OOTP, 8 Revisit: Fudging It Up

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
This is episode four hundred and sixty three of a
lokal Mora for August second, two thousand and twenty five.

(00:38):
Welcome to another episode of Aloha Mora, the fandom's original
Harry Potter book Club.

Speaker 2 (00:43):
I'm Jeff Hutton, I'm Shamani Willis, and I'm Kat Miller
and I have the distinct pleasure of introducing our guest today,
someone who's returning to the show, although told me they've
never been on the show, but they were a part
of the show for many, many, many, many many years. Anyway,
it's our friend, and our is old the right word previous,

(01:03):
our previous editor, mister John Tagle Hi, John, Hello.

Speaker 3 (01:08):
Thank you.

Speaker 4 (01:09):
Yeah, this is very nice to like finally be on
this side of it.

Speaker 2 (01:12):
Yeah, so all, I mean, I trust you and I
believe you, but I don't believe you. I just feel like,
how did you never make it on as a host
in all your years editing the show.

Speaker 4 (01:24):
I just remember, like you know, timing circumstances, it just
never kind of worked out.

Speaker 2 (01:30):
Yeah, I mean, you had a tiny you had a
young child, true at that point, and a job where
I think you had crazy hours or something.

Speaker 4 (01:38):
That was one of the reasons I stepped away for
a while is like I can't juggle both, and then
came back a little bit and yeah, but but yeah,
thank you Kat for mentioning that I did really kind
of fall out of out of the loop entirely. So
if you hadn't said something, I don't think I would
have known you were kind of wrapping it up. And yeah,
really excited to finally kind of join and be part

(02:01):
of this.

Speaker 2 (02:03):
Yeah, well on this end, yeah, because you have been
a part of it, and you were a big part
of it.

Speaker 4 (02:07):
For a long time, so many years ago.

Speaker 2 (02:10):
Yeah, can you believe we've been doing this for thirteen years?

Speaker 4 (02:13):
That's crazy. Yeah, congratulations. By the way, that's an awesome accomplishment.

Speaker 2 (02:19):
Do you remember what chunk of episodes you edited back
in the day, It was like double digits.

Speaker 4 (02:25):
Yeah, yeah, I know I started a fourth or fifth episode,
and I think I went a couple of years, but
I can't remember a number of episodes or which which
episode number I stopped at. And then again I came
back in for yeah, another couple of months or another

(02:46):
year or something, but even that was yeah, like you know,
almost ten years ago, just crazy.

Speaker 2 (02:53):
Wow. Yeah, well, Patrick will know exactly how many episodes
and exactly which numbers you edited, right, yeahs and stuff.
So yeah, I'm sure for listeners out there, John and
Patrick started pretty much at the same time, and so
they helped us kick off this incredible show. What have
you been doing in the last ten years? Give us

(03:15):
like a tiny.

Speaker 4 (03:17):
Summary, Yeah, you know, working raising the kid. The most
exciting thing is I've been playing a lot of digerido lately.
So the Renaissance Festival in Colorado Springs is fantastic. And
the first digury Do I got was Gezy I probably

(03:38):
like ten plus years ago, but it's really in the
last like six months or so. I've been playing a
lot more. And I played in a band for fifteen years,
and my guitar playing was also sort of like not traditional.
So when I say DIDERI do, a lot of people
might think of like circular breathing, and I haven't quite
hacked that. In fact, I was watching a video the

(03:59):
other day and I basically the guy was saying, you know,
if you're doing it this way, you're doing it wrong.
You need to like unlearn that. I'm like, that's great,
that's how I do it. So but what I've been
doing is much like the way I learned to play guitar.
I've just been like playing the didger doo along with
other songs and especially like movies, like I can just
sit there and watch a movie and just you know

(04:20):
when especially like music by Hans Zimmer. I mean, it's
just meant for didgerido, you know, so you know every
song like Dune, the Dune movies are just fantastic for it.
The thumper sound, it's like this sounds like a digredo
to me. So playing along with that, that's been like
really really fun, really enjoying that.

Speaker 2 (04:38):
I had to google what that was because I was
pretty certain I sort of knew a little bit about
what it was. And yeah, so for those who people
are probably googling it on their end as well. But
it's like a long I mean, how would you just
what's it made of?

Speaker 1 (04:54):
Is?

Speaker 4 (04:54):
So yeah, traditionally it's like an Australian instrument. It's traditionally
like bamboo, but you know, there's eucalyptus did reidos, there's
ones made out of PVC. In fact, I tilt my
camera up on the seeing there that's a PVC one
with that fluted end, and in fact, this one that
if you notice, that's kind of next to my firebolt.

(05:17):
But anyway, but I just got that one. It's it's
a slide dig reido, which it's like a trombone like
or a slide whistle, so it it there's an inner
piece that pulls out to change the pitch. I mean,
it's this whole world of digityding, that digitiduying that I
didn't know existed and just been really like diving into.

(05:38):
It's it's awesome.

Speaker 1 (05:39):
That is going to be the title of this episode.
We have to Yes, it has nothing to do with
the chapter discussion, but I don't care. This is the
only chance we're ever going to get to use this word.
My favorite part of that story was when you said
that's when I got my first digitido, because I knew
the implication was that there are multiple digery dudes in

(06:03):
your life.

Speaker 4 (06:04):
There's six in this room. One of them is like,
actually this one just two seconds he's getting us, and
it was probably doesn't work great with like audio.

Speaker 2 (06:12):
Only, but no, it works great. We love it.

Speaker 4 (06:15):
This is a digitydo. It's a box what yeah that
comes through? But I've got one. Yeah, I've got this box. One,
I've got one that shaped like a saxophone, one that
shaped like a French horn. That's It's like I'm telling you,
there's this whole world of digging. Yeah, i'd be remissed

(06:36):
by I didn't say my my my wife uh says
this and I love it. It's digery, do not digity, don't.

Speaker 1 (06:42):
So that's a share. Yeah, that's.

Speaker 2 (06:49):
That's incredible. Wow, you all who are just listening or
missing out if you're not watching the video, because you
should have seen our faces. When you pulled out that box,
it looked like you were blowing into it with your nose.
But I know you worked, but it looked like it
the way you were holding.

Speaker 1 (07:04):
It, it looked largest e cigarette because those things just
look like they look like iPods that you put in
your mouth. Basically, yeah, don't do it, John, it's not working.

Speaker 4 (07:17):
That's funny.

Speaker 2 (07:20):
I feel like I know the answer, but our listeners won't.
What what have you been keeping up with fandom or
Harry Potter in any way, Like what's been going on
in the magical part of your life?

Speaker 4 (07:30):
Yeah? I really did kind of like fall out mostly
of the Potter thing. You know, it was I got
in late to it. I didn't start reading the books
until the Half Blood Princes movie was being worked on,
so I'm really laid into it. But but then got
pretty obsessed. And for years I was like the easiest

(07:52):
person to buy presents for because if it was a
Potter related shirt, it was like I was sold. So
I still have this Oli Vanders sure that I'm nice
sporting right now. So so that was kind of how
I part part of how I expressed my kind of fandom.
But yeah, you know, book wise, I don't read as

(08:13):
much movie wise if it's like doesn't have digity do
cut his outs? You know, or again like on Zimmer
Christopher Nolan, Like those kinds of things are really where
I've kind of been gravitating towards lately.

Speaker 2 (08:27):
We will email Patrick Doyle on your Behalf and say, hey, man,
put more digitido in your next soundtrack, okay please.

Speaker 4 (08:35):
To be fair, I've been meaning to go back through
the movies because I'm sure there are moments, good moments really.
Any anytime there's like low notes, it's like that's a
good spot for digit do to kind of company, you know,
and get in there and complement that. So so at
some point I will go back through the movies and
I'll probably just, you know, keep this one, this nice

(08:56):
small did we do handy just in case I need
to whip it out and play along with something.

Speaker 2 (09:02):
I feel like Half Blood and Deadly Hallows would both
be really good for that.

Speaker 3 (09:05):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (09:06):
I was thinking Goblet because they need to get get
rid of the get rid of the break dancy part
when Dermstrang walks in. Make them all Australian just dudes,
war On and and just somebody just walks in. It
takes forever. They walk up to the front with this
digerido and then they just start and then they all

(09:29):
come to chargin in.

Speaker 2 (09:32):
I love it.

Speaker 1 (09:33):
I love scene, love to try.

Speaker 2 (09:37):
Well. I guess I can't say it enough. But we're
glad to finally have you here and to and and
to have you back.

Speaker 4 (09:43):
Yeah, thank you.

Speaker 3 (09:44):
On the showow hm, well, today we're going to be
getting into chapter eight of Order of the Phoenix the Hearing.
The original episode we discussed this song was episode eighty
five from May two thousand and fourteen. It was titled
Kangaroo Court.

Speaker 1 (10:05):
Okay of Australia Right Boom Nice.

Speaker 3 (10:11):
And it featured host Laura, Michael, and Noah with guest
hosts Kara, who was another one of our editors apparently.

Speaker 4 (10:18):
And I went back through. I was the editor on
this original episode. I believe if I if I'm lining
up the emails right, So I went I listened to
it as well yesterday, and I was like, I don't
really remember this, but again, that was, you know, eleven
years ago, and I sometimes I can't remember what I
did eleven days ago.

Speaker 2 (10:35):
Yeah, yeah, no, I can't remember what I was minutes ago.

Speaker 1 (10:39):
And we've been doing this for longer than that.

Speaker 2 (10:42):
Yeah, yeah, and shaw many you said the title of
that episode, like you didn't know what a kangaroo court is.

Speaker 3 (10:48):
I actually I do not, because what I picture is
not the right answer at all. As I mentioned, kangaroos
just kind of lined up.

Speaker 2 (10:58):
Oh, it's an idiom, which basically means it's like a
sham trial, nothing like justice is not served. It's like
just a big joke.

Speaker 3 (11:08):
So I learned something.

Speaker 1 (11:09):
Not sure what that has to do with today's discussion,
but not at all. You know, I guess we can
just suspend disbelief.

Speaker 2 (11:19):
Yeah, sure, let's do that. We never do that on
this show.

Speaker 1 (11:23):
Before we thank our Patreon sponsor. I need to clarify something.
Is this who I think it is? It is who
I think it Okay, just wanted to make absolutely sure
before I tell everybody that we are thanking our Patreon
sponsor for this episode. You know him, you love him,
and if you don't, I pity your taste because I

(11:43):
love him. It's our own Josh Cook.

Speaker 2 (11:50):
And I'm sure people who've been listening for a long
time know that before Josh was a host, he has
been a voracious listener of the show and contributor. He's
Lytherin Prefect on the on the forums.

Speaker 1 (12:02):
Friends, I thought he was Grifferin Prefect.

Speaker 2 (12:04):
That's what I met. I'm sorry, Grifferin Prefect. WHOA sorry, Josh,
don't yell at me for that.

Speaker 1 (12:09):
We're not cutting No, we're not cutting that out. It
stays in the episode. Stand we must stand by our shortcomings.
Kat's that's right exactly. So thank you Josh for sponsoring
this episode and for everything else you do for the show.
We absolutely love you and our Patreon offers a lot
of great perks, including ad free episodes, monthly made ups

(12:31):
with the host, and so much more than that. They
start at just three muggle dollars a month, so you
can head over to patreon dot com slash Alokhomora to
become a sponsor, And if you're looking for a non
monetary way to support the show, you can subscribe, save
and share this episode or the whole show with your
friends and your favorite Harry Potter communities. And we appreciate

(12:53):
the support of every single one of our listeners however
you're able to do so, so thank.

Speaker 2 (12:58):
You, yay, thank you everybody, and thank you Josh. There
is a reason he got thanked in the first volume
of The Companion and the second volume of The Companion.
But yeah, all right, friends, let's jump into today's chapter.
I'm gonna be sweaty because I just had to shut

(13:19):
my fan off when I noticed it was showing up
on the recording. So no, yeah, it's gonna be a
fun one. It's okay. This is a good chapter. It's
a good chapter.

Speaker 1 (13:27):
Three turns should do it. Chapter revisit.

Speaker 3 (13:35):
Order of the Phoenix.

Speaker 4 (13:40):
Chapter eight, The Hearing.

Speaker 2 (13:46):
And My Friends. The title says it all. The day
has come and Harry is at his disciplinary hearing for
the use of the Patrona's charm in front of a Muggle.
He is in off of the courtroom itself when he
visited previously in the Pennze, as well as by the
large number of Wizards sitting far above him, shadowy figures
casting a dark tone across the courtroom. Just as he

(14:07):
thinks all hope is lost to Dumbledore appears in his defense.
The rest of the trial unfolds as expected for a
corrupt power hungery government aka kangaroo court Shaw Me, but shockingly,
Harry is in fact clear of all charges. Yeah, so
this is a really fun chapter, she said facetiously.

Speaker 1 (14:30):
I sent a message to everybody right before we got
on to record, and I said, oh, I remembered why
I wanted to be on this episode. It was because,
back when we were doing topic episodes as well as
chapter revisits, I really loved the idea of doing a
deep dive into the Department of Magical Law Enforcement. So

(14:52):
I'm gonna save it until we've discussed this trial because
a lot of what happens in this trial kind of
feeds into it. But I did bring a kind of
condensed version of what I would have imagined that episode
to look like.

Speaker 2 (15:08):
I love that for us. I can't wait. That's exciting.

Speaker 3 (15:11):
Many episode within an episode exactly.

Speaker 1 (15:15):
Sometimes the flowers arranged themselves.

Speaker 2 (15:18):
Jim, some days I really miss those topic episodes. So
I'm really glad you're doing this. So that's good.

Speaker 1 (15:25):
Well you in your summary of this chapter, bravo. By
the way, you mentioned that Harry was in awe and
the first sentence, I just love that. It very simply says,
Harry gasped the idea that Harry, he's fifteen, we're still closed,
we're somewhere between the middle and the end of this series,

(15:48):
and yet Harry can still be taken aback or shocked
by anything. And this is a room again, as you said,
he's seen this room before in a way that most
people usually don't. He's he's not just watched like a
playback of this room. He's in a way he's been

(16:08):
in it. But it's he can still be taken by surprise.

Speaker 4 (16:14):
You know that. Just so he said that, it makes
me think, are you guys familiar with the marry problem.
It's kind of like a thought experiment about this idea
that if you kind of imagine a scientist who named Mary,
who's kind of in this room and knows everything about
the color red, but there is no color red in
this room. But she understands all the fundamental physics, you know,

(16:37):
the way the light waves work, the way the brain processes,
you know, the light coming into the eye. And the
idea of the thought experiment is what if someday somebody
you know, brings her an apple and she actually sees
red for the first time, Like, does she gain knowledge?
Is there something new that made the way you phrase that?
They kind of made me think because like this is

(16:59):
the first time physically he's been in this in this room,
the pencive isn't the same thing? Is like a physical
thing of physical experience? Correct, as far as we kind
of not.

Speaker 2 (17:10):
Yeah, no, right, The films do a poor job of
representing what Harry actually experiences.

Speaker 1 (17:16):
I think I would imagine it's like one of those
VR visors, the thing where you put it over your
eyes and you're you're meant to kind of immerse yourself
in a virtual experience in a way, it feels like
you're occupying that physical space, but then every now and
then something happens to remind you, oh, I'm not actually here.

(17:36):
It's just supposed to feel.

