommunication between J.K. Rowling and the casting directors.
• Impact of Race on Character Dynamics: Exploring how Lavender being black would alter her interactions and the audience's perception.
• Racial Performance and Stereotypes: Discussion on how black teenage girls are often adultified and denied the carefree portrayals afforded to white counterparts.

Brit [Timestamp: 15:30]: "By making Lavender Brown white instead of black, it reinforces stereotypes of white teenage girls while at the same time denying black teenage girls the ability to experience or be seen in a similar way."

Prof. Wamble concurs, highlighting the societal implications of such portrayals and the lack of representation of black girls experiencing typical teenage frivolities.

Prof. Wamble [16:45]: "We don't see that we don't have that understanding of, like, black girls getting to be that."

3. Lavender's Fate at the Battle of Hogwarts

Listener Allison S. prompts a deeper analysis of Lavender's role and tragic fate during the Battle of Hogwarts, raising questions about narrative choices and character significance.

Key Points:

• Lack of Closure: The books and films provide limited information about Lavender's survival post-attack by Fenrir Greyback.
• Narrative Purpose: Examination of why Lavender, primarily serving as Ron’s girlfriend, was chosen for such a brutal fate.
• Gendered Violence: Discussion on the gendered aspects of her attack and its implications.

Allison S. [23:10]: "Why did Lavender have to be the one chosen by Greyback to be mauled? What does this say about her character and her role in the narrative?"

Prof. Wamble speculates on potential reasons, suggesting it could reflect broader themes of war's indiscriminate brutality or serve as a catalyst for character development among the main trio.

Prof. Wamble [24:50]: "It's the price of war, and this is what happens to people."

4. Examination of "Good Purebloods"

Rachel's comment introduces a nuanced debate on what constitutes a "good Pureblood" in the wizarding world, challenging the community to reassess their metrics for heroism and moral standing.

Key Points:

• Gatekeeping Morality: The high standards set for Purebloods to be deemed "good" often require significant personal sacrifices, paralleling real-world notions of allyship.
• Passive Purebloods: Many Pureblood characters lead lives unaffected by activism, raising questions about their moral standing.
• Spectrum of Morality: The idea that Purebloods exist on a spectrum of goodness rather than a binary classification.

Rachel [30:20]: "We're kind of gatekeeping what it means to be a good pureblood because our metric is really one that's kind of based on the idea of sacrifice."

Prof. Wamble reflects on the challenges of defining morality within the Pureblood community, acknowledging the difficulty in balancing idealistic standards with realistic character behaviors.

Prof. Wamble [32:15]: "We are asking people to really have to do the work. And the work is hard."

5. Gender Performance in Gryffindor House

Serena's insights propel a discussion on the gendered expectations within Gryffindor, contrasting Lavender's overt femininity with Hermione's "not like other girls" trope.

Key Points:

• Castigation of Femininity: Characters like Hermione and Professor McGonagall discourage overt feminine expressions, enforcing a specific gender performance within Gryffindor.
• Male-Coded Bravery: Bravery in Gryffindor is often portrayed through masculine-coded actions, sidelining alternative expressions of courage.
• Gender Stereotypes: The episode critiques how Gryffindor's definition of bravery aligns with traditional masculinity, limiting diverse representations.

Serena [39:40]: "Hermione being positioned as the one we are supposed to hold up as the gold standard girl, indoor Gryffindor."

Prof. Wamble emphasizes the restrictive nature of these gender performances and advocates for a more inclusive understanding of bravery that transcends gendered expectations.

Prof. Wamble [40:55]: "Bravery has no gender performance. It has no gender identity that anyone can be brave."

6. Conclusion and Future Directions

Prof. Wamble wraps up the episode by expressing enthusiasm for continuing the "Prof Responds" segment, encouraging ongoing dialogue within the community. He hints at the next episode's focus on "The Best and Worst of Purebloods," signaling an exciting exploration of diverse Pureblood characters.

Prof. Wamble [50:10]: "Next episode will be our best and worst of Purebloods. I've been compiling it and it's already getting chaotic and I'm so excited to share that with you all."

He invites listeners to participate in the meta post-episode chat to further refine the segment and adapt it to the community's preferences.

Prof. Wamble [50:40]: "Please feel free to join us in a post episode chat about this post episode chat. It's a meta post episode chat and I can't wait to hear what you all think about this concept and whether or not it works for you."

Key Takeaways:

• Representation Matters: The portrayal of characters like Lavender Brown significantly influences audience perception and reflects broader societal attitudes towards race and gender.
• Complex Morality: Defining "good" Purebloods requires a nuanced understanding that goes beyond binary classifications, acknowledging a spectrum of behaviors and motivations.
• Challenging Gender Norms: Gryffindor's traditional association with masculine-coded bravery limits diverse expressions of courage and reinforces restrictive gender performances.

Prof. Julian Wamble effectively uses listener feedback to deepen the analysis of Lavender Brown’s character, intertwining critical theory with the rich tapestry of the Harry Potter universe. This episode not only addresses specific character portrayals but also invites listeners to engage in broader discussions about race, gender, and morality within fictional worlds.

Stay tuned for the next episode, "The Best and Worst of Purebloods," where Prof. Wamble promises to dissect and debate the complexities of Pureblood characters in the Wizarding World.