WHY HP is so popular - Professors' First Names - Tom Riddle - Calvinism

[frantyck at yahoo.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 23580

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Rita Winston <catlady at w...> wrote:
> So I have often said that JKR MUST be touching something archetypal,
> because otherwise this story wouldn't have swept the world like it 
has.

oddly, i was just discussing something this-ish with a friend: it 
occurred to us that in appropriating all these pre-existing ideas of 
magic and so forth rowling is, partly by the sheer impact of millions 
of her books, fundamentally reshaping what those ideas mean to us.

consider "magic." what that word conveyed has been altered by magic 
as it is in the potter books: no longer something shortlived that 
grants wishes, as in cinderella (the first example that comes to 
mind).

what's a "goblin" now?

what is a "potion?"

a wand?

an elf?

a broomstick?

even a wizard or a witch?

when you think abstractly of these things, is your conception of them 
shaped by what you've read in hp? i think this is fascinating: the 
power of rowling's sweeping, but still modest, enclosure of the 
entire magical universe -- medieval or modern, chinese or african, 
leprechaun or djinn -- within the Potterverse. it's a revolution of 
sorts. everything has a place here, and thus everything is tweaked by