Replies

"I've seen the first two movies and they do not suggest that non witches are stupid."

This is what they call non-magic folk like them, "it’s your bad luck you grew up in a family o’ the biggest muggles I ever laid eyes on". So says one of the characters in the books.

A ‘muggle’ is a person who does not practise the ‘dark arts’ i.e. magic. In the Harry Potter books, the main ‘muggles’ are ‘The Dursleys’ who are very cruel to Harry and are continually ‘putting him down’. Throughout these books the ‘muggles’ are portrayed to be, what the word ‘muggle’ derives from - mugs or fools. ‘Muggles’ are depicted as bringing upon themselves an unnecessary dependency on others and on self to get things done. Life for a ‘muggle’ is burdensome. According to JK Rowling this is where she got the word from.

It teaches that evil forces are conquered by ‘good’ witchcraft and counter curses.

http://www.fimc.org.uk/alert/2001novdec/Hpotter.htm

Let's not be deceitful here. In context, a muggle is nothing except a non-wizard. There are several Muggle familes in the books. Not all of them are portrayed as stupid. Harry's relatives are, for reasons of narrative convention. The hero must always have evil step-sisters or adoptive parents, right? It's part of the whole hero with a thousand faces idea.

In fact several wizards are portrayed as fascinated by Muggles and their inventiveness, which is praised on several occasions.

"In the Harry Potter books, the main ‘muggles’ are ‘The Dursleys’ who are very cruel to Harry and are continually ‘putting him down’"

You haven't read the books at all have you??? Shame on you. A sorta bearing false witness thing.

If you read the stories you would know Harry respects "muggles" and Dursley aspect of his life is to highlight how he rose beyond his mistreatment. He didn't do the "victim" scenario, it made his character stronger.

It teaches that evil forces are conquered by ‘good’ witchcraft and counter curses.

Yes, it does teach that good conquers evil. Glad you can see that.