Fanon VS Canon
The Death Eaters equate to Nazis or the KKK.
It may well be that Rowling had the Nazis vaguely in mind when she wrote about the race laws which Umbridge introduces, but the Nazis would kill anyone who was even a quarter Jew or gypsy, whereas the Death Eaters, and even Umbridge, will spare anyone who is even a quarter wizwitch.
There are superficial similarities between the Death Eaters and White Supremacists, but the dynamics are different. White Supremacists, at least where they occur in predominately white countries, are members of a majority who have been in power for centuries and don't like the idea that they may now have to share their toys with others. Pureblood supremacists are a minority within an already tiny minority, possessed of certain advantages but hiding in fear from the very Muggles whom they affect to despise but who outnumber wizwitches six thousand to one, and who in the past have done their best to hunt wizards into extinction.
If the Death Eaters equate to any American racist group, it's not the Ku Klux Klan but the Nation of Islam; a militant wing of an oppressed minority, who have become as bigoted as their erstwhile oppressors.
The dynamic is similar to the setup of the made-for-tv 1991 film called Blood Ties, which was shown at least three times on British TV and might well have been seen by Rowling....
SPOILERS coming up if you haven't seen the film....
It's about vampires, but these vampires aren't supernatural beings but a surviving remnant of another and more predatory human species, who refer to themselves as Carpathians. They are physically superior to Homo sapiens, much stronger, more agile and longer-lived, but their numbers are tiny and because of their wolf-like behavioural peculiarities they have been ostracised and hunted to the verge of extinction. The moral core of the film is about what happens when a persecuted minority turn inward and start to see themselves as not only different from but superior to their persecutors, and start to treat them as beasts, as prey, which is effectively what's happening with the Death Eaters (especially after Umbridge gets involved).
Saving someone's life creates a magical Life Debt.
This idea is so firmly rooted in fanon that it is accepted almost universally as being established canon - yet all we find in the books is that Dumbledore says that when one wizard saves another, it creates "a certain bond" between them, and that Snape feels himself under an obligation to James because James saved his life. There's nothing in canon to say that this is any more than the sense of gratitude or of moral obligation which a Muggle would feel towards someone who had saved them.
I'm dubious as to whether the idea of a formal Life Debt is even conon-compatible, since you would expect that if such a thing existed, it would have been mentioned. Even if Dumbledore's "certain bond" is more than just the sense of moral obligation a Muggle would feel, it still doesn't sound strong enough to be the powerful imperative assumed in fanon.
Perhaps the problem is in the use of the word "certain". I'm as sure as one can be from the phrasing that when Dumbledore says "a certain bond" he means "something in the nature of a bond", not "a bond which is certain and sure", but it's a phrase which is open to misunderstanding.
Saving someone's life creates a magical Life Debt.
This is almost a universal Fanon almost canon at this point. Reading this actually makes sense that it shouldn't be magical obligation, more of a moral obligation to return the favour.
The Death Eaters are a highly organized group who wear special, elaborate masks and uniforms.
In the films the Death Eaters are portrayed as militarized and disciplined, wearing black uniforms and elaborate, sinister white or silver ceramic masks as they trample in silent unison across the World Cup campsite, hammering it flat with their iron tread. In the book the Death Eater wannabees at the World Cup are a baying, undisciplined rabble emitting "Loud jeering, roars of laughter and drunken yells", who set fire to a few tents more or less by accident as they blast them out of the way.
During the scene in the graveyard at Little Hangleton in GoF, Harry sees a gathering of Death Eaters, including Lucius, and sees that "their eyes dart[ed] sideways at each other through their masks" and "the glittering eyes in their masks [were] fixed upon Voldemort". Lucius's voice is variously described as coming both from "beneath the hood" and from "under the mask". When Harry next encounters Lucius, in the Department of Mysteries at the end of OotP, he thinks that "He had last seen those cold grey eyes through slits in a Death Eater's hood".
Pro-IRA photo' montage, found on Google images - the link is to a Pinterest page but the image has been removed. The flag is that of the Republic of Eire.
It seems clear that mask and hood are one thing, and that the mask is some sort of cloth flap on the front of the hood. The result probably resembles, and is intended to resemble, the black Balaclava helmets worn by real-life British paramilitary organisations such as the IRA, INLA and UDA. Pointed KKK-style hoods are possible but unlikely, as that look is so distinctive - and to British eyes so ridiculous - that you'd expect it to be mentioned. Indeed, in British tradition a pointed, cone-shaped hat like that is called a "Dunce's cap", and symbolises stupidity.
