My reading journal for this week centers on the idea of “magic” that could theoretically be performed by non-magic users as well, and uses the chapter, “Magic for Daily Use and Profit: Mandrakes, Charms, Bezoars, and Love Potions in the Muggle and Wizarding Worlds.”
In the chapter, “Magic for Daily Use and Profit: Mandrakes, Charms, Bezoars, and Love Potions in the Muggle and Wizarding Worlds,” Birgit Wiedl discusses the various manners in which wizards (and on occasion, Muggles) use magic from casting spells to brewing potions. Wiedl draws comparisons between magic in the wizarding world to Muggle usage of the same spells, and comes to a conclusion that wizards and Muggles participated in a cultural transfer before the Statue of Secrecy was enacted; this concept is concisely stated in the reading when Weidl states, “very little of the wizarding world’s magic is, in fact, exclusive to that culture” (34). This does raise the question, however, of why the Statue of Secrecy is even necessary at all – if there was already a cultural transfer of magical concepts, there is no harm in knowing that magic exists without being able to cast spells; Squibs, for instance, have no inherent magical ability and are still allowed to remain aware of the magical world, and parents to Muggle-born wizards and witches are also given clearance to visit the wizarding world.
An issue with a lot of the magic in the wizarding world is that many objects do not require the user to be magic to use them. For example, Weidl cites a passage from Chamber of Secrets that shows Arthur discussing wizards who trick Muggles with keys that are enchanted to shrink (33). For the prank to work on unsuspecting Muggles, the key has to be enchanted to sustain the spell on its own, and still works around non-magic users. Another example is potion brewing in general – many times the key to brewing a potion is simply having the right ingredients, not a flick of the wand to cast a spell over the cauldron. The reading even refers to situations in which Muggles once used ingredients shown in the wizarding world such as the usage of mandrakes in Europe to create “witch salves” (18) or bezoars, which Muggle noblemen were once desperate to collect to “soothe their constant fear of being poisoned” (20). Why is it that Muggles are no longer allowed to have access to magical ingredients? There are surely Squibs in the magical world with a proficiency in potion making, after all!
Weidl does, perhaps, agree with me on the topic of Muggles being able to perform some feats of magic, because when discussing astrology in particular, she points out that, “Astrology/astronomy ultimately became the court science among Muggles” (28). Although the word “science” is used, I would argue that particularly for astrology there isn’t a different, magical way to look at the stars that Muggles couldn’t see. There is, perhaps, a precedent established in the wizarding world that not everyone who uses soothsaying tools is accurate, as the quote from Prisoner of Azkaban at the beginning of the section on such magical abilities used in the reading states, “Divination is one of the most imprecise branches of magic” (23). It is no secret, however, that the wizarding world is home to prejudice against Muggles, so it is possible that it’s not considered “real magic” because Muggles are often able to produce the same results as wizards.
I’m not 100% sure what the argument of this reading journal is … I can tell that the paper is about magic being used by muggles, but I don’t really see an argument. It feels like more of a summary of what the reading had said rather than analysis. Since the journal is supposed to be pretty short, maybe focus on something specific and elaborate on it. Maybe focus on what specific benefits would occur if the Statute of Secrecy was lifted, or imagine what role squibs play in a world dominated by magic.
I think if you want to focus on Muggles using magic, you may want to focus on the Statue of Secrecy. A good argument for the Statue of Secrecy is that Muggles would want solutions for all of their problems, considering numerous things shown in the book are done with a wand.
If you want to talk about Squibs, I think you could discuss how Squibs were looked down upon, even though there is a real possibility that they could use magic.
Hello! I do agree with the two previous comments. however, I will say your last paragraph could function as your argument. You make a good argument about wizard’s judgement of divination, perhaps because muggles are also capable of it. Overall I liked reading the journal, but there was no strong argument made.