Speaker 2 (17:38):
Like I am well, well, right. I mean, we we
tried so hard to make this a T shirt back
in the day. But there's a meme that now goes
around of Harry and Dumbledore in Half Blood Prints when
they're watching the Memories and it's just like you see
just their heads in the pensive mm hm. And that
is how the book describes it, but the movie shows
Harry as like following falling into So I always imagined

(18:04):
it the way that Harry describes it in the book,
where oh wait, does Harris say, no, you know what,
I take all of that back, because I'm pretty sure
that in maybe it was even in Goblet that when
he was in the courtroom, doesn't he say that he
looks up expecting to see like a hole that he
just fell through.

Speaker 1 (18:23):
Yeah he does. Yeah. And then in the movie, for
added physical comedy, somebody reaches through his chest to shake
Dumbledore's hand and you're.

Speaker 2 (18:33):
Like, hey, apologies to the filmmakers for calling it trash
because I just had a bad memory.

Speaker 1 (18:37):
I think we're just used to calling out the filmmakers
for all of the bad choices that they made, because
there is an abundance of those.

Speaker 2 (18:46):
Yeah, there are, there are, there are Well.

Speaker 4 (18:48):
The VR thing you said, Jeff, that also kind of
makes me think in contrast to what I just said
about this Merry problem. It makes me think about the
matrix and you know, what is real if it's stuff
that's you know, perceived by if you know, if the
sensation is just what the eyes are coming or perceiving

(19:09):
through this you know VR kind of experience. Well maybe
that isn't that different than actually being there. That's fascinating
to think about. You know.

Speaker 2 (19:19):
I had never heard of the merry problem, so but
now I'm going to look it up and read twenty
books about it because that is very interesting and I've
been super into That's kind of a philosophical question, would
you call that? Yeah, I've been super into that.

Speaker 4 (19:33):
Yeah, please do look at it. I'm sure I did
a poor job explaining it, you know, but look into it. Yeah,
it's it's really it's really intriguing to kind of think
through it's. Yeah, it's fun thought experiment. You know.

Speaker 2 (19:46):
Well, I tried to find this time. I wanted to
find an allegory for the shadowy figures because Harry is
talking about how he's sitting there and he can only
see some of the people, but everyone else sort of
in shadow, and I really wanted to find an allegory
for that because I feel like the specific words that

(20:06):
the author used felt very pointed and sort of significant.
I really couldn't find anything, but I did find out
about this thing called a sleep paralysis demon. Uh huh oh, Jeff,
you're saying that, like you know what I'm talking about.

Speaker 1 (20:20):
I don't have one, but I'm acquainted with people who
have tried to help me to understand what it is
like when they have witnessed one.

Speaker 3 (20:30):
It was not good.

Speaker 1 (20:36):
Stop really, Oh no, it's it's a very it's a
real thing. There are a lot of people who do
struggle with that. And where I can definitely see the
similarities between what I have been made to understand about
them and what you're talking about is just the element
of psychological torture. With a lot of the people I
know who have experienced the feeling of, you know, the

(20:59):
sleep paralysis demon of witnessing one, is that they just
can't get away from it. They can't do anything about it,
like they cannot move away from this thing. And that's
sort of what Harry is experiencing, because that's how this
courtroom is designed, is This is not a place where

(21:20):
justice is meant to be done. This is not a
place where you are innocent until proven guilty. It is
designed so that the people who are serving the justice
are literally looking down on you, and based on the
lighting and where they're sitting, I think it's by design
that you can tell there is a large number of

(21:42):
important people sitting there looking down on you, but you
can't see their faces. I think that's actually that's not
just clever writing on the author's part. I think that
that's actually how it's meant to happen. This isn't a courtroom.
This is a psychological torture chamber.

Speaker 2 (22:01):
Wow, intense, I mean, you're not wrong, sham many do
you want? Can? Can I ask you sure about your
I don't know if it Do you want to talk
about it?

Speaker 3 (22:12):
You can say no, it doesn't like like it just
it kind of gives me the creeps to talk about it.
But like it's not it hasn't happened in a long time.
This was a long long time ago. To please ask.

Speaker 2 (22:22):
Away, I just tell me about it.

Speaker 3 (22:25):
It's it was basically like my experience was I was
sleeping and then I woke up. But like you literally
cannot move, you can't you can't talk, you can't scream,
you can't anything. And there was this black shadow kind
of situation hovering above the bed. And at the time,

(22:48):
this is when I was married, I tried to get
my husband's attention. I was like, hey, there's something in here,
there's something in here, and I couldn't move, couldn't say anything.
I don't remember what. I think I might have started
praying or something like that, and it kind of shifted
for a minute, is the best way I can describe it.
And I was able to move for a second and
I sat up and it was gone, and then I

(23:09):
fell back asleep. It happened again. And the only thing
that I could connect it to you was my window
was open that night, so I closed the window. And
once I closed the window, it stopped happening. So I
don't know what it was. It hasn't happened again since,
but it was absolutely terrifying to not be able like
it's like we're when they say in horror movies you

(23:31):
can't you can't scream, no one can hear you, like
you literally you're awake but stuck.

Speaker 4 (23:39):
Wow, it does sound terrifying.

Speaker 1 (23:41):
Yeah, also I you say things like this, and then
people will do it just to defy you, or because
morbid curiosity will seize them if you have not actually
looked up images like artistic depictions of what sleep paralysis
demons look like. I do not recommend it. There, trust me,
you are better off. It's one of those things. It's

(24:03):
like it makes it worse. It's kind of like seeing
a thestral like when Hermione. You remember when Hermione says
she wishes she could see them and Harry's like, oh
do you and she's like, oh no, I don't mean
like that. I just mean I'm curious. Do not be
curious about this. If you don't know what slie paralysis
demon looks like, don't look it up. You don't need

(24:24):
to know.

Speaker 3 (24:25):
Like, thankfully, whatever it was, it didn't look like the
pictures that I googled later. It was just like the shadow,
but you could feel it was like a heavy presence
in the room is the best way to describe it.

Speaker 4 (24:40):
This.

Speaker 3 (24:40):
There was something wrong with that house. I think it
was just it was a house. Because since I moved
it hasn't happened again.

Speaker 2 (24:46):
So thank goodness for.

Speaker 1 (24:50):
Me too. Shall we get back to serious miscarriages of justice.

Speaker 2 (24:57):
I was gonna say, let's talk about another heavy presence
in the room, and it's our friend Umbridge. Of course
we don't know what's her yet, We won't know for
a long time, but we've read these books before, friends,
so spoilers. But the time and the change location is
so sleazy. I think I think about that every time.

(25:18):
Who do you think orchestrated that? Did that come from
Umbradge like whispering into Fudge's ear? Was it Fudge himself?
Did Percy have a hand? Who do you think made
that final call to say, let's change the time and
location to really screw over Harry Potter here?

Speaker 1 (25:35):
You know, I actually used to believe that this was
the one thing Fudge did in which he thought he
was being truly clever, because it would make sense for
this to be something that they would actually because think
about it, Who would actually believe that just changing the
date and time of the thing would trick Dumbledore into

(25:59):
miss out on it? When Dumbledore has eyes and ears everywhere.
That sounds like something that, when you really get into it,
is actually dumb enough that Fudge could have come up
with it himself. But then I remember that when Umbradge
another spoiler, but the book's been out for years, when

(26:20):
Umbradge talks about how she ordered the Dementors after Harry,
about how everyone was bleeding about silencing him, discrediting him somehow,
but she was the one who actually did something about it.
I don't think sending the Dementors after Harry was the
first instance of Umbradge trying to not just get rid

(26:41):
of Harry and Dumbledore, but she wants to be the
one who's getting the credit for coming up with the
thing that's really leading to their demise. So I for
that reason, I could see Umbradge being the one who
came up with that idea. It was either Umbradge or Fudge.

Speaker 2 (26:59):
I think it was Umbridge whispering and Fudge his ear.

Speaker 1 (27:01):
You know, That's what I think, which she probably does
a lot because I think she's in love with him.

Speaker 4 (27:07):
She in love with him or is she in love
with Voldemort?

Speaker 1 (27:11):
She does not, I don't see see a lot of
people have made that comparison, like they're wondering would Umbridge
be willing to follow Voldemore? It does Umbridge support what
Voldemort does? I don't really think it's about that, because
think about it, Umbridge has this serious thing about what
she calls dangerous half breeds, whereas Voldemort he looks down

(27:34):
on them for being less than human, but he's also
willing to ally himself with them to get whatever use
he needs out of them, and then to an extent,
he still gives them what he promised them in exchange
for their services. I think working that closely with creatures
that are not pure blood, which is in wizards, would

(27:55):
rub up against her discomfort. She she's happy to help
run the the governmental wing of what's going on and
then ignore all the rest of it. She might even
be fooling herself into thinking, oh, the Minister of Magic
is fine, he's not under the imperious curse. Everything's there's
no war in bossing, say, for all the Avatar the

(28:17):
Last Airbender fans out there. So would she work directly
with Voldemort and be a death Eater?

Speaker 4 (28:22):
No?

Speaker 1 (28:23):
I don't think so. But if Voldemort can help create
a world more like the one she wants to live
in and she gets a cushy seat in the government,
will she take that deal?

Speaker 4 (28:30):
Sure?

Speaker 2 (28:31):
I mean she does take that deal.

Speaker 3 (28:32):
Yeah, she's in love with the paw deal. Yeah, no,
I definitely power Like well, I think Fudd is the
closest thing to power that she can get right now,
and being the undersecretary, I think that's the way that
she gets her bidding done is by whispering in his ear,

(28:53):
and I one hundred percent things. She said, well, you know,
maybe we should change the time, and this would Harry
from showing up and we can keep him from going
back to Hogwarts. I think she was kind of laying
the groundwork, and then Fudge kind of came up with
the rest of the plan on his own, thinking that
it was clever, but as you pointed out, it was

(29:14):
not clever at all because Dumbledore's eyes and ears.

Speaker 1 (29:18):
I got it, Okay, So here's what happened, so check it.
So Umbradge starts telling Fudge, we need to think of
a way to actively prevent Dumbledore from being at this
trial because we know he's gonna show up for Harry,
and if he does, there's no way we're gonna be
able to carry this out the way we want. So
what we need to do is and that's when Fudge

(29:40):
jumps in and says by Thunder I've got it. We'll
lie about when and.

Speaker 3 (29:45):
Where it's supposed to be.

Speaker 1 (29:47):
Oh, what a brilliant idea I've just had. And then
he leaves the room and Umbridge is like, maybe.

Speaker 3 (29:54):
That's not what I was going for, but okay.

Speaker 1 (29:57):
I was gonna say, and he's gone.

Speaker 2 (30:00):
That certainly brings a more comical angle to that conversation,
you know, I mean point of view.

Speaker 1 (30:08):
He's a jacket. I feel like we can say that
word Fudge is a jacket. But he's really kind of
a comical character, at least a lot of the ways
he's presented because he's he's he's like Mayor Quimby from
The Simpsons. His authority and his power are completely imaginary,
and if anybody actually took the time to analyze his

(30:31):
so called accomplishments when he's been in the hot seat,
they would realize he's a terrible minister. He's bad at everything.
But I've got that, I him.

Speaker 2 (30:42):
I'm just kidding. Yeah. No, So Harry goes in and
he sits down, and he's sitting in the chair where
he watched death theaters like Carkeroff give testimony and ultimately
get sentenced, and the chains of the give a little rattle,
and it made me wonder this time, how do the

(31:04):
chains know when when to bind somebody or when not
to bind somebody? Are they given the directive ahead of time?
Is there I pulling on Noah here? Does it like
know what the crime is?

Speaker 3 (31:21):
Does it?

Speaker 2 (31:21):
You know?

Speaker 4 (31:21):
Yeah? It seems like it could be a number of things.
Age of the accused, you know, like if they have
a prior history of you know, breaking the law or whatever.
Seems like it could be like but yeah, but maybe
is your question like are they sentient? You know?

Speaker 2 (31:37):
I didn't want to say the words, but.

Speaker 1 (31:38):
Yeah, see, I prefer it the way they did it
with this was one of movie ism that I actually
thought was kind of neat just for the visual effect
of it. But with Karkaroff's trial and Goblet of Fire
where he kind of is raised up into this seat
and he's surrounded by all these jagged spikes in this
cage and the whole thing just looks very medieval.

Speaker 2 (31:59):
Yeah, and then there's someone twisting them a little bit
closer so he can't move much.

Speaker 1 (32:04):
Yeah, like just do that. Yeah, if if you accidentally,
you know, move too far to the left or the right,
it's a free haircut.

Speaker 2 (32:13):
Yeah. Maybe maybe the chair is aware of the schedule
of events for the day and there's a number assigned
or severity assigned. Something has to be controlling it. It
can't be making its own decisions. It's a chair.

Speaker 3 (32:29):
There's somebody in the little wizarding computer the different levels
of chain activity.

Speaker 2 (32:36):
Yeah, yeah, I don't there's got to be There's got
to be something or someone controlling it.

Speaker 1 (32:42):
Right, I'm possibly like that. Maybe that's one of the
jobs of like the court scribe is they have to
give a little woosh with their wand when the acuse
sits down and then the chains spring to life.

Speaker 2 (32:55):
Well, in that case, this is Persy And that's that's
perfect because I really wanted to talk about him next.
I think he's the scribe.

Speaker 1 (33:01):
Yeah, he's Percy Percival, Percy Ignacious Weasley.

Speaker 3 (33:07):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (33:07):
It's weird when you when you use like a nickname
for the first name, but then you say the middle name,
like if you're gonna say the full name, shouldn't you
say the whole thing? Yeah? Person, is it Perseus or
is it Perceval? I don't know, Percival ignacious? Is it Percy? Yeah,
Percival ignacious Weasley Ignacious. Ignacious a name.

Speaker 2 (33:35):
That's a family name, Molly's have they have someone has
someone in the family named ignacious? Anyway, I just thought
it was funny that I know, Shamani how much you
love Percy, so I thought we could point this out.
But it's just it's it's ironic that Percy went from
disliking Fudge so much in the last book because he

(33:56):
was all, you know, head over heels for Bardy Crouch,
and he was like, oh Fudge is no, I'm mixing
up my characters, aren't I.

Speaker 1 (34:05):
I was gonna say, I don't recall bag from Yes,
disapproves of.

Speaker 2 (34:12):
He's nipping at the heels of power.

Speaker 1 (34:14):
Rightly so, because Bagman is an.

Speaker 5 (34:15):
Idiot, another powerchaser see Yeah Hi Jeff Hutton, wizard, rocker, podcaster,
proud Percy Weasley, Percival, Ignacious Weasley, sympathizer.

Speaker 1 (34:29):
Yes, I I I, and I always say and I'll
continue to do.

Speaker 5 (34:33):
So.

Speaker 1 (34:34):
This is the book where I really can't stand by
everything that Percy does. He makes some very, very very
bad choices. But the thing is when people are hurting,
When people were hurting for a long time, and it
went unaddressed because people didn't think it was a problem.

(34:55):
This is what happens. Their backs get up against the wall,
they get defensive, They at themselves with the wrong people
just because they think they're making a point or they're
looking for something that ultimately they're not gonna get where
they are. And that's where Percy is in this moment.
He had this huge fight with his father. He needs

(35:16):
some kind of parental substitute. He's still drawn to figures
of authority who will show him the way and make
him into the person that he feels he's supposed to be.
So he's his default setting is to kiss the bum
of whoever is in charge. When he was at school,

(35:36):
it was the teachers. When he got his first government job,
it was Barti Crouch. No matter how dodgy things got
last year, he was ten toes down for Barti Crouch
the whole time. And now it's Fudge and why because
Fudge did what cult leaders do. He saw a vulnerable

(35:56):
person and said, hey, friend, why don't you come over
here and tell me what other people aren't listening to
from you? He gave him an understanding and a position
and options that he wasn't getting from other people, and
now boom, just like that, he's fudging it up.

