Wikia

Harry Potter Wiki

Talk:Selwyn family

11,958pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Revision as of 23:29, December 5, 2010 by Happychickenvermin (Talk | contribs)

I appreciate that the book doesn't outright say "The Selwyn family was a pure-blood family", however, following the rules of grammar, Umbridge does confirm they are pure-blood when she says, "Indeed, there are few pure-blood families to whom I am not related" when referring to the Selwyn Family. I think that it kind of sounds like i'm being nasty by saying "following the rules of grammar" but thats unintentional :p it's just true! Mafalda Hopkirk 05:58, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

It is true, technically the book confirms that they are pure blood. The same would be true for Umbridge's own blood status. Wether we think Umbridge is a reliable source or not, JK (maybe inavertantly) made her a pure blood when she wrote that sentence. So she is a pure blood until proved otherwise. Jayce Carver Slytherin Prefect badge Talk 07:07, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

This is the passage in question from Chapter 13 of Deathly Hallows:
“That’s – that’s pretty, Dolores,” she said, pointing at the pendant gleaming in the ruffled folds of Umbridge’s blouse.
“What?” snapped Umbridge, glancing down. “Oh yes – an old family heirloom,” she said, patting the locket lying on her large bosom. “The S stands for Selwyn.... I am related to the Selwyns.... Indeed, there are few pure-blood families to whom I am not related.... A pity,” she continued in a louder voice, flicking through Mrs. Cattermole’s questionnaire, “that the same cannot be said for you. ‘Parents professions: greengrocers’.”
Yaxley laughed jeeringly. Below, the fluffy silver cat patrolled up and down, and the dementors stood waiting in the corners.
It was Umbridge’s lie that brought the blood surging into Harry’s brain and obliterated his sense of caution – that the locket she had taken as a bribe from a petty criminal was being used to bolster her own pure-blood credentials. He raised his wand, not even troubling to keep it concealed beneath the Invisibility Cloak, and said, “Stupefy!”
The way I read this was that the Selwyns are indeed pure-bloods, but Umbridge's relation to them is not clear; she might have been lying. And even if she is related to them, that doesn't automatically make her a pure-blood - Tonks, for instance, is related to the Blacks but is a half-blood. Umbridge is obviously not Muggle-born, but it's possible that she's a half-blood. We know many half-bloods who care about blood purity lie about it, especially if they are affiliated with the Death Eaters. Oread (talk) 18:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree that the passage quoted by Oread confirms that the Selwyns were pure-blood. Umbridge probably would have known better than to claim the Selwyns were among her pure-blood relatives if she didn't know the family's actual blood status. As for whether Umbridge is pure-blood herself, the text is unclear, but I take the part about her using the locket to "bolster" her "pure-blood credentials" as a hint that she wasn't. One thing I've always wondered is why no one ever raised any questions about hard-line pure-blood supremacists with surnames that don't belong to known wizarding families. I mean, really, could Voldemort have gotten as many followers as he did without at least one of them realizing they'd never heard of any other wizards or witches called Riddle? I disgress. Starstuff (Owl me!) 16:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Starstuff, Thats why Voldemort chnged his name. The Riddles were Muggles!

As for Dolores, she could well be a dsitaff member of the family. She could be a descendant of a female Selwyn.

Sirius said all pure-blood families are interelated. Umbridge could be a pure-blood or a half-blood (in which case her ancestors were pure-blodds). She is most certainly not a muggle-born (though if she was, her ancestor would be a Squib, who's ancestor would be a pure-blood. Happychickenvermin 23:29, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki