Science Fiction and Fantasy Community Forums

Full Version: The Muggle word is derogatory
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Is the word Muggle a racist or derogatory word for non -magical person the same way non white or like Jew and Gentile ? Even people who are interested in Muggle thing s get discriminated against like the Weasleys.
That's the whole premise of the books' class structure, right?
Well. I don't think that it is always a derogatory word. Smile

It is more of a collective word. I watched a BBC series once where the characters referred to themselves as "Hons" standing for Honorable, the title given to the children of knights.

To my American skills with the English language, "No Mag" standing for "No Magic" makes more sense to me, but perhaps in the British (or Scots) version of English the word "Muggle" has some better explanation.

But I'm more inclined to think of the Usage of the word "Muggle" the way that Humpty-Dumpty uses words.... They mean whatever we want them to mean. A word used in a Mean fashion, can be meant to be derogatory. I was once told that calling me "Miss Irene" was a snarky way of talking to and about me. But I prefer to think not.

The following is from Wikipedia: "Rowling has stated she created the word "Muggle" from "mug", an English term for someone who is easily fooled. She added the "-gle" to make it sound less demeaning and more "cuddly".
I'm not sure J.K. Rowling intended for "muggle" to be racist or derogatory, although history teaches us that such words can transition into that kind of role. The word is used to distinguish between "wizard-folk" and "non-magic folk". Words like "mudblood" are clearly racist, and I believe one of Rowling's clear themes in the books is that those who believe in racial purity are the ones at fault and morally inferior. She would not have been well-liked in Nazi Germany.
Sadly the fantastic beasts movies seem to say that if the wizards were not in charge we have the natzis. (Sorry for spelling errors.darned nook screen.)
Irene Wrote:Sadly the fantastic beasts movies seem to say that if the wizards were not in charge we have the natzis. (Sorry for spelling errors.darned nook screen.)

True, but since that story line hasn't been fully played out yet, I'm willing to cut J.K. Rowling some slack. The Grindelwald saga is, in my opinion, a morality play that looks at the Pureblood-versus-Muggle argument from an older, different angle.

Grindelwald was, after all, spewing propaganda to sway his followers. So I think the movies will finish with a "bad wizards are just as bad as Nazis" message.
I hadn't really thought of this until now - if wizard vs. muggle is seen as a bloodline thing and therefore genetic, then within the world of the books, they really are races then. So there are the races with differing
physical attributes that we see in the diverse world of the movies... but also magic/non-magic races within those. Or maybe the other way around. Huh
august Wrote:I hadn't really thought of this until now - if wizard vs. muggle is seen as a bloodline thing and therefore genetic, then within the world of the books, they really are races then. So there are the races with differing
physical attributes that we see in the diverse world of the movies... but also magic/non-magic races within those. Or maybe the other way around. Huh

Well, I'm not sure if she has said anything about this, but I believe J.K. Rowling used the stories to attack racism, prejudice, and classism (I think that's the term). Hagrid tells the kids that the bloodlines between magical and non-magical families have become very mixed through the centuries. I think the whole fictional world is meant to condemn that kind of "we're superior" thinking.
No, it's not derogatory like mud-blood. It's just a distinction.