Speaker 2 (36:15):
So, for the record, I was searching while you were
talking just now, and I agree with all of that.
And the only places that say Percy is not his
first name is a Quora answer and someone on Reddit,
So I think his real first name is actually Percy.

Speaker 1 (36:32):
Really, the most reputable sources on the Internet.

Speaker 2 (36:36):
Yeah, but the Wizardingworld, dot Com, the lexicon, everywhere has
it as just Percy, except the wiki, which would make
me to believe the wiki is wrong.

Speaker 1 (36:47):
You say the word wiki, It's like when you say
the word read it, and I instantly think, okay for
anyone not watching the video right now, I rolled my
eyes at the words reddit.

Speaker 2 (36:59):
And wiki right because they're wrong.

Speaker 1 (37:01):
Yes, because when anybody can contribute to the information being provided,
what could possibly go wrong.

Speaker 2 (37:09):
I will never forget when Kingsley shackle Bolts wiki page
said that he was a house elf.

Speaker 3 (37:16):
Wow, I will never forget.

Speaker 1 (37:19):
That just sounds like tomfoolery.

Speaker 2 (37:21):
Wow, Yes, it definitely was. It was definitely tomfoolery.

Speaker 3 (37:25):
But I mean, I'm of the opinion here that Percy
Percy honestly should not have even been there if this
was a proper courtroom in a proper trial. Due to
conflict of interests, he should not have even been in
the room.

Speaker 4 (37:40):
Correct.

Speaker 3 (37:41):
But again, this is the wizarding Government. They don't care
about any of that. Here now not carry out justice
as we say.

Speaker 4 (37:50):
No, find the actual truth of what happened. It's just
it's just the steps to go through to try to
get you know, Harry, put Harry in his place, kind
of you know, theater.

Speaker 1 (38:03):
Make an example.

Speaker 2 (38:06):
We should start a counter for how many times we
I guess prove is the word I'll use. Prove how
perfect the original title of the episode for this chapter is,
because I feel like we're already at four or five.

Speaker 1 (38:18):
We'll just make it. We'll just make it a little
boring sound effect for a kangaroo perfect and.

Speaker 3 (38:23):
This will be Kangaroo Court two point zero.

Speaker 2 (38:27):
Right, kangaroo.

Speaker 1 (38:28):
I like that. Actually, I like a callback to the
original title, especially when it works so well.

Speaker 2 (38:33):
Well, Harry's freaking out because they're about to start the trial.
But oh then Dumbledore arrives, because of course he does.
He shows up at the last minute to quote unquote
save the day.

Speaker 3 (38:45):
I don't know, yay Dumbledore.

Speaker 2 (38:47):
But the whole exchange is between him and Fudge is perfection.
That's all.

Speaker 1 (38:52):
You know. We talk about the dark contrast between Dumbledore
asking Harry about putting his name in the Goblet of
Fire in the book versus the movie, but this is
yet another one of those moments because in this book,
Fudge reads out all of the interrogators and the courtscribe,

(39:12):
like basically all of the officials who need to be
noted on the official record, and then when he's done talking,
Dumbledore just calmly says, witness for the defense Albis Percival Wolfrick,
Brian Dumbledore, which I mean, talk about a full name.
That's just fun to say.

Speaker 3 (39:29):
But in the.

Speaker 1 (39:30):
Movie Fudge is saying Cornelius Alls Walfudge, witness for the difference, Percival, Wolfrick, Brian.
There's something there. If he had spoken a little slowly
and not just paused, there would have been something almost
snapish about that.

Speaker 6 (39:50):
Albus Percival, Wolfrick, Brian, Brian Dumbledore. It's like, oh, whimsical, bibbling, whibbley,
swimblely wizard names Brian Dumbledore.

Speaker 2 (40:03):
That's his dad's name, right.

Speaker 1 (40:05):
His father's name was personal. I mean, his father's name
was Perceval you're right.

Speaker 2 (40:09):
Yeah, Wow, I'm having a memory parts today.

Speaker 4 (40:13):
Well, yeah, I don't remember. Where does is there a
source for Brian? Where does Brian come from?

Speaker 3 (40:17):
Brian? It seems so randomly thrown in there. I don't know.

Speaker 1 (40:21):
I mean, by this point we did have family Guy.
Is it possible the author was just a huge family
Guy fan?

Speaker 3 (40:28):
That's it?

Speaker 4 (40:31):
I guess right.

Speaker 2 (40:33):
This way.

Speaker 3 (40:38):
This interaction here brings one of my favorite lines from
the court scene, when Dumbledore says, and by a lucky mistake,
I arrived at the ministry three hours early. Like what
eyes and ears everywhere Dumbledore was not having any of
what they were trying to do. And the look that
I imagine on Fudge's face, the sputtering and the flustered

(41:01):
look that he must have had when Dumbledore appeared seemingly
out of nowhere, it's great chef's kiss.

Speaker 4 (41:07):
At least, and it kind of it kind of doubles
down too, because then he's like, I guess we should
get you a chair. No need, I'll take care of it.
Whips up a chair. You know, it's pretty cool, not just.

Speaker 2 (41:18):
A chair like a chintzy arm chance, I think, is
what the description says.

Speaker 1 (41:23):
Yes, like I don't need you to give me a
seat at the table. I'm Dumbledore Dumbled. I will Dumbled
do this myself. Yeah. Yeah, like double door is the
wizarding equivalent of dug Demodome, where everything has dumbled in
front of it.

Speaker 2 (41:44):
I remember when for Fantastic Bass they used dumbled as
a hashtag on Twitter because people were so frothing at
the mouth for Jude Law, as they should.

Speaker 3 (41:56):
You saw him, right, Yeah, definitely there did.

Speaker 1 (41:59):
Look, I don't need I have facial hair, but that
beard on Jude Law. Forget about it.

Speaker 2 (42:03):
You have facial hair.

Speaker 1 (42:04):
I don't like it. Oh, I only have it. I
only have it at the moment because I've had a
very love I worked a sixty hour week and I'm
not shaven. But for the record, this no, this hair
on my face. It causes terrible gender dysphoria and I
can't stand it.

Speaker 2 (42:20):
That's that's fair. Yeah, you're typically clean shaven.

Speaker 1 (42:22):
Right, typically? Yes?

Speaker 2 (42:24):
Typically any way, And.

Speaker 3 (42:27):
Now all Jeff can think about is the facial hair.

Speaker 2 (42:32):
For the rest of Hey, I mean it could be
I I'll move on. So they start talking about what happened,
and I'm going to ask this question and I'm saying
it sort of facetiously because we know the answer blah blah,
But are there really no loopholes or like for allowance

(42:55):
of doing magic in front of muggles who know you're magical.
So Madam Bones brings up, well, you know there's this
statue or I actually think it's Dumbledore who says, well,
you're allowed to do it in the case of the
wizard or the muggle or whatever. But what about like
in this exact if not even this exact instance, if

(43:16):
Hermione's at home and her parents know she's a witch
or wizard, and her mom is like Hermione, I can't
get the cap, I can't get the this jar of
pickles open. Can you help me out? And Hermione's like yep,
boop uses her Wand is that really like I understand
they're underage. Is that the you know I'm getting at, Like.

Speaker 4 (43:38):
Yeah, I think a big deal.

Speaker 1 (43:40):
Yeah, Like if you're the parents of a muggle born child,
or if you're if it's the situation like you remember
when we meet all the Little Gryffindors in the first book,
Seamus says that his mom didn't tell his father because
she was a witch until after they were married. So
clearly she is trying to quell any use of her

(44:02):
magical power, and it was a bit of a nasty
shock for him. But I would imagine it would be
like a more romantic version of what happened with Moro Bgaunt,
where she was able to give free rein to her
powers once her oppressor was gone. But in that case
it would be more like, you can start doing magic
here and there once your partner is aware that you

(44:23):
have these magical abilities. But the thing is, we don't
know all the magical laws because they aren't all written
out for us to read. And even if they were,
I'm sure we would find many inconsistencies because this is
not about what the law does or does not permit.
This is another one of those times where they're happy

(44:43):
to let things slide as long as it doesn't threaten
their perfect order. But Dumbledore and Harry are threatening their
perfect order the way they see it. So now all
of a sudden, oh, we have to make sure that
any exposure of the magical world is absolutely ritten controlled.
And if this was and if this wasn't about you know,

(45:05):
happening at a time when Harry and Dumbledore are trying
to kick up dust, then they would probably do exactly that.
They would just let it go. If Harry had done
this like two books ago, it wouldn't be that big
a deal. He blew up his ant. They didn't care,
And I mean they point all this out at the
end of the chapter. All these other things they let
slide because Harry and Dumbledore were not a threat to

(45:27):
the ministry at that time. But now that they are,
they have to act like they cared about the rules
the whole time. This is the problem with letting things
slide once in a while. If you're gonna act like
you care about the rules, then you have to enforce
them evenly and all the time, because if you let
things slide and then one time you decide to enforce

(45:48):
the rules, then everybody's gonna remember all those times that
you didn't, and you're gonna have a problem.

Speaker 2 (45:53):
So you're talking about every time you want to give
your son a cookie after dinner and you like, do it,
and then the one you like don't give them a cookie.
Bad analogy.

Speaker 4 (46:04):
No, that makes sense to me. It's yeah, it's a
really good point. It's it just makes me think, like
some times just because we use the word law, like
maybe it's more practical to think of it as a guideline,
Like the way you were describing like Hermione helping her
mom open a pickle jar, really, like does the law

(46:27):
really make sense here that she can't just help out
that way? I think there's a lot of laws in
our world that that kind of fall into this thing.
The one that I refer to a lot, the drinking
age totally arbitrary, Like for if you just think of
it as a human thing. You know, in America it's

(46:49):
twenty one, but in other parts of the world it's
a lot younger. Right, It's to me, it's like it's
a guideline. It's I like to think of it this
way that if we were to be very strict about this,
it's like why why twenty one? It's not like there's
some magical thing that happens when somebody is you know,
twenty years old, eleven months, thirty days, and you know,

(47:14):
twenty three hours, fifty nine minutes, and then that one
minute comes and now they're like officially twenty one, and
now they somehow have this responsibility like magically you know,
bestowed upon them that they're able to drink responsibly. Obviously,
that's nonsense. You know, it's good to have the guideline,
you know, it's helpful, but I think, like what you
were saying, Jeff, it's like it's tricky to have something

(47:37):
be like this is the law. Yeah, we've you know,
we've been lax on it and these other cases, but
now this time, no, this time it's like really big deal.
So yeah, it's a tricky thing I think for wizards
or muggles alike to really try to navigate, like what
the best way to you know, handle these kinds of

(47:59):
guideline laws.

Speaker 1 (48:01):
You know, remember that time that Snape was trying to
point out to Cornelius Fudge that Harry actually did break
the law and that technically the law says he should
probably be punished for that. So he's technically right, but
he's doing it for the wrong reasons. And then Fudge
was all like, oh, well, Harry Potter, you know, we've

(48:22):
all got a bit of a blind spot where he's concerned.
These are words that Cornelius Fudge said, Yeah, sums it
up perfectly. They keep making these allowances for Harry when
they think he's this boy of destiny and they have
to try to protect him. But now that he's trying
to disrupt the peaceful world that they would rather pretend

(48:44):
that they live in, all of a sudden they're pulling
his resume. You can't do that.

Speaker 2 (48:48):
When does it? When is the flip going to happen
in the Muggle world? Because I'm ready for that.

Speaker 1 (48:53):
When is the when tomorrow?

Speaker 2 (48:55):
I said? When is the flip going to happen in
the Muggle world? When are they going to stop making
excuses for our Harry Potter?

Speaker 1 (49:01):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (49:02):
Yeah, anyway, you know, you're right, of course, you're right.

Speaker 1 (49:06):
Well, something else that caught me about just any time
Fudge is talking, Fudge uses so many words, and especially
in this case, it reminds me of something that my
lawyer once explained to me. She said, the more words
are being used, the flimsier the argument. If you have

(49:27):
a strong case, you don't have to talk that much.
You can make it very simple. But the case that
they have against Harry is flimsy at best. So they're
doing what people do in courtrooms very often. Apparently they
think if they bury everything under all of this legal
ease and pontification, then what they want you to believe

(49:52):
they're doing is just make sure that they're closing all
the gaps and making an airtide argument. But all they're
really doing is using all of that speech to distract
you from the fact that they don't actually know what
they're talking about.

Speaker 2 (50:07):
Yeah, I mean, I have a friend who's an incredibly
good liar, tends to only use it for good, you know,
but still it's lying is a skill that you can learn.
And they have said to me many times, if you're
lying and you used too many words, people are going
to know you're lying. So I agree with your lawyer, agreed.

Speaker 1 (50:31):
I tend to agree with my lawyer friend because she's
a lawyer.

Speaker 3 (50:37):
It's very true because when my kids try to lie,
and terrible, terrible liars, by the way, they would be
awful criminals, terrible. They do the thing where they get
too many details, use too many words, and I'm like,
you could have just said blah blah blah and been done,
but you kept going. That's where you messed up.

Speaker 2 (50:59):
You know what, though, be glad they would be by I.

Speaker 3 (51:01):
Am very glad, very glad.

Speaker 1 (51:03):
And this is why there are three I always say
there are three acquaintances every person should endeavor to cultivate
in their life. A good lawyer, a good mechanic, and
a good hairdresser. Those are the big three of those
wonderful No wonder you're thriving.

Speaker 2 (51:19):
Is that all we need to thrive in this life?

Speaker 1 (51:21):
I wish? I mean those are I mean there's probably
other things, like if you know a dentist who's willing
to cut your brake, then yeah, that's probably good. But
those other three things are the things that I have
found are the most important types of people that you
should have a connection to.

Speaker 2 (51:37):
That's fair. Well, I count myself lucky then, just as
Harry should really count himself lucky that Madam Bones is
here at this trial, because one, I love that woman.
Also I listen to the Jim Dale audiobooks and the
voice that he gives him Madam Bones is like so

(52:01):
gravelly and.

Speaker 5 (52:02):
Like it's exactly even the same.

Speaker 1 (52:05):
It's the same as his voice that he uses for
Aunt Marge. But he tries to take like that. But
when he does Aunt Marge, he does this thing whereof
Brad Blah, It's like he tries to, you know, like
activate his jowls, Like this is a thing that people

(52:27):
do when they're trying to do the voices of overweight characters,
and it's frankly insulting because not every overweight person talks
like that, but they do that to really emphasize just
the heaviness of ant Marge. But there there are a
lot of female identifying people out there who have this
kind of gravelly voice. So it's like it's like he

(52:48):
took all of that, all of that offensive. Oh I'm
doing the voice of a fat character out of his voice,
and he was just left with dementals.

Speaker 2 (52:58):
Don't run, They go, yeah, I mean that would.

Speaker 3 (53:03):
That?

Speaker 2 (53:03):
Yes? Yeah, she just sounds like she has been smoking
twenty packs a day for the last thirty years. To me,
she has Yeah, here's.

Speaker 1 (53:15):
A monocle, the course, she's got.

Speaker 3 (53:17):
A picture brandy and a cigar.

Speaker 1 (53:22):
Or like maybe she's got a pipe that's shaped like
a digery doo oh maybe.

Speaker 4 (53:28):
Maybe maybe it's small enough she could play with her nose.