This seems to fit almost every occasion when Death Eater masks are described. The only exception is during the final battle when Thicknesse's mask is pulled down to bare his forehead, showing that it isn't of a piece with his hood: but Thicknesse isn't a real Death Eater, just some poor sap of a politican who was Imperiused, so his outfit may be ad hoc.
There are references to recognisable "Death Eater robes", which indicate that they do have some sort of uniform, or at least a look: but we are never told what that look is. Possibly it's the built-in mask which distinguishes them. Even the idea that the Death Eaters habitually dress in black is only moderately supported in canon. We are never told that the Death Eaters always wear black, nor told that they are wearing black every time they appear. All we can say is that on the few occasions when we see a Death Eater and are told what colour their clothes are, they're wearing black - but black is a very common colour for wizard robes.
The Death Eaters carry out wholesale slaughter, torture, Dark Revels etc..
American readers tend to assume that the Death Eaters are based on Islamist terrorists and are therefore wholesale slaughterers of civilians - but the Harry Potter books were planned at a time when hardly anybody had heard of Islamist terrorists and Britain was, and had been for decades, in the grip of its own long-running terrorist war between the different factions in Northern Ireland. This is why Vernon makes a joke about Harry "checking for letter-bombs" in the first book - if the family had had any strong police, political or military connections then a letter-bomb would have been a real possibility in 1991 - and also probably why Vernon and Petunia assume that the Potters were killed by the explosion which destroyed part of their house. They (and presumably the villagers of Godric's Hollow) assume that they were the victims of a bombing. The Death Eaters wear cloth hoods which are probably similar to the black Balaclava helmets worn by Irish terrorists, and the timing of various events to do with the Death Eaters matches similar events to do with Irish terrorism in Ireland and on the mainland, with the same debates about the behaviour of the security services, with starving, Dementor-damaged prisoners in Azkaban as against hunger-strikers in The Maze etc., so it's far more likely that the Death Eaters are modelled on the IRA, UDA etc. than on Islamists.
With some exceptions, Irish terrorists rarely deliberately murdered civilians. They were perfectly willing to kill civilians as collateral damage but their style was usually to attack political and military targets, or to cause huge damage to civilian buildings but to give the police just enough warning to evacuate them first. The bombs which took out a large slice of central Manchester in 1996 could potentially have killed or maimed eighty thousand people: but in reality there were no serious injuries at all, because the IRA warned the police in advance.
Sometimes they warned the police there was going to be a bomb when there wasn't, and got to cause mass evacuations and massive disruption for the price of a 'phone-call.
So, we cannot automatically assume that the Death Eaters target civilians or carry out acts of gratuitous cruelty, just because they are terrorists. We need to look at what we actually know about them.
In GoF Arthur Weasley refers to "Muggle killings" during Vold War One, half of which he believes to have been done for fun, but gives no figures - we don't know if he's talking about two gratuitous murders or two hundred. In DH Harry tells the Dursleys that Voldemort (he personally, not the Death Eaters) kills Muggles for fun, and there are references to Muggle casualties and the need to defend Muggle neighbours during Vold War Two, although it's not said whether these casualties are due to Death Eaters or to Dementors. Although Arthur mentions the existence of some gratuitous killings, all the Muggle killings that we actually know about before DH seem to have been carried out for practical, tactical reasons, mainly to put pressure on the Ministry. These killings are callous, but not gratuitous, so they do not amount to evidence that the Death Eaters kill for sport on a regular basis - that idea seems to rest only on Arthur's opinion.
We are told that some of the Death Eaters in Vold War One indulged in Muggle torture - Voldemort himself refers to it - but then he calls the baiting of the Roberts family at the World Cup "Muggle torture", and that was only slightly worse than what the Marauders did to Snape. So we don't know whether Muggle torture refers to gory atrocities or aggravated bullying. It could be the kind of horrors assumed in fanon, but we don't know.
Sirius says that in Vold War One "Every week, news comes of more deaths, more disappearances, more torturing ..." but again, we don't know if this was the gratuitous cruelty assumed in fanon, or practical military action. The torture of the Longbottoms, for example, was done in order to obtain information, not out of sadism. If you list the names of people we know have been killed by Death Eaters up to the start of DH, there are one or two where we don't know where they worked or why they were targetted, but the vast majority were either Ministry staff or Order members or their families, and there's nobody that we know of that was killed by Death Eaters prior to DH and that we know not to have been a Ministry official or an Order member or one of their relatives. We do know that whole families of Order members were wiped out, but we don't know whether they were deliberately targetted, or were collateral damage.