Speaker 2 (53:32):
Yeah, okay, Jeff, write a song about it and get
John to play the digerido on it. There you go.
It's Madam Bones and her her nose pipe. I see
you writing that down. Were you just writing that down? No?
It's okay, you can lie to me and see yeah, anyway.

(53:53):
But what I really wanted to point out about this
moment is Harry's restraint because he gets cut off at
out ten times in a row, like they ask a
question and then he starts to say, and then they
ask what he starts and then and you know, back
and forth. And if I were him, I know he
blows up a little bit at the end. They would
have never gotten that far. I would have just like

(54:14):
slammed my fist or stood up or I'm glad he
had the patience of a saint in that moment. But
my goodness, we just need to call out there restraint
when it happens, because Harry is not typically very restrained
as a person.

Speaker 4 (54:29):
The thing that struck me about this so I put
a link here in the in the doc about this
cognitive bias video that the veryitassium YouTube channel did. I
don't know if you guys are familiar or veritassium. It's like,
science videos are really really interesting, and this particular one
I really highly recommend checking out. It's only like five

(54:50):
minutes long. Cognitive bias confirmation bias. It's I think they're
technically two different things, but you know, the ven diagram
overlaps quite a bit. Think. But what's really interesting about
this video is this guy is kind of on the
street doing this another kind of thought experiment type of
thing about kind of pattern recognition and just pointing out

(55:12):
how quick we can be sometimes to just you know,
be stuck in our original assumption about something, even in
the face of evidence saying that's not it. We just
keep hammering it. Are we sure? Like the same thing
over and over? And it's really it's a great video.
The best part is at the end he kind of

(55:33):
brings it all together by just saying, that's the whole
point of the scientific method. And you know, I will admit,
like I kind of forgot about this until I saw
this video. I'm sure I learned it in elementary school
like science fairs. But really the point of the scientific
method is to disprove our hypothesis hypotheses over and over,

(55:55):
you know. I mean, in other words, if your hypothesis
is X, and you find evidence that supports and you
say I'm done, chances are you're missing out on like
the rest of you know, the reality that could prove
you're wrong. So you you really need to like disprove
your hypothesis, have the next hypothesis disprove it over and over.

(56:15):
That way you get closer to what's actually true. And
so in this whole kangaroo court thing, like nobody is
doing that. Nobody's doing that. Obviously Fudge isn't doing it.
But when Madame Bones comes in and she starts asking
about the you know, she she has to be aware
that this is about a patronis charm, but she doesn't
appears to not know that it was a corporeal one,
like a full Patronis. And as soon as she hears that,

(56:38):
I just I was listening to the audiobooks too, and
it was just so clear to me that her, I mean,
at least the way I listen to it and read
it is she has this like kind of subconscious unconscious
bias thing going that she's like nothing else matters. She
just is like, Wow, you did this full Patronis. You're
only fifteen years old. Wow, And like, isn't her job

(57:00):
to be like trying to get to the truth of
this whole thing? But that's not the point of this.
So it's so maddening, you know, she's just and like
you said, Kat how many times has this Harry interrupted, Yes,
but and you know, she just is like seeking the
information to just all she wants to know is like, yes,
he did this patronas and wow, how impressive. And it's

(57:21):
like there's so much more important things to be digging
into in this conversation, and she just seems totally blinded
to all of that because she's so excited, like about
this one thing and just doesn't look past it. It's
really interesting to me.

Speaker 2 (57:38):
It's great that she is so in awe of Harry
here and the magic that he can do. That's great.
But you're right, I mean cool, Maybe say that to
yourself and then be like, well, maybe I'll talk to
him about it later once I clear him of all churche.
It's not what we know.

Speaker 4 (57:53):
Yeah, exactly right.

Speaker 2 (57:54):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (57:55):
I thought it was kind of fun that she was
doing that whole Oh you can actually do a patronis
very impressive. Indeed, I thought it was fun that she
was doing that, because all up until now, Harry keeps
having these interactions with people, even well known people, even

(58:15):
powerful people, who are like, good lord, you're Harry Potter. Wow,
you look just like your dad, but you've got your
mom's eyes and oh, it's so cool to meet you, Harry,
and blah blah blah, blah blah. It even happens in
the next book with Slughorn. But up to this point,
you know, Harry has had a lot of these interactions,
and this is the last place where Harry probably feels

(58:35):
like somebody's going to be impressed with him for existing.
And then it happens right in the middle of Fudge
trying to fudge up this whole trial, and then Madam
Bones just bursts in and she's like, wait, you did this.
You've been doing this for this long. Wow, that's so cool.
It's like this little nugget of Oh, Harry's impressive because

(58:58):
he's Harry in the middle of all of this. Oh
Harry is bad because he's Harry.

Speaker 3 (59:02):
B Imagine how frustrated Fudge must have been getting as
Madam Bones went on and on about Harry's patronis.

Speaker 1 (59:11):
Fudge comes across as a man who has been constipated
for at least a decade. If he could just deal
with that, he would have such a sunnier disposition. And
that's all I'm going to say about it. He just
comes across like a guy who has been constipated for
so long that everything bothers him now. And I think

(59:33):
it's also a mark of how powerful, you know, the
Bones family is one of the only pure blood families
out there. This lady is in charge of the Department
of Magical Law Enforcement, presumably I would think, one of
the most powerful and influential departments in the government. So
it's kind of if you think about it, with Fudge

(59:54):
being the Minister of Magic and him not having a
deputy minister or he has junior ministers in different departments,
I would argue that being the head of the Department
of Magical Law Enforcement kind of makes you like the
vice president or the vice chancellor, or just the second

(01:00:15):
highest ranking I would think official in the government. So
the fact that she's able to sit here say all
these nice things about Harry and nobody is I mean,
Fudge kind of pushes back on the magic being impressive,
but she doesn't get called out by anybody for being
supportive of Harry, and nobody cuts her off when she's talking.

(01:00:38):
So I think that I think speaks a lot about
how important and powerful this person is. That's actual power.
Fudge's power is imaginary. He only has authority because they
gave him a job, and everybody pretends that what he
does is important. He doesn't do squat.

Speaker 2 (01:00:56):
Yeah, I mean that's true of most people in power.

Speaker 1 (01:01:00):
Power is an imaginary concept. We made it up. People
have power because we pretend that they do.

Speaker 2 (01:01:07):
Yeah, we give it to them by giving them attention
and blah blah blah whatever. I also wonder too if
Madam Bones sure, I do think, like you said, you know,
she's she's trying to be fair here, she's trying to
hear Harry out. I also wonder if there was any
pushback to this, like if we assume it was Umbrage

(01:01:30):
or Fudge who decided to make this a full court,
you know, for for this disciplinary hearing, because I believe
it is said. I think Arthur says, well you had
a full court, like typically you would just meet with
Madam Bones, right.

Speaker 4 (01:01:44):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:01:45):
So I wonder if she, I don't want to say,
is pushing back or whatever, but in a sense, is
trying to maybe de escalate a little bit because she
knows that this is over killing a little dumb and
a little stupid. So maybe she's just trying to focus
on the magic. Yeah, all and sort of do what

(01:02:09):
she would be doing if they were having a one
on one in her office. I feel like this conversation
would have gone exactly the same way. So I think
I think this is her attempt maybe to de escalate, Yeah,
a little bit.

Speaker 1 (01:02:23):
Too, Like I could even see her being kind of
mad at Fudge, Like this was supposed to be something
that she was supposed to handle. This falls under the
umbrella of her authority. But you know that to make
this happen, Fudge had to pull rank on her. And
we don't know what kind of rapport or relationship or
friendship or whatever. We don't know what kind of typical

(01:02:46):
interactions there are between Amelia Bones and Cornelius Fudge. But
if I'm Amelia Bones and I'm supposed to handle this
and the Minister steps in, takes it away from me,
makes it into a whole thing at the eleventh hour,
and then tries to do it deliberately to cut Dumbledore
out of it, I might go along with it if

(01:03:08):
I have no choice, but I'm gonna be mad about
it afterwards, and I'm gonna let him know it. So
if we were friends before this, we're probably not going
to be friends.

Speaker 2 (01:03:16):
After this, I get the feeling they aren't friends. But
I hear, I hear what you're saying, and I agree
with that. So the trial goes on and they continue
to talk about the patronish charm, and I think it
was Fudge that says like, why were you even doing
the patronish charm? Or somebody asks that I don't remember

(01:03:37):
who and why else would he be doing the patronish charm.
The only use for the patronish charm is for dementors
because Dumbledore invented the use of patronish charms for communication
during the Second Wizarding War. So and nobody knows that
they're using that until it's discovered that they're using that

(01:03:57):
in a year or two from now or whenever. What
I understand, they probably have to establish like it has
to be on the record. But what a dumb question
like was.

Speaker 1 (01:04:09):
Purely trying to rewrite the narrative.

Speaker 2 (01:04:12):
I know it's they're trying to do a gotcha.

Speaker 1 (01:04:14):
Yeah, they want it. They want because you know that
they're gonna they're gonna publish. They probably had a plan
to publish a whole article in the Daily Profit the
moment this trial was done, and They were probably trying
to make sure that it's on the record that Harry
is this irresponsible show offee boy who just wanted to

(01:04:36):
do a big piece of magic where a lot of
people could see it and see, this is exactly why
we need to expel him and kick him out, because
we're all going to be in danger if we don't.
So it's a very, very poor job. But they are
trying to rewrite this character of who Harry Potter is
when a lot of people in the wizarding world already

(01:05:00):
probably have a better idea than Fudge does, even if
they don't know Harry all that well. It was the
same problem that Rita Skeeter had in the last book.
All she cared about was writing these juicy stories about Harry.
She couldn't even commit to which version of Harry she
wanted to write about, because one minute he's this weepy,
emotionally needy kid. The next minute he's this pitiable loaner

(01:05:26):
who's being toyed with by a teenage girl. The next
minute he's mentally unstable and having fits in class and
shouldn't even be in the tournament anymore. So, if you're
gonna try to assassinate somebody's character, you need a lot
more thought going into it than they've given it, and ultimately,
as we see, it doesn't work.

Speaker 2 (01:05:47):
I just wrote a book about Patronis's and if I
remember correctly, I'm not retracting my statement because the only
used for the Patrona's charm is against mentors. However, I
do believe the Wizardingworld dot Com had said that it
was once used against a lethofold successfully, but I don't

(01:06:08):
believe that's a textbook like deterrent for the lethofold. Just
to clarify my statement, and you know, put that out there.

Speaker 4 (01:06:19):
Can a patronis be used to open a stubborn pickle jar?
Just wondering if that's a possibility.

Speaker 2 (01:06:31):
I mean that depends on the animal. If you're doing
a corporeal that comes out of your wand.

Speaker 3 (01:06:37):
Does it happens?

Speaker 4 (01:06:39):
And it's got a nice sticky sucker and just amazing.

Speaker 1 (01:06:44):
Oh wait, No, it can't open a jar of pickles,
but it can open a jar of ghost peppers.

Speaker 4 (01:06:52):
Nice. You love it?

Speaker 3 (01:06:55):
Wow?

Speaker 2 (01:06:56):
I do? I do love it.

Speaker 1 (01:06:58):
Fudge in this chapter Man his inconsistent treatment of Harry,
his unsuccessful attempts to take down Dumbledore, though, just.

Speaker 2 (01:07:09):
Are you getting on your soapbox about Fudge? Yeah? Or
the oh, the things in general doing?

Speaker 1 (01:07:16):
Oh no, no, A lot of that I have saved
for the end for a reason, just at this point. Okay,
this is where Fudge is really showing he can't actually
do anything successfully. For fans of RuPaul's drag race, insert
the gift of Bianca del Rio saying, let me ask
you a very fair question, what do you do successfully quickly?

(01:07:39):
Because as a minister he is willing to bend and
or break the law and is incapable of being objective
as a wizard, any actual groundwork that needs doing he
delegates to other people, but then he takes the credit
for it, which is what a politician would do, unless
you count turning a tea cup into a journy, which

(01:08:00):
don't get me started on that one. And as a
human being, he is so petty and so insecure that
he flips on Dumbledore after being completely codependent on him
for so long, and he tries to vilify him, thus
putting the lives of other people at risk. So this
is my hottest hot take of this entire discussion. Even

(01:08:22):
when you get right down to it, Harry is not
responsible for the death of Serious Black, Cornelius Fudges. If
Fudge had listened to Dumbledore when Dumbledore laid out a
plan for what he needed to do about Voldemort, Serious
could have been cleared of all charges. He would not
have had to charge into the ministry. Harry would not

(01:08:44):
have gone in with his friend's half cock trying to
save somebody whose life wasn't even in danger at the time,
and Serious could still be alive. But now Fudge decided
to do what he did, and that made things progress
the way that they did. So there you have it.
Cornelius Fudge is the one who's responsible for the death
of Serious Black.

Speaker 2 (01:09:03):
Yes and no, Okay, so I hear you without getting
too deep into us, and Serious isn't this chapter and whatever? Yes,
yes and no. Fudge is a product and an amplifier
of an already bad government. He didn't create the system
that he is a part of, but like any good

(01:09:24):
patriarchal system, he does add to it and make it worse.
When I say good, you all know what I mean
When I say so. Yes, he has both the problem
and the multiplier of the problem, so he contributes to
Sirius's death. Dumbledore is really the one who is responsible

(01:09:50):
for Serious's death. He even says it and like takes fault,
but Harry is definitely in there too, so I hear you.
It is the patriarchal structure of the entire world, the
wizarding world, the Muggle world, the all the worlds. It's
that fault. That's why Sirious is dead. And you all
know how I feel about Serious Black, so blame it

(01:10:11):
on the patriarchy, my friends.

Speaker 4 (01:10:13):
Yeah, I mean, it seems like it's tricky to pin
the responsibility on one person, not just in this but
in many cases, you know, like yeah, shaw many said,
like everybody's kind of a factor in the whole formula, you.

Speaker 2 (01:10:30):
Know, so in Serious too, he's a grown up as adult,
you know. Easy though, here we go again. Yes, but no,
we're not going to.

Speaker 1 (01:10:40):
Talk about this now because like I could. He's like,
I could go on about this, but I will. I
will relinquish it so that we can continue to exist
in this chapter.

Speaker 2 (01:10:52):
Well, great, because I found a really weird and fun
word that I needed to look up and I want
to talk about it and maybe it's a little relevant
to what we're just talking, and it is the word taradiddle.
It's in there fudge, says Dumbledore. I don't have time
for this, Tara diddle. And I went to myself, what, Yeah,
how have I ever noticed this? Yeah, I'd never paid

(01:11:16):
attention to that word. Maybe I just assumed what it meant. Anyway,
the true this is from Miriam Webster. I'm going to
read the entry because it is perfection. The true origin
of taradiddle is unknown, but that doesn't mean you won't
encounter a lot of balder dash in its history. Some
folks try to connect it to the verb diddle, one

(01:11:36):
meaning of which is to swindle or cheat, but that
connection hasn't been proven and may turn out to be poppycock.
You may even hear some Tommy rot about this particular
sense of diddle coming from the Old English verb didrian,
which meant to deceive. But that couldn't be less true
unless didrian was somehow suddenly revived after eight or nine
centuries of disuse. No one even knows what when terold

(01:11:59):
did was first used. It must have been before it
showed up in the seventeen ninety six Dictionary of Colloquial Speech,
where it was defined as a synonym of fib But
if we claim we knew who said it first and
when we'd be dishing out pure apple sauce.

Speaker 1 (01:12:15):
Yeah, there are words and poetry.

Speaker 2 (01:12:19):
Yeah, you you deserve all the awards, my friend, you
should write a book. Maybe you are the one who
wrote all of Merrionnwebster dot com, but you should frame
that one and put it in your office.

Speaker 1 (01:12:31):
I'm just saying I love any time people use quirky
vocabulary like that, like I used to have. I used
to have a very specific dictionary I got at the
Scholastic book Fair. Shout out to the Scholastic Book Fair,
one of my fondest memories of school days. But I
got a very specific dictionary of quirky vocabulary words, and

(01:12:51):
it was words like that. It was words like tommy, rot, poppycock, tadidal,
boulder dash exactly. Basically, it must, I think, for it
to be a quirky word, it must have no less
than three syllables.

Speaker 2 (01:13:06):
Yeah that makes sense. Well, let's move on from that
moment of fun and levity and talk about this very
serious question. Can squibs see dementors? Honest?

Speaker 1 (01:13:19):
Oh that's when you wrote, you say, can squib see dementors.
I'm sorry. When I was preparing by notes, I thought
you wrote in muggles seed dementors.

Speaker 2 (01:13:26):
Oh no, I was like, well no, so, because let's
pretend we don't know anything. Okay, wipe your brains for
a minute.

Speaker 3 (01:13:37):
Nothing done.

Speaker 1 (01:13:39):
We like John snow like.

Speaker 2 (01:13:43):
Missus Figg's account of what happened is accurate. Was that
fed to her? Did she actually see them? Did she
just feel them? Because she does? Harry says, she does
accurately describe the feeling. I just always left that moment
sort of questioning if Squibs really actually could see dementors.

(01:14:04):
And they didn't want to google it to find out
the answer from the outher. I just wanted us to
talk about it, that's all.

Speaker 3 (01:14:10):
Can squib see any magic like Filch for example, when
he's at school? Can he see the magic that the
kids are doing? And I feel like if they can
see magic, then they should be able to see dementors.

Speaker 1 (01:14:24):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:14:24):
I mean he'd have to see like the moving staircases, right,
I mean there's there's something there, right, Yeah, there's got
to be something.

Speaker 3 (01:14:32):
The moving portraits. He sees the moving portraits.

Speaker 1 (01:14:34):
Yeah, Squibs must be able to see magic because muggles
can see magic. Otherwise, why would they need laws about
not letting muggles see magic? What would we even be
doing in this very courtroom. So, yes, they can see magic.

Speaker 3 (01:14:50):
So are dementors considered magic?

Speaker 1 (01:14:52):
They're magical creatures. I mean, can do you know any
non magical beings or devices or anything that exists in
real life that can suck the soul out of a
person in a little glowing ball. I would argue that
they are creatures of pure, concentrated dark magic. That's why

(01:15:14):
they thrive in you know, decay and despair, and they
feast on your happiness. My theory is that it's sort
of like the dark version of the explanation you get
in Peter Pan about where fairies come from. Because in
that explanation they say, when the first baby laugh for
the first time, the laugh broke into a thousand pieces.

(01:15:36):
They all went skipping about that was the beginning of fairies.
So now every time a baby is born, its first
laugh becomes a fairy. And I would think of it
like maybe even the opposite way, When the first baby
cried for the first time, the cry broke into one
thousand pieces, and they all went swooping about thirsting for

(01:15:57):
the happiness of other creatures, and that was the beginning
of dementors. I just made that up, But that's actually
kind of like it. It's dark, but it's it's kind
of good, isn't it.

Speaker 2 (01:16:10):
That'd be an excellent short story just saying so.

Speaker 1 (01:16:14):
You know what that would mean that we can We
don't need to conjure a patronis to fight dementors. We
just have to say we don't believe in them. Boom,
they're dead.

Speaker 2 (01:16:23):
So it sounds like you all are saying that, yes,
scripts can see dementors.

Speaker 1 (01:16:27):
I would say that they can, yeh. I have to
come clean about something, though, just for the sake of
our listeners, because you I don't know if anybody caught
this in the notes or not, but I mixed up
my magical creatures. I mixed up festals with dementors because
I had this whole point about how muggles who have

(01:16:50):
seen death can probably see dementors. But the idea of
being able to see them if you've seen death applies
to fstrals, not dementors.

Speaker 2 (01:17:00):
So dare you?

Speaker 1 (01:17:01):
I thought that was I thought that was a hilarious
faux paw, and I wanted to I wanted to want
to come clean about that very well reasoned.

Speaker 2 (01:17:13):
Oh that's such a raven claw answer.

Speaker 1 (01:17:15):
It was, see, you can kind of at least you
could see how like at least you can see how
I got there.

Speaker 2 (01:17:20):
But yeah, definitely.

Speaker 1 (01:17:22):
On a lighter note, I just I know, I just
said this thing about how upset I get when they
fixate on body weight and size and all those things,
but I can't help it. One of my one of
the things that always kind of makes me chuckle is
speaking of mix ups when Madam when when Missus big

(01:17:44):
has asked what did they look like? She thinks they've
met the boys, so she says, well, one of them
was very large and the other rather skinny, and they're like, no, no, no,
not them, the Dementors.

Speaker 2 (01:17:58):
The whole conversation with Missus Veiga is fantastic because they
correct her so many times, and she she she's just
like a sweet little old lady who's been tasked with
looking out for Harry Potter. She's just trying to do
her best. She's trying to comic goal.

Speaker 3 (01:18:14):
Oh yeah, the Dementors running.

Speaker 1 (01:18:17):
Yeah, Ronney, Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:18:20):
That's that's so weird that, Like Madame Bone says, they
don't run, they glide like they're trying to find out
again this it doesn't seem like they really care about
finding truth.

Speaker 1 (01:18:28):
Here, you know, like why would they volunteer?

Speaker 4 (01:18:31):
Yeah, you know you were mistaken there, this is what
they actually did. Why didn't she ask like, are you
sure you saw them running and just let her kind of,
you know, explain her her side of it instead of
what you meant to say was this, I'll help you out.
It's just kind of a weird.

Speaker 3 (01:18:49):
Well, that kind of further solidified the idea that maybe
she was trying to help Harry out.

Speaker 1 (01:18:55):
Yeah, like I I think she definitely she definitely. The
sticking point for me is after they're done talking to
her is when Madame Bones, I think, says she certainly
described their effects accurately. I think that part was truthful.
I don't know if she could see the dementors or not,
but she could definitely feel them. So the fact that

(01:19:19):
she was able to describe the experience in that kind
of detail, I don't know that she could have been
coached on that.

Speaker 2 (01:19:29):
I agree with that, I think, Yeah, I do love that.

Speaker 1 (01:19:31):
I also love that Madam I keep calling, wanting to
call her Madam Fig. I'm just gonna, you know what,
to heck with it, I'm just going to call her
Madam Fig. So, Madam Fig, in spite of obviously being
intimidated by the circumstances where she's being interrogated, is still
able to stand her ground because when she did's done

(01:19:51):
with her explanation, they're like, oh, so that's what you saw,
is it? She says that's what happened.

Speaker 2 (01:20:00):
Boom. Yeah. I agree with John here that Madam Bones
is not She's not the best adjudicator. Really, she's volunteering
a little too much information. She's not very good at
questioning people. But for me, that just backs up my
point that I said before that I think she's just

(01:20:22):
trying to de escalate. I think she's just trying to
get through this and to sort of make everybody realize
this is silly, We're being silly. Why do we have
a full court going on for something so silly? Which
just makes me love Madam Bones even more quite honestly,
So I know I like her, Yeah I do too,

(01:20:43):
her and her gravelly voice and her forty packs a day,
so well, you know.

Speaker 4 (01:20:48):
I was curious about the actual question that Fudge asks,
you know, Ken Squibsey dementors. You know, does he really
not know or is he just kind of putting it
out there to kind of be considered. But but then
I was, you know, really kind of thinking about squibs
in general, and even in the original episode, I think
it was Noah maybe quickly googled and there was a website.

(01:21:09):
I don't think it's still around, like a society of
support of squibs, and I kind of made this connection.
I think I definitely didn't make it at the time
I read the books years ago, but my son got
an autism diagnosis when he was fifteen a couple of
years ago, and Wow, my whole like worldview really kind

(01:21:33):
of expanded just just being the father of somebody who's
autistic and learning more about it. And I think there's
a correlation here maybe between squibs and neurodivergence. And it
makes me kind of wonder, you know, is is the
Wizarding World? You know, will they kind of get with

(01:21:53):
the times maybe? And will squibs kind of be am
I wrong here? Like doesn't it seems like squibs are
sort of just like shoved aside and not really thought
of as you know, human beings in the same way.
They're sort of like a lesser class. So I think
that's interesting. But the other part I kind of wanted
to share was, you know, through this increasing my awareness

(01:22:18):
about neurodivergence and stuff, I realized something about just the
way my brain developed. I'm sure nobody told me to
think this way. It's just something that kind of happened
that I was. It was like in the subconscious level.
I wasn't aware of this until just last few years.
But for and I'm forty four, so for decades of

(01:22:41):
my life, I had this tendency again, this subconscious tendency.
I wasn't even aware of that, Like pretty much anytime
there was any kind of statistic about percentages of people
that you know, seventy six percent of people that do
this experience this whatever fill in the blanks that my

(01:23:01):
brain would kind of just ignore the twenty four percent.
I would say, oh, seventy six percent, that may as
well be one hundred. I was doing this like subconsciously.
I wasn't even aware that I was just completely ignoring
these like other you know, this twenty four percent. And
again through learning more about autism, not just because of

(01:23:23):
my son, but I work for a company who, let's
just say they're very progressive, but they have they have
employee resource groups, which are fantastic. If you're not aware
any corporate America, corporate company especially you know, when there's
tens of thousands of employees, if they're not doing this

(01:23:44):
employee resource group thing, they got to get with the times. Man,
Like this is like it's so massive, are you guys?
Does this sound familiar? Employee employee resource groups? I mean,
and so this company I work for, there's nine different ones.
And what's beautiful about this is it's not an exclusive thing.
You know, the group is kind of formed around a

(01:24:07):
certain demographic, but it's not exclusive to that. The whole
point is like, you know, this demographic isn't something you're
kind of associate with, identify with, Come on in, learn
about it, you know. It's it's just this encouragement of
increasing awareness and that really like it's just it's really

(01:24:29):
feels like my the trajectory of my life changed just
from just from being aware and and I think that's
helped me again, like think about these this this this
goes back to the fourth Matrix movie. Have you guys
seen it resurrections?

Speaker 2 (01:24:49):
Oh no, but I'm sure some of our listeners have.

Speaker 4 (01:24:53):
With me, like so much goes back to the matrix.
It's it's kind of ridiculous sometimes so much goes back
to the matrix. But the fourth movie, there's this really
great line about we don't see it, but we're all
stuck in these strange repeating loops. And that's what this
thing was that for me that like I had this
I mean, there's a lot of words for it, subconscious model,

(01:25:14):
map of the world, default mode network, but it was
this this automatic thing in my subconscious that I wasn't
you know, I wasn't aware of it, so I couldn't
do anything about it. There's a there's a biologist from
I think Stanford, Robert Sapolski is his name. He's got
a really interesting theory about free will that really free

(01:25:34):
will doesn't exist. It's more like free won't and I
don't know a ton about it, but it's it's fascinating.
And so I've I've just had these like big revelations
in the last few years that I feel like has
helped me. And it all comes from this like awareness
that I had these these strange repeating loops, these like

(01:25:55):
automatic things that my subconscious was just like just like
a large language model with it's the same thing. It's
just my subconscious was like, here's the best guess. And
before I was aware that that was happening, like I
couldn't do anything about it, you know, I just followed
the path the you know, this neural these neural pathways
that had been solidified for decades and it's really like fascinating.

(01:26:21):
So I don't know, I think there was a way
to tile this. And I realized I'm kind of just
like sharing all this personal stuff here. What does that
have to do with this chapter? Well, I think specifically
this idea about like squibs and kind of I think
there's a similarity with like neurodivergence there.

Speaker 2 (01:26:38):
So well, yeah, and how they've been dismissed and sort
of pushed aside and like, oh, you're different, and you don't,
you don't you don't experience things the same way that
we do. And and but yeah, I mean I totally
get where you're I totally get where you're coming from. Yeah,
And I think that's a really apt comparison.

Speaker 1 (01:26:55):
Honestly, I one of these days I will get to
unleash this, because I have this plan for this panel
that I feel like is going to be a big
one when I finally get to start presenting it. I
just need a convention to accept it. But it's about
this intersection of things being coded, being representation and things

(01:27:17):
being normalization in works of fiction, and neurodivergence is one
of those things that I would really love to get into,
especially as a person. Just in the interest of full disclosure,
my therapist recently referred me for an evaluation for that

(01:27:38):
because she thinks that I may be on the spectrum somewhere,
which honestly would explain a lot of things in my life.
But when I think about things like that in terms
of what you've just been talking about about, how squibs
could be like maybe even I don't know if metaphor
is the correct term, but like a metaphor for neurodivergens,

(01:28:02):
I can see a lot of similarities. So I can
definitely see how some people would consider that coding. But
even with coding, the thing about the difference between coding
and representation, and this is something I hope to discuss
more when I present this panel is that coding is argumentative,

(01:28:25):
like it's about interpretation, i e. If you want to
read this person as being a neurodivergent character, and you
can make a case for that, or if it's important
to you that they be that, then they can be
read that way, but it's not necessarily concrete, whereas representation
is a little bit more fixed, i e. I have

(01:28:47):
written this character in this way because I feel like
this population needs to be represented fairly and discussed so
that there will be understanding as a result of something
that I am presenting with intention. And when I think
about that, I'm glad that squibbs are not an obvious

(01:29:12):
stand in for neuro divergence, because for all the things
the author does well as a writer, she should not
be the person to represent that or many other marginalized populations,
because I don't think she would do it fairly, and

(01:29:33):
especially considering the reputation that she has gained for the
way that she is willing to look at people unapologetically,
I don't think that a person who thinks that way
should be the one to represent any marginalized populations in fiction.

Speaker 2 (01:29:55):
Yeah, and I mean I think that we as voracious readers.
That is a second time I've used voracious, and the
fourth time I've used it this week. I just want
to say, I think it's the word of the week,
But as people who have lived with these books for
twenty twenty five years and have been doing this podcast

(01:30:16):
thing for over a century over a decade, is the
word it meant not batter you look good.

Speaker 4 (01:30:23):
That's a gracious decade, acious decade.

Speaker 2 (01:30:27):
I love that we see a lot of things that
clearly are unintended, and I'm with you, Jeff, I don't
think that this is an intended thing, and I'm glad
that it's not, because I agree. She would not be
the person I would pick to speak about these kind
of things. And for the record, jeff our friend Artemis,

(01:30:51):
who was on our Herbology episode, has is autistic themselves ADHD,
on the spectrum all those and has pointed out many
times that neurodivergent people tend to flock together. So if
you are neurodivergent or on the spectrum or whatever, that
would make sense, especially if you have a lot of
friends that are so oh yes, I feel like I am.

(01:31:13):
I feel like most of the people in my life
are in some way. I'm actually pretty convinced that most
people have some form of neurodivergence and the people who
don't are actually the minority. So but that's another podcast.

Speaker 1 (01:31:27):
Right, Oh, I can tell you for absolute existing in
the realm of anime conventions the way that I have,
and for as long as I have in the different
capacities that I have, neurodivergent people absolutely do flock together,
and usually they come to events like that, And I'm
very proud of this because they know that when they
come there, they will not be mistreated, they will be safe,

(01:31:51):
and the things that they're passionate about will be celebrated,
and it will hopefully fuel their little patronises.