The way Voldemort seems to be holding court at Malfoy manor slightly supports the idea of Death Eater social gatherings, at least in Vold War Two, and he does have a tormented prisoner in the dungeon - or at least in the cellar - and kills Charity Burbage in front of his council. The classic fanon idea of the Death Eaters is just about canon-compatible, especially in Vold War Two: but it's not the only possible interpretation. Therefore, one cannot state that the Death Eaters as a group definitely do murder or torture for fun and then use that as evidence of anything else: it's a point which is unclear.
Fabian and Gideon Prewett were twins.
There's a common assumption in fandom that Fabian and Gideon Prewett, Molly's brothers, were twins like Fred and George. In fact we're simply told that they were her and each other's brothers. Nor do we know whether they were older or younger than Molly or one of each. All we know is that as at August/September 1981, when the brothers were killed, they were old enough to be Order members, and Molly was in her late twenties or early thirties.
Harry regards the Weasleys as his family.
The Weasleys certainly seem to regard Harry as almost an extra son, and indeed Molly seems more attentive to Harry's needs than she is to Ron's. But canon Harry doesn't really reciprocate (and perhaps he is right to distrust Molly's favouritism, which probably contains elements of pity and celebrity-worship).
We see this very clearly in the scene in DH after the Trio Apparate away from the attack on the Weasley wedding, and Arthur's Patronus meets them at Grimmauld Place to tell them that the family have survived. Ron is quite undone with relief, and so is Hermione, even though Molly was quite unpleasant to her in fourth year when the Prophet suggested she had toyed with Harry's affections. But Harry has to think about Ginny, specifically, before he can share their excitement. "'It's your family, 'course you're worried. I'd feel the same way.' He thought of Ginny. 'I do feel the same way.'" He's quite explicit that he would feel the same overwhelming relief if Molly and Arthur were his own family, but as they aren't, he doesn't, except as regards Ginny.
Hermione could have saved Snape if she had thought to use dittany.
Since we see dittany being used to treat a bite from Nagini, it is often said that Hermione left Snape to die when she could have saved him, if only she had used her supply of dittany on him.
There are several points to consider here. The first is that vipers - which, from her description, is what Nagini is - can choose whether to bite with venom or not. It seems likely, from the way Harry reacted when Nagini bit him, that she withheld her venom in order to bring him alive to Voldemort, and therefore all Hermione did with dittany when she healed Harry was to seal a simple bite-wound, such as one might get from a dog or a crocodile. We do not know, therefore, whether dittany would help in cases of actual snake venom - it isn't mentioned as being used on Arthur Weasley when he received a venomous bite.
Dittany of Crete, Origanum dictamnus, from gardenharvestsupply.com
Dittany, also called American dittany, Cunila origanoides, from Garden of Aaron, photo by Fritz Flohr Reynolds
Ordinary British dittany, also called false dittany, Dictamnus albus, from Labour of Love Landscaping. Also seen with pale mauve flowers.
Given that Voldemort wanted to kill Snape, and do so rapidly so he could (as he thought) gain the Mastery of the Elder Wand, it seems very likely that Nagini would have bitten Snape with venom, as well as tearing a hole in his neck. Now, there are three unrelated plants which are all called dittany, all of which are believed to have healing properties. We know that Hermione started out with a small bottle of dittany essence, and that she used it to heal Ron's Splinch injury, Harry's bite, and widespread burning and scorching on three people. We do not know whether the type of dittany Hermione was carrying could have helped treat snake venom, but if it could, it was presumably Dittany of Crete, since that is the form of dittany associated with power over serpents. Dittany of Crete is both foreign and rare, so if that was what Hermione had it's unlikely she would have been able to replenish her bottle of the stuff, so treating their post-Gringotts scorches had probably used up all she had had left. If on the other hand the dittany she had was one of the more common ones, she might well have replenished her bottle and it might have sealed Snape's wound and prevented further blood-loss, but it wouldn't have helped with the venom.
If they could have got him to St Mungo's he might have been saved, since St Mungo's know what saved Arthur. But St Mungo's was in enemy hands. Also, they presumably wouldn't have been able to Apparate from the Shack, because if Apparition to the Shack were possible it could be used as a back door into Hogwarts, and Hogwarts' anti-Apparition wards seem to work both ways. In any case the Shack is just on the edge of Hogsmeade and they had established a few hours previously that the Death Eaters had set wards to prevent anyone from Apparating out of Hogsmeade, and they had no definite information that those wards had been lifted. We don't know whether the students who were evacuated via Hogsmeade were Apparated or Flooed out, but I don't think the Trio knew either.
So, to take Snape to St Mungo's they would have had to carry him away from the Shack first, quite possibly a couple of miles away from the Shack depending on how far into the area around Hogsmeade the Death Eaters' anti-Apparition wards extended, at a time when time was of the essence and he appeared to be already dead, to reach a point whence they could Apparate him to a hospital currently held by Death Eaters. Much the same applies to carrying him back through the tunnel to Madam Pomfrey - it would have taken a long time, and if he wasn't dead when they started he almost certainly would have been by the time they got to the hospital wing, so they would just have traded a quick death from bloodloss for a slow, painful one from venom.
They could perhaps have Transfigured him into some small portable object and than carried him to Poppy that way, assuming that that would have put the process of dying on hold, but we don't really know whether Transfiguring a living person into an inanimate object is survivable or not (was Slughorn actually self-Transfigured into an armchair, or was it just some sort of Glamour?) and in any case there wasn't really time to think of it. As soon as they drew near to the injured Snape he gave them instructions, which they obeyed, and between their completing his instructions by collecting the memory cloud and Snape's dying (or at least losing consciousness) there were only a few seconds: not really time for three teenagers with no medical training to do anything useful. To save him they would probably have had to disobey him, and he was a soldier - he had a right to choose to spend his last few minutes doing his duty instead of being saved. And choice it probably was, because he could if he had so wished have used his last remaining breaths to instruct the children on how best to save him, if he thought they had a chance of succeeding, and if he cared enough about his own survival to set it before his duty to the Cause.
Hermione's use of the Time-Turner left her significantly older than her calendrical age.
There's a widespread belief that Hermione's use of the Time-Turner meant that afterwards she was months, even a year older than her calendar birthdate would suggest. She says she used it to attend several classes at once, and for the first two terms of the year she's taking all twelve subjects when normal students take nine. Around Easter she drops out of Divination, and at the end of the year she drops Muggle Studies. In subsequent years she does ten subjects and manages to fit them in without the use of a Time-Turner.
Hermione says she was given the Time-Turner right at the start of the year. Out of fifty-two weeks in the year, the whole of July and August are holidays, and according to the Lexicon's calculations term ended on the 18th of June that year. In any case exams finished on the 9th, according to the Lexicon, and once the exams were over Hermione had no need to use the Time-Turner (except to rescue Sirius later that day). There are also two-week holidays at Christmas and Easter. So that's sixteen weeks, less a couple of days, when Hermione was not using the Time-Turner, and thirty-six weeks when she was. For twenty-eight of those weeks she was doing three extra subjects, and for the remaining eight weeks, two.
For each extra subject, she needs to fit in three hours per week in the classroom, plus time for study and homework. Most students take nine subjects and I doubt if they are expected to work more than nine hours a day on average, so that's not more than an average of seven hours per week spent on each subject, three in the classroom and four on study and homework, so Hermione needs to gain around seven hours for each extra subject she is taking. She probably doesn't need to do all that on the Time-Turner - in subsequent years she manages to do one extra subject without one - but if we take the most extreme position and assume that she does use the Time-Turner for seven hours a week for each subject, and let's say nine hours for extra sleep to make up for all the extra study, that's thirty hours a week for twenty-eight weeks, and twenty-three hours for eight weeks. That works out at forty-three days, or six weeks - and that's the maximum it could be.
In fact, given that in later years she does one extra subject without needing a Time-Turner, and her tendency to work herself too hard, she may be sleeping less and adding fewer study-hours. She's more likely to have added four or five weeks to her life than six.
Also, Hermione spent five or six weeks in second year Petrified by the Basilisk. No date is given for the Easter holidays that year but in the real world Easter Sunday was on the 11th of April, so school should have resumed on the 17th. The Gryffindor-Hufflepuff match, after which Hermione was Petrified, seems to be on the following Saturday, so the 24th, and the Petrified students were revived three days before the start of exams, so in very late May or early June. During that time Hermione certainly appeared to be in some sort of stasis during which she probably didn't age - we don't see any attempts being made to feed her, for example, which suggests her metabolism is on hold. Those five or six weeks counter the four to six weeks of extra ageing caused by the Time-Turner, so overall the Time-Turner balanced by the Petrification only leaves her at most a week older than she would otherwise have been.
Hermione's use of the Time-Turner left her significantly older than her calendrical age.
I agree with this. I have read many Snamione where they use this troupe to make Hermione who is aged pair with Severus and other older men to eliminate the underage issue.