Speaker 4 (01:32:00):
Oh, peace of love and good happiness stuff exactly.

Speaker 2 (01:32:05):
Well, let's since you brought up the patronas, let's roll
it back here. Even though I loved that discussion and
I really could talk about that for like four hours,
let's get back to the trial. So Harry somehow makes
it through getting interrupted four hundred times, and missus Fig

(01:32:28):
gives I'm sorry, Madam Fig gives it, gets their testimony,
and then Fudge is just like this is some this
is a cock and bowl story. Like I don't believe it.
Here he is doing it again, trying to just make
He's just making stuff up for the sake of making
stuff up.

Speaker 1 (01:32:47):
I know there's nothing vulgar about the phrase cock and bowl,
but when you say it, for some reason, it feels
like you're saying something. And I know why. We don't
have to dig deep on it, just it feels like
you're saying something naughty.

Speaker 2 (01:33:05):
Sorry, it's probably I probably shouldn't. I probably shouldn't say it,
since it's an animal one and it might mean something
really bad. If Tyler you're listening to this, I'm sorry,
please correct me. But yeah, I mean it's also just
fun to say.

Speaker 4 (01:33:23):
It just flows.

Speaker 2 (01:33:26):
Yeah, and it does feel a little naughty, but also
like acceptable, you know. But anyway, this is where.

Speaker 3 (01:33:34):
I believe Fudge is trying to ask why would the
Dementors have been near Harry's home? Who would have sent them?
Blah blah blah, And again Dumbledore jumps in and tries
to get him to see reason that Voldemort's out there,
maybe he's controlling them, or worse, maybe it's someone from
the ministry who sent them. And I just find it

(01:33:56):
really funny how Unbridge basically gives herself away as she
leans forward and has to say something. If she had
just sat there and let it go would have been fine,
She would have been good. But she gives herself away
just a little gives us a little hint that it
was her, because of course she has to insert herself

(01:34:17):
in the conversation. That was all I had to say,
thank you.

Speaker 4 (01:34:22):
Yeah, no, I agreed. I've read that that same way.
It's you know, it's the very next paragraph after of courses,
we must ask ourselves why somebody within the ministry ordered
to pair. It's a nice checkmate move too, by the way.
You know, he kind of gets Fudge into this thing,
but he's like, why were they in that alleyway in
the first place. And the very next paragraph is, you know,
in that silence of the witch to the right of

(01:34:44):
Fudge leaned forward. That's how I read it, like, that's
why because she she did it, you know, kind of
a thing.

Speaker 2 (01:34:50):
So what's that sort of classic villain horror movie reveal.
The villain steps out of the shadows and you see
them for the first time and their their gnarly face
and whatever, and the description of umbrage is so great.
Harry basically is like, she's a big toad, complete with

(01:35:11):
a black bow on the top of her head that
looks like a fly fly. And so, of course, uh,
being me, especially especially since I just finished that book
about Patronis's, I needed to look up sort of the
history of toads and like if they have any you know,
sort of what their mythology is across different cultures and whatever.

(01:35:35):
And I found a lot of things. Toads have a
lot of mythology and whatever, But this one was so interesting.
It's from an MIT Press article entitled toad lower in
the Natterjack at the Edges of Occult History. Amazing, And
the quote that I pulled was another long standing Northern
European folk tradition holds that the toad holds that the

(01:35:58):
toad contains within and its head above the eyes a
kind of philosopher's stone, the toadstone, which possesses healing and
anti poisonous properties similar to those of the bazaar. And
I just read it because I was like, is this
basically the Harry Potter frog? And well, I will make

(01:36:20):
sure that that's linked in the in the show notes,
because you all should read that article. It was very
illuminating and interesting and there's no way you don't read
that and just like scream Umbrage in your head the
whole time.

Speaker 4 (01:36:34):
But you know, yeah, fascinating.

Speaker 2 (01:36:36):
You look bewildered, Jeff.

Speaker 1 (01:36:37):
Just you're thinking about all of the Toad stuff and
just realizing how much I didn't actually catch when I
was younger and would read these books over and over again.
But Umbrage might be one of the strongest examples that
we have of the author trying to equate people's physical

(01:36:58):
bodies with their moral character. And I mean, you get
two extremes with the Dursleys. You get one very very
large man and one very very thin woman, and you're
constantly reminded of their physical characteristics, especially interestingly enough when

(01:37:20):
they're experiencing particularly strong displays of emotion. But we get
these constant reminders of Umbrage that she dresses, and she speaks,
and she carries herself in a very feminine way. She

(01:37:41):
wears bows in her hair, she wears pink, fluffy cardigans,
and all of these things, and yet when she speaks,
when you look closely at her face, her actions, they
all point to, oh, she is really ugly, and she
is a bad. Ugly is equal to bad. It's okay

(01:38:03):
to judge. The subtext is it's okay to judge people
based on how they look, because you'll find out everything
you need to know about them if you do.

Speaker 2 (01:38:13):
John, since I know you listened to the original episode,
did they talk at all about the color pink in
media and how it tends to be a representative of
evil they talk about that?

Speaker 4 (01:38:26):
I don't think so. It doesn't sound familiar. I don't
think that was in there.

Speaker 1 (01:38:29):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:38:29):
I seem to feel like it was Michael that at
some point, maybe it was an Umbrage episode or just
an Umbridge chapter. I'd have to go find it, and
I don't want to misquote him, and I don't have
time to do the proper Google research. But there's a
whole theory about the color pink and how so many
villains wear the color pink.

Speaker 4 (01:38:51):
Interesting.

Speaker 2 (01:38:52):
Yeah, but yeah, I mean her leaning forward coming out
of the shadows all but she all but fesses up
to it right here in this moment, and we actually
do get sort of confirmation later she's like, yeah, I
did that. I think it's when she catches everybody in
they're in her office right before they head out.

Speaker 1 (01:39:13):
Yes, Jeff, so, yeah, yeah, yeah, I had a note
and hear about how it was. It was chapter thirty
two specifically, and it's a book. It's in the book,
it's not in the movie. But she specifically says what
Fudge won't know won't hurt him. After all, he had
no idea that I ordered de mentors after Potter last summer,
which we just skate over. And what a waste of

(01:39:36):
a confession because she's right back to working in the
government again, and Harry just thinks to himself, Oh, so
she's still working for the government.

Speaker 4 (01:39:43):
Huh.

Speaker 1 (01:39:44):
Doesn't mention it to anybody because he's given up on
them to do the right thing or even the comprehensible
thing by that point. So big deal that she confessed
to it because didn't lead to anywhere, no consequences.

Speaker 2 (01:39:58):
No, please, well government? Does that sound like anyway?

Speaker 1 (01:40:00):
We fried out in the apocrypha though, that she was
sentenced to life in prison for crimes against humanity and
that she was given something like one hundred and twenty
five year sentence.

Speaker 2 (01:40:10):
Is that a Potter More thing?

Speaker 6 (01:40:12):
No, that was that.

Speaker 1 (01:40:14):
I think it was a BuzzFeed article, but it was
it was I did not make this up. I brought
this up before and somebody told me it sounded like
it was not confirmed. But this was stuff that was
confirmed by the author, and it's you know, little things like.

Speaker 2 (01:40:31):
It was this like a tweet back when Yeah, this
was like it was like a list.

Speaker 1 (01:40:35):
Of post post Battle of Hogwarts things that aren't in
the nineteen years later epilogue. But they just to let
you know what did happen, like who Percy got married
to Neville marrying Hannah Abbott, Luna marrying Rolf's commander Kingsley,

(01:40:57):
you know, saying whoever wants to et cetera. But like
the point is in that list of things, it was
established that Dolores Umbridge was sanctioned for her crimes and
she was put in jail for the rest of her life. Great,
unless you've seen Curse Child, but we won't talk about that.
I'm just throwing it out there to be a chaos
goblin scene.

Speaker 4 (01:41:15):
What.

Speaker 2 (01:41:16):
Yeah, the lexicon, of course, I just lost the reference.
Hang on and hang on, I had I just had it,
and then my page refreshed. Yes, it was she said it.
The author said it during the Bloomsbury live chat, and
then it was also on Potter More at some point.

Speaker 1 (01:41:33):
So that's it.

Speaker 2 (01:41:35):
If you believe her word, then there it is. And
I suppose that's what the new ride at Epic Universe
is based on, right, So if you go through her
trial as I've been told. So anyway, Ah, the question
of the day.

Speaker 3 (01:41:51):
Do dementors need permission to attack? Discuss?

Speaker 1 (01:41:57):
Is it necessary they do? No, I wouldn't say it
was strictly necessary. I think of them as similar to
the centaurs. Technically they're considered magical creatures, but they are
sentient and capable of being persuaded under the right circumstances,
although they prefer to probably fend for themselves. So I

(01:42:18):
would think some of them would be content to wait
for orders if they think they're going to get what
they need out of the arrangement. But their instinct for
draining happiness is so strong that they would not be
able to resist the temptation to go rogue, as it were.
And I think we all remember what happened during the

(01:42:40):
quidditch match in Prisoner of Azkaban, right, So basically there
might be some who are willing to take orders if
they feel like that's the best and easiest deal. They're
going to get. But their instincts are very strong, so
they definitely would break the deal under the right circumstances.
And some of them would probably just say, no, I'm
a being of pure dark magic and you're a human.

(01:43:01):
I'm going to suck the happiness out of you now, Straw.

Speaker 2 (01:43:05):
And not all dementors are in the employee of the
Ministry of Magic.

Speaker 1 (01:43:09):
They are if you believe, if you believe that's.

Speaker 3 (01:43:13):
What that there.

Speaker 2 (01:43:16):
Outside and there is, there have to be rogue dementors.
There have to be.

Speaker 1 (01:43:25):
I mean, every breed of being has rogues.

Speaker 2 (01:43:30):
I mean, just I'm gonna go like a little silly.
The Ministry of Magic can't offer them a better life
than being a free agent and being a self employed dementor. Like,
what are the benefits of working for the ministry other
than like a consistent meal at Askaban the health care pacty,

(01:43:56):
Like that's the only one. But they don't need a
thousand dementors or is it Askaban? And we know that
they're they're starting to get a little more prolific, they're
starting to breed a little bit, you know, So there
have to be rogue dementors.

Speaker 1 (01:44:13):
They just have to be socialized medicine. Just trying to
think of do we do we access to better schools
for the baby dementors? Yeah?

Speaker 4 (01:44:25):
Yeah, do we know the history of dementors? Like how
long have they been in existence?

Speaker 3 (01:44:31):
That's an excellent question.

Speaker 7 (01:44:32):
Let's check the lexicons just because like like you're saying,
I mean eventually kind of what you were saying to Jeff,
Like because of time and change, inevitably, it seems like
it'll you know, yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:44:48):
Like budget so convinced that they have them all under control,
but that can't like, like cats said that that there's
so many of them, Like that can't be. It's highly
unlikely that that's the case.

Speaker 2 (01:45:00):
The lexicon doesn't have anything about their history, but that
doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just means that we'd have
to sort of look it up.

Speaker 4 (01:45:09):
Like in other words, if it was possible that like
dementors were like created or something, you know, five ten
years previously, maybe they haven't evolved or matured enough to
even consider being rogue. But I do think like eventually,
like just like you said, Jeff, every being kind of

(01:45:29):
has some eventually, like some some part of their evolutionary
traits I think would tend towards like change, doing something different,
and you know that could be a dementor just attacking
by its own volition. You know.

Speaker 1 (01:45:47):
His picture like dementtors wearing a T shirt of Eric
Cartman from that one South Park episode going whatever I will?

Speaker 2 (01:45:56):
I mean, I just read. I just clicked through all
of the links the Lexicon has on their page about dementors,
and there's, yeah, there, at a quick glance, what I
could see, there's no real history. There's a lot of
talk about how the author invented them, invented them, and
what the allegories are meant to be depression, which yes

(01:46:17):
we all get, but nothing really about the history of dementors,
where they came from. We know that they breed. That's
about it.

Speaker 3 (01:46:28):
So now the only thing I think is the Cott
and I do song about mentors, Where did you come From?
Where'd you go?

Speaker 1 (01:46:38):
Well, great, now that's going to be stuck in what
song Joe happen Mary in Lockdown Ago? Where did you
come from?

Speaker 3 (01:46:47):
Ready to go?

Speaker 1 (01:46:47):
Ready to come from?

Speaker 3 (01:46:49):
And there's a whole dance and everything.

Speaker 1 (01:46:52):
There's also a really really gross theory about what that
song is actually about.

Speaker 2 (01:46:56):
Discuss that here, pretty racist isn't it.

Speaker 1 (01:46:59):
It's not a race thing it is. It is a
thing thing, a.

Speaker 2 (01:47:04):
Thing.

Speaker 1 (01:47:04):
Yeah, it's about what cotton Eye Joe is actually referring to.
It's not kad.

Speaker 4 (01:47:13):
Okay, is this like the other thing? Like, don't look
into it.

Speaker 3 (01:47:16):
I don't want to know, you know what.

Speaker 1 (01:47:18):
Actually, I'm going to be a chaos goblin again, and
I'm gonna say this one you can look up in
your own time, because there's nothing hurtful about knowing it.
It's just kind of weird and gross.

Speaker 3 (01:47:28):
That seems to always be the case, with like such
a happy tune behind it.

Speaker 1 (01:47:35):
Oh my gosh. Every time I hear the ice cream
truck rolling through my neighborhood and it's playing Turkey in
the Straw, I'm like, don't do they not know? I
don't know if I know the history that I know,
well the history of the Turkey. Yeah, Turkey and the
Straw was a very very very very racist song. And
the words were not Turkey in the Straw. The words

(01:47:56):
were words that I can't say.

Speaker 2 (01:47:59):
Shouldn't say, yeah, will not ever, will not ever say no. Good. Well,
there are a lot of things.

Speaker 3 (01:48:07):
That's quite a turn.

Speaker 2 (01:48:10):
Whoops, sorry, Okay, no, no, No, we're on such a
tangent le's we're almost done with this chapter.

Speaker 1 (01:48:17):
And I'm really looking to do it by soapbox about
the government, I know.

Speaker 2 (01:48:21):
And I'm so excited to hear that. So let's finish
up talking about the trial.

Speaker 3 (01:48:26):
As the trial portion, this is the portion where they
start they're asking all the questions, they're trying to figure
out you know why Harry has done this? Is he
telling the truth where they're really dementors blah blah blah.
And this is always the point where I say, if
only they had a pensive or bear to serum, that
would solve all your problems. You'd be able to PLoP

(01:48:49):
the memory in or give them the truth, erm whatever
you see these sonny truth problem solved. However, I realize
we're not here to find out what actually happens. We're
here to vilify and possibly Dumbledore since he happens to
be there as well. And we don't want justice, we
don't want truth. We just we have an agenda.

Speaker 1 (01:49:08):
Oh yeah, we can't risk the possibility that the truth
might actually come out. It would ruin this Kakka maimi,
there's another word for you, this kaka Maimi narrative that
we were trying to construct about Harry. We have to
make him look bad, not find out what happened. What
trial is ever about that?

Speaker 3 (01:49:26):
But in a perfect world, how how great would that be?
How helpful would that be?

Speaker 4 (01:49:31):
Well so, so my small counter to that is this idea.
Like my wife and I were talking about this years ago.
We were realizing, like, you know, we only remember an
event like once, like when it happens, anytime we think
back on it, we're remembering what we remembered about it,

(01:49:52):
and then the next time we talk about it, we
remember what we remembered, you know, like and especially when
it's like a shared exp experience. And if I don't
know if you guys can relate, but have you ever
had a case where, like, you know, a group of
of you know, friends, you all experienced something and then
as a group you're telling other people about it, and

(01:50:13):
maybe you're sharing your you know, memory of what happened,
and someone else says and then this happened, and you
kind of go, wowow, I don't remember that happening, but
it becomes part of your memory. So the next time
you talk about it, you might say, like, now you
know so and so said this happened. I don't remember
that happening, but they said it happened. Or you might
even not even you know, include that detail, you might

(01:50:36):
just incorporate that into your own memory. So the interesting
thing about this, we kind of we called this like
telephone game memory. And then there was this show on
AMC called Dispatches from Elsewhere and I was running on
the treadmill watching it, and this scene happened where this
guy was saying the exact same thing, and I'm like, WHOA, Like,

(01:50:57):
this dude's talking about this thing we've been talking about.
But it's really fair to me, and it goes with
like eyewitness testimony. You know, a lot of I think
that the general concessan consensus is it's really not that
reliable because I don't I don't think humans in general,
like our memories are that great, you know, because again,
it's the actual event happened once and there until our

(01:51:20):
consciousness evolves into a way to perceive time in more
than just one direction. Linearly, we can't go back to
that time. We're just left with our best guess of
what we remember about it. It's really fascinating to me.
So so I, you know, I hear what you're saying, Shamani.
And also like in the especially in the real world,

(01:51:41):
like I don't know that that would be as helpful.
I think it'd be just like eyewitness testimony. Like the
only way to really have some concrete proof of what
happened is if it's like, you know, filmed or something.
But even that is losing its potency because of how
good generative AI is getting. And you know, the days
of like being able to trust what you see on

(01:52:02):
a screen are like almost long gone. It's really like
kind of crazy to think about. But then I also
was thinking about the Verita serum, and you know, something
in my memory was like, yeah, it's something like sodium
pentathal or something. And then they googled, you know, truth
serum and again it's the general consensus is it's it's

(01:52:27):
not something that's reliable. And I pulled this quote out
of the wiki on truth serum that just that says,
the practice of chemically inducing an involuntary mental state is
now widely considered to be a form of torture because
it's talking about the killicals kind of being like a
psychoactive kind of you know, mental state. Or whatever. So

(01:52:49):
my question though about this was like, because to me,
the keyword there is involuntary mental state. So I don't know,
is there a case to be made for if someone
was like voluntarily, like I give me the truth serum.
I you know, I'm voluntarily putting myself into this for
the purposes of convincing you that I'm not lying or something.

(01:53:13):
I don't know, is that interesting to anybody.

Speaker 1 (01:53:15):
But well, that's it is, because I mean, just the idea.
I think in theory, most people would probably agree if
there was a way to use something outside of ourselves
to definitively prove without any doubt what the truth was,

(01:53:35):
unless you have something to hide, I think most people
would probably agree that the benefits would outweigh the cost
of doing something like that. But something else that I
think you may have even actually mentioned this in what
you were just sharing. But something else that my lawyer
has explained to me because I would do this thing
with her all the time where I would watch an

(01:53:56):
episode of Law and Order and I know it's drama,
I know it's television. They make stuff up, and also
some laws are specific and that show takes place in
New York, so they're really only ever taking New York
laws into account most of the time. But I would
every now and then I would ask her something that
I saw on the show, and I would say, is
that true or does it really work that way? And

(01:54:16):
I asked her about sodium pentathal interviews, and she said,
most of the time, people don't even bother bringing it
to the table as a suggestion. Even if the person says,
I'll take a lie detector test, I'll take a sodium
pentathought whatever, you know, whatever I have to do to
prove what the truth is, because there's just way too
much red tape and way too much uncertainty in things

(01:54:40):
like that. It unfortunately, the use of substances like that
to force people to be truthful does not adequately, you know,
remove doubt.

Speaker 4 (01:54:53):
Yeah, so the theory might be good, but in practice.

Speaker 1 (01:54:57):
Unfortunately, according to her, that's why it doesn't necessar Necessarily,
it's not necessarily that it's illegal. It's just that most
people involved in a case will know on either side
that sodium pentothal interview is not going to be considered
reliable testimony because you only need one juror in that

(01:55:17):
room to have a strong belief in conspiracy theories and
to dismiss solid science, for them to say, oh, well,
we don't actually know what was in that stuff that
they gave that person when they supposedly did this interview.

Speaker 2 (01:55:33):
Yeah. Well, And the real problem with eyewitness testimony is
that we see things through our own bias. So even
if ten people stood and watched somebody murder somebody, or
even something as simple as shuffling a deck of cards
or like cutting an onion, We're all going to see

(01:55:55):
that differently. So that's that. And my understanding is the
reason that eye witness testimony, aside from the memory part,
is just so unreliable because everybody has their own set
of beliefs and principles. And I mean, Jeff was just
talking about people not believing in science, like that's just

(01:56:17):
one of the things, especially in this modern culture that
we're in. It contributes to that. So for me, for
me in the Wizarding World, if verita serum, if verit
to serum is the equivalent of this muggled truth serum
that you all are talking about, probably unhelpful, but I
would tend to believe that the verit to serum, much

(01:56:40):
like the pen seve which We have talked about so
many times on this show that the penceieve is an
unbiased view of that conversation. We see that it can
be tricked, you know, Slughorn tricks it when they're talking
about the memory. But the way it has always been
described is that you pull the memory from your head,

(01:57:02):
you put it in a penzeve, and you can look
at it outside yourself. It's beyond the barrier of your
of your bias, and that would be the only thing
that would ever work in any scenario to show truth.

Speaker 3 (01:57:22):
Though it for sure be the most reliable.

Speaker 2 (01:57:24):
Exactly, Yeah, what is truth? Everybody has their own truth? Yea,
exactly truth is not even truth, Like you said, I.

Speaker 4 (01:57:32):
Think Dostoyevsky maybe said, there is no objective reality. Everything
is subjective reality. But that does sound like a truly
magical thing to be able to take a memory and
then observe it objectively. In other words, like anyone could
take that same memory, my memory or your memory, but
the pensive experience would be the same objective view, regardless

(01:57:56):
of whose actual memory you know, was poured into it.
That that does sound like it would.

Speaker 2 (01:58:01):
Be so helpful, I feel right, Yeah, And that's why
I think I think. And I'm not patting myself on
the back here when I say this, but people who
tend to have dreams where they view things outside of themselves,
I have found, tend to be more subjective, I'm sorry,

(01:58:26):
less subjective thinkers, and come to conclusions that consider more
than just the one narrow point of view. I personally
very often dream outside of myself. I see myself in
my dreams when I'm dreaming as if I'm another person.

Speaker 3 (01:58:47):
And I know a lot of people who do do
That is fascinating, That is like wow, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:58:53):
So I'm sure there have been studies done about it.
I haven't read them. I don't know anything about them.
That is just my conclusion, sort of like my my
theory about the car you drive. If you are able
to purposefully pick the car that you drive, what that
says about your personality. But that's another podcast.

Speaker 3 (01:59:13):
Okay, I need to know more about that later. All right,
moving on the dreaming about the car.

Speaker 2 (01:59:20):
Oh great, well we'll tell me all of it. We'll chat.
That'll be for our next Patreon made up we'll talk
about it there. So this last quote that I sort
of want to use to wrap up things here before
we get to Jeff's political Wizarding World legal system discussion.

(01:59:42):
It's iconic and I had I just had to read it.
This is Dumbledore saying, in your admirable haste to ensure
that the laws upheld you appear inadvertently, I am sure
to have overlooked a few laws yourself. And I just
think that they should print it on shirts and they
should ended out to everybody, because that is like basically

(02:00:03):
the motto of the Wizarding World. I mean there, it
is in one sentence.

Speaker 3 (02:00:10):
And this, I think is also the moment where Fudge
decides that something has to be done. At first, I thought, well,
this is where he decides he's going to send umbrage.
But I don't think he even necessarily decides that it's
going to be umbrage. But I think he decides that
he has to do something because he can see that
Dumbledore appears to have more authority than what he does.

(02:00:33):
He is lacking control here and he needs to find
a solution to kind of brain Dumbledore in. I don't
think he necessarily knows what the plan will be, but
I think he knows. This is where he realizes something
has to be done.

Speaker 2 (02:00:50):
I agree, And I mean, and then you know, Umbrage
sort of leans in and she's sort of joining the
conversation a little bit. And I really, I really to
think in this time is like Umbradge doesn't know Harry
at all personally. She knows word of mouth, she knows
what she's heard from Fudge, from the newspaper, but even so,

(02:01:13):
he's really not been in the news. She knows very
little about Harry. And so I'm thinking that she's pretty
much purely politically motivated at this point. Would you all
agree with that that her motivations are purely for her
own power and gain.

Speaker 1 (02:01:31):
Yeah, I think those have probably always been her chief motivators,
even when we got the Potter More stuff that ended
up getting published as its own separate thing, where we
find out about her backstory being not just feeling important,
but using authority to make other people see that she

(02:01:52):
is important. It's like she doesn't want people to recognize
on their own that she is some body to be
respected and even feared. She wants that feeling of subjugating
other people and gathering them. She has to be the

(02:02:12):
one to take people who are unaware of who she
is and she thrives on making them see it and
then ensuring that they don't forget it. Unfortunately, her power
is also imaginary, and people wake up to that surprisingly
quick compared to other characters in the story.

Speaker 2 (02:02:33):
Yeah, amen to that.

Speaker 1 (02:02:34):
Thank you Curse of the Defense against the Dark Arts
teacher for poking a hole in that.

Speaker 2 (02:02:41):
In that well, I have a really good throwback comment
which I think is actually a perfect lead in to
your legal system discussion, especially in relation to the chapter.
It comes from our friend Elvis Gaunt, and they say
Dumbledore says he is the witness for the defense, but
he effectively plays the role of defense attorney. He arranges

(02:03:04):
for a witness and quotes various laws. Who picks this
witness in this case? I think it's safe to assume
Dumbledore chose himself, and I am sure he would not
be the witness in all the cases. I also have
a feeling he was allowed to speak so much because
he is Dumbledore. So in a typical trial there would
be no defense attorney. And if the accused does not

(02:03:24):
know all the laws, which they normally wouldn't, they're doomed.
We can only hope they are allowed to at least
give an explanation for their actions. Finally, Fudge plays the
role of prosecuting attorney, and he is also on the jury,
a true kangaroo court. Indeed, which this again, you wouldn't

(02:03:46):
have said it better than there it is again. Yes,
there it is again. So all right, Jeff, my friend
to the floor. The floor is yours. I'm really excited
to hear this.

Speaker 3 (02:03:57):
Thank you.

Speaker 1 (02:03:58):
And actually first I have to start by just saying
to kind of also attach what I have prepared to
that quote that you added. I wrote all of this
in here at the end because I felt like a
lot of the points that I wanted to make are
illustrated by the whole discussion. But then after I put

(02:04:21):
it in here at the end, I went back and
I read that quote that you inserted, and that's when
I realized.

Speaker 2 (02:04:27):
From Elvis Cotton, and that's when I said.

Speaker 1 (02:04:30):
Oh, well, this ties it up very neatly. I could
have probably just did a paragraph, but it's me people
who have listened to the show that have heard me before.
I know I'm not going to stop at a paragraph.

Speaker 2 (02:04:40):
That's okay though we love it so and we're only
at like a two hour show, so you have plenty
of time.

Speaker 3 (02:04:44):
Yeah, so.

Speaker 1 (02:04:47):
I'm not telling anybody anything they don't already know here.
But the legal system, like everything else in the Wizarding World,
and I do mean everything. I could go in on
any tiny aspect of this Wizarding World. It's poorly structured. Okay,
this is the only example we see anything close to

(02:05:09):
a barrister or a lawyer speaking on behalf of someone
who has been accused of a crime. Every other trial
has not been a trial because they don't have trials.
They call them that, but what they have are inquisitions. Heck,
when they installed Umbrage at Hogwarts, they literally give her

(02:05:33):
the title of High Inquisitor, which the last time I
got on a soapbox about that was when we were
talking about the chapter the Hogwarts High Inquisitor, and the
night before I had just seen the movie Conclave, which
is a brilliant film. People should watch that. But to
bring it back to the chapter, I'm seeing this inquisition

(02:05:56):
of Harry in front of the full Whizen gamma, and
I'm thinking, how many people in the Wizarding World do
we actually think are adequately prepared and or qualified to
act in their own defense when they step into a courtroom.
There's an old adage. I heard this in a Law
and Order episode. I asked my lawyer. She said, people

(02:06:17):
do say this, that whomever acts in their own defense
has a fool for a client. That's not the version
that I heard at first. It was, you know, what
they say about the man who represents himself, that he
has a fool for a client. So obviously you know
that's an antiquated way of saying it. But the point
is people have the legal right to act in their

(02:06:40):
own defense, but they often shouldn't because people in general
are unqualified to represent themselves in legal matters. So basically,
the jury for every trial in the Wizarding World is
always the same, regardless of who's on trial or what
they've done. And this is a government where the officials

(02:07:02):
are appointed or hired, but they're not democratically elected. So
government officials that weren't even voted on by the citizens
are the ones deciding if they're guilty or innocent. Every
time this comes up, and I wonder if they have
to recuse themselves if someone they're close to is on trial,

(02:07:22):
And then I answer myself, they obviously don't. Because Barti
Crouch presided over an inquisition that involved his own son.
And the legislators who write these laws, which apparently can
be written by anyone in the government, Arthur Weasley writes them.

(02:07:44):
The judges who determine guilt or innocence, which is apparently everyone,
and the wizarding police who respond to very specific types
of magical infractions are all under one umbrella, and it
has the word enforcement in it. If you're writing laws,

(02:08:05):
your title should not have enforcement in it. And I
think we should just rethink the use of the word
enforcement entirely, because the whole thing screams intimidation, and it's
not about protecting anyone. It's about trying to keep people
in line, which is why they do these inquisitions and

(02:08:28):
call them trials. The way that they do, they are
literally looking down on you because they want you to
feel overwhelmed by what is happening, so that you feel
the weight and the authority of the government crashing down
on you. That's how they want it to feel, otherwise

(02:08:49):
you would be equal. I've seen footage of courtrooms in Britain,
and I know that some of them are different. Some
of the ones in America even are different. But I
know so that your typical courtroom in the United States,
you have the defendant at one table, you have the
prosecution on the same level at the other table. The

(02:09:10):
judge is raised up, the jury might be raised up.
But when you're actually being interrogated in a courtroom, you
take the stand, you're the one who's raised up, not
the other way around, So that's backwards. But then to
kind of bring it all all together, I was thinking,

(02:09:31):
if I'm in the Wizarding World and I'm part of
the government, what proposals would I have to remedy some
of these issues? And these are the things that I
would put forth. This is by no means a comprehensive list,
because I could probably think of others, and there would
probably be a lot of amending to each of these things,

(02:09:53):
but just overall, these are the things I would see
that need correcting. First of all, government official should be elected,
they should have to reapply for their jobs, and their
term limits should be short. They should have to constantly
be checked and held accountable by the people, and they
should have to demonstrate that they deserve to keep their

(02:10:16):
job and their assumed authority because they have used it correctly.
Two citizens of the Wizarding World should be eligible for
jury duty. I know that your average person is probably
not all that savvy when it comes to the law,
and as we've just talked about, there may be if

(02:10:37):
you have a room full of twelve people, there may
be one who believes something very very different from you.
But we have to trust when people are chosen for
jury duty that they can remain unbiased and make decisions
purely based on the evidence. Maybe they do, maybe they don't.
I may not come across as an optimist in what
I'm saying here, but I actually do consider myself an

(02:10:59):
optimist most of the time. So I would say you
have to give people a reason to think, you believe
that people are good, otherwise than ever will be. So
I do think that people in the Wizarding World should
be called up for jury duty. The Minister of Magic
point number three should never be involved in any criminal

(02:11:20):
trials unless they're the defendant. So the person who has
the top job in the government absolutely should not be
the person in the hot seat. If you're going to
have people who are experts in magical law, which is
going to be my next point, then you should have
people who are so well versed in magical law like

(02:11:40):
that should be you know something that Madam Bones is
in charge of. Madam Bones should be in charge of
appointing at the very I don't know if we would
call them judges necessarily, but you know, for want of
a better term, we can call them judges. So the
Wizarding Justice system should have judges, and they should be
a point by the person who's in charge of the

(02:12:01):
Department of Magical Law enforcement. Point number four, experts in
magical law should be trained to offer their services as barristers,
because most people cannot defend themselves. They don't know courtroom procedure,
they don't know if they're going to talk themselves into
a corner or not. They need somebody who is actually

(02:12:24):
prepared to do what Dumbledore is doing for Harry. And
don't call them a witness for the defense, because witnesses
can be called by the prosecution and the defense. So
you have to standardize these terms too. And finally, I
would say we need a complete restructure of governmental departments
that we won't get into for now for reasons of time,

(02:12:46):
but things that involve more clear divisions of authority and responsibility,
things that ensure that not everyone who works for the
government has the opportunity to write laws, because honestly, I've
met some people the DMV who thankfully do not write
laws for the City of Louisville. And it attempts to

(02:13:07):
keep the citizens of the wizarding world safe and prevent
disaster rather than just responding to it after it's already happened.
Because that's probably my biggest beef with a lot of
these departments. In the Department of Magical Law Enforcement is
that there are things where they wait for trouble to
happen and then they respond to it, depending on the

(02:13:30):
type of trouble it is, Department of Magical Accidents and Catastrophes,
Magic Reversal Squad, Obliviators ors going after wizards who practice
dark magic. They wait for the thing to happen and
then they have first responders depending on how specific it is.
But they don't have anybody out there on the front

(02:13:52):
lines trying to actually make sure that people things stay safe.
They just wait for it to get messy.

Speaker 2 (02:13:58):
Let me first applaud you are pulling this all together.
I think it's very very well organized, and I think
in episode A topic episode on the legal system would
have been very interesting and super duper frustrating. I would
like some of these things for our own country right now,
or a muggle country, But without insulting you or any

(02:14:24):
of your research, A lot of this stuff we know
doesn't work well.

Speaker 1 (02:14:27):
Of course it doesn't work. Do you think that?

Speaker 4 (02:14:32):
Do you think it works better? I mean, I would say, like,
what the what the wizarding world currently has. It's like
an antiquated right and it's like in need of like
being brought into the modern century. So maybe it doesn't work,
but does it work better? He is at least a
step in the right direction.

Speaker 2 (02:14:51):
Sure, Yeah, I suppose I am coming in from my
as we just talked about my own biased view of
government and how well it does.

Speaker 1 (02:15:00):
Oh, I'm one hundred percent with you on people. Know,
what I always say is that every every because there
are different. You know, there's different there's different types of
ways of governing. You know, they're they're in a lot
of countries, a lot of people whose governments have put
those certain systems and practices into place for the longest time.

(02:15:22):
They believe that their way is the way that works.
But those would be the people who either don't want
to put the effort into figuring out something that could
work better, or they're the ones who are benefiting the most,
which is why what I've always said is that there
is no such thing as an ideal system of government
except on paper, because if the idea is only on paper,

(02:15:46):
you can willfully ignore the nature of human beings. Most
human beings, while nice and well meaning, they're biased, and
some of them are frankly stupid, so you can It's
why some people they very very strongly try to make
the argument for just to throw one example out there,

(02:16:06):
there are people who still believe that there is a
way to make communism work, and there are other people
who believe communism can't possibly work because no matter which
way you're going about trying to implement it, the people
implementing it are going to turn it into their version
of what they think communism should be like. They're not
going to do it according to the way it was
originally proposed, because they would have to put themselves at

(02:16:29):
a disadvantage for that to work, and they're not going
to do it.

Speaker 2 (02:16:32):
And then there are people who think that communism is
actually socialism or Marxism or whatever, and they don't understand
what communism actually is, and so yeah, government is complicated.

Speaker 4 (02:16:46):
No, think about it. Yeah, like really, how just just America,
three hundred and thirty million people, Like, how are we
going to govern ourselves in a way that is the
best for all three hundred and thirty million. It's almost
like it's impossible. So we just have to do the
best we can, you know, and like, you know, in
my lifetime and from my own experience, like I just

(02:17:07):
shared like forty some years of not even realizing that
I was so you know, stuck in my own strange
repeating loop where I would just ignore, you know, the
twenty four percent because well, seventy six it's close enough
to one hundred. I mean, you know, without having that awareness,

(02:17:29):
I would have just kept doing the same thing over
and over. So at best, I do think like I
see progress, though, I mean like I don't think anyone
can really like just you know, argue against that. Like
if we look at like the last you know, one
hundred years, let's just say, last hundred years in America, Like,
there has been progress. There's been steps back as well,

(02:17:53):
but there's been progress, and I believe there will continue
to be progress. But it's you know, it's tricky because
I I don't think in general human beings mature at
a rate that is fast enough for us, especially when
technology is so prevalent in technology is evolving way faster

(02:18:14):
than we can keep up with. I just I just
kind of sat through kind of presentation with an AI
company and I and I was just like it was
so frustrating because I was like, this, to me, the
thing is like we need to focus on learning to

(02:18:34):
be better humans first, because it was about like responsible
AI and and it just to me, it seems like
this is like band aids stuff, like you know, it's important,
it's not unimportant, but like the root of the problem
is that, like you said, Jeff, like humans are flawed beings.
It's very easy to look and get. It's a struggle

(02:18:57):
for me sometimes that I, you know, gets swallowed up
in this thing like, yeah, humans are awful people. But
I don't think we're only awful people. But but but
I do think like the it seems to me like
the better approach would be trying to focus on how
do we become better humans first? Because if we're better

(02:19:19):
humans first, we will inevitably use AI more responsibly. But
if we don't fix the human problem, and we just
keep you know, being unaware of our own biases. It
doesn't matter what kind of guardrails eventually. Especially this is like,
you know, I don't want to be too critical of
like capitalism because I think it.

Speaker 1 (02:19:39):
Do it it's you know, theory.

Speaker 4 (02:19:42):
Theory is good, but in general I think it's you know,
my biggest proponent for capitalism is it encourages competition. Without competition,
you know, have innovation, things get stale. There's a lot
to say about that, but like the downside is this
is the competition as well. That Like this particular AI company,

(02:20:02):
I won't name them, but they started as a nonprofit.
The original idea was AI for everybody, and that didn't
last why because they had to compete with the for
profit AI companies or else they just would have been
left behind. And it's all you know, So this this
human thing that I'm talking about many times, I think
it comes back to greed and money. And you know

(02:20:25):
this company I said that I work for. It's I
love this company because they're in the core values like
profit is the lowest priority, and I don't think I
see that in general in most companies in America, corporate
culture is kind of In fact, that was the thing
in the eighties. I can't remember the guy's name now,

(02:20:46):
but but some guy, I don't remember his name, but
he made this this statement that seemed to like really
resonate with everybody, and it was, if you're a publicly
traded company, your number one priority should be to increase
sharehold their value. Nothing else matters more than that. And
that led to what we're in now, where it's just
like profit is the most important thing. Making money is

(02:21:07):
the most important thing. Everything else is less important. And
I do think that you can point to that as
the reason we have all these messes with stuff, and
it's it's encouraging to work for a company where I
don't feel like that is their priority. The actual you know,
taking care of employees, taking care of the communities that
they do business in, are much more important than just

(02:21:29):
making money and increasing shareholder value. But it's it's not
the common thing, you know, It's anyway, I could keep
going on and on. Actually, sorry, if I can leave
with if I can just close with this, because this
is a quote that it's so applicable to just so
many things. It's by this Nigerian author. Her name is
Chimamanda and Gozia Dja. I believe, okay, And it goes

(02:21:53):
it's about stereotypes and single stories. And again, this is
a mind blowing thing that when I read this, it's like,
it's not hyperbole to say it changed my life, you guys.
So so it goes, the single story creates a stereotype,
and the problem with stereotypes is not that they're untrue,
but that they're incomplete. They make one story the only story.

(02:22:15):
And like, again, forty years of my life I was
just focused on these single stories. And it's just in
the last few years that I've been like becoming more
aware of all these other stories, and like, wow, the
human condition is wide and vast, and you know, I'm
much better off being curious about all the things I'm
not aware of than just kind of being in my

(02:22:36):
own little bubble. This is what I know about being
a human. Everything else must be wrong because it but
that's how I was for decades, and I don't think
I'm the only person that you know can say that.
So anyway, that's my rant on.

Speaker 1 (02:22:51):
That it's easy to have compassion for your fellow human
beings until you have to have it for people who
are so different from you that they hate you.

Speaker 4 (02:23:00):
Yeah, in group outgroup stuff. There's there's a really fascinating
podcast called Inner Cosmos by this this guy, David Eagleman,
really highly recommend checking out some of his episodes. He's
he's done several studies that, you know, showing like the
parts of the brain that highlight that that light up,
you know, when certain images are shown to the subjects,

(02:23:23):
and the studies and and yeah, being shown pictures of
people in your in group lights up your brain in
a way that pictures of people in your outgroup doesn't.
I mean literally, he's making the point that, like our
brains are kind of wired to not even see human
beings as human beings if they're not in our in group.
I don't know if this is like widely like all

(02:23:44):
of us do this, but I do think like it's
a it's a it's at this subconscious level. The only
way to fix this is the first step is to
be aware that it's happening. If we're not aware that
this is what's happening, we can't fix it. It's just
band aids, you know. So I'm I'm I'm a big
proponent in you know, self awareness, like doing the work

(02:24:05):
to try to really like analyze what is my brain doing,
like for for everybody, I think it's like worth the
effort to really think about these biases that like are
there at the subconscious level. It does take work to
even recognize, and then once you recognize it, it takes
work to try to like correct that this free will
free won't thing. You know. It's about like recognizing the

(02:24:30):
opportunities to like stop yourself from saying something doing something
because you recognize this is just coming from my automatic,
strange repeating loop. I don't have to do this. I
can think about this differently, but it's not easy. It
takes a lot of work, you know. Anyway, Sorry, I
could go.

Speaker 3 (02:24:48):
I'll be going down a rabbit hole this weekend. Thank you,
You're welcome. Yea heats my interest on several topics here.

Speaker 2 (02:24:58):
But that is where we're going to leave it today. Friends,
super interesting conversation. The tangents that we went on, which
are pretty typical on this show. I think we're really
interesting and very relevant to the topic of this chapter
despite the fact of their tangents. So, John, it was

(02:25:19):
so nice seeing your face and hearing your voice and
having you back in the Alokholmore universe. Thank you so
much for being here.

Speaker 4 (02:25:27):
Yeah, thank you. It was really awesome. It feels like
a nice full circle thing, especially with this particular chapter
since since I edited the one eleven years ago. So
that was really great.

Speaker 2 (02:25:38):
I love it. You're gonna do this one too, right,
I'm just kidding.

Speaker 1 (02:25:41):
You're the guests the Manta.

Speaker 4 (02:25:43):
I gotta go to something.

Speaker 2 (02:25:46):
Yeah, no, it's okay. If our listeners wanted to find
you online, do you have any I know you're not
a social media guy, but where could they find some
of your work?

Speaker 4 (02:25:56):
So if if any shawmany said it piqued your interest.
Last year I did a podcast with some friends called
Sending Poets. We got the name from the movie Contact,
based on the Carl Sagan book Jodie Foster goes through
this wormhole and she's in this other galaxy and it's
so beautiful and she has no words, and she says

(02:26:17):
they should have sent a poet, and so that's where
we got the name from. But we did like forty
some episodes and it's you know, me doing what I
was just doing, kind of going on about ideas. We
did five episodes about LGBT stuff. My son in addition
to having the autism diagnosis four years ago, he came

(02:26:37):
out as trans just another another you know, just world
of stories. I was just totally unaware of that is
just you know, I think about this, this concept like perfection,
isn't you know, we can't really be perfect, but at
least we want to try to be better than we
were yesterday, right, And just being aware of this stuff

(02:26:58):
really feels like this is the trajector that I feel
like my life should be on to be a better human,
you know, than I was yesterday. So we talked a
lot about that stuff in those episodes, so sending poets.
And then additionally, my wife and I have been writing
haikus for years and years and years, and I put
a little fun website together. You can pull up random
ones or submit haikus. It's a Church ofcos dot com.

(02:27:21):
Cos is kind of an allusion to this Scandinavian concept
of huga kind of you know, comfort and coziness, and
so those are probably the best ways.

Speaker 2 (02:27:30):
To find me awesome. Thank you. I'm going to listen
to that pod because I feel like I could listen
to you talk about this stuff for us me too.

Speaker 4 (02:27:37):
There's a lot of yeah, there's, there's, it's it's a
wide range consciousness, there's a lot of really you know,
we did multiple episodes on really cool topics.

Speaker 1 (02:27:45):
I think it's fun, So you can count me in
for sure.

Speaker 3 (02:27:51):
And when we gather here again, we will be discussing
chapter nine, a Halflood Prince the Half Blood prints.

Speaker 2 (02:27:59):
Oh title chat, I love that for us.

Speaker 1 (02:28:02):
In the meantime, if you would like to find us online,
you can follow us on pretty much any social media
outlet at Aloha Mora MN or on Facebook at Open
the Dumble Door and remember to subscribe, save and share
this episode with your friends and.

Speaker 2 (02:28:19):
With that, folks. This has been episode sixty three of
the final one hundred. I'm Kat, I'm.

Speaker 3 (02:28:24):
Shamani, and I'm Jeff.

Speaker 1 (02:28:26):
Thank you for listening to episode four hundred and sixty
three of Aloha.

Speaker 4 (02:28:30):
Mora Open the Double Door.

Speaker 1 (02:28:32):
I get to say it.

Speaker 2 (02:28:35):
That was perfection.

Speaker 1 (02:28:51):
Alohamra is produced by Tracy Dunstan.

Speaker 3 (02:28:54):
This episode was edited.

Speaker 2 (02:28:55):
By Katherine Lewis.

Speaker 1 (02:28:57):
Aloha Mora was co created by Noah Freed and Kat
Miller and.

Speaker 2 (02:29:01):
Is drought to you by A p W b d llc.

Speaker 3 (02:29:06):
Mm hmmm.

Speaker 2 (02:29:13):
Oh, I'm sorry. It is my is my ice making
too much?

Speaker 1 (02:29:17):
I wasn't hearing anything but all of that to say
when I when, when I look at.

Speaker 2 (02:29:21):
It, you didn't get it. Sorry, you didn't get it.

Speaker 1 (02:29:24):
You didn't get it because you said ice. Was that
an ice?

Speaker 4 (02:29:29):
I didn't get either.

Speaker 2 (02:29:33):
It's okay. It was poorly time. It was poorly time.
We can put that out. Sorry for interrupting the flow.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}OOTP, 8 Revisit: Fudging It Up

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

OOTP, 8 Revisit: Fudging It Up

Stuff You Should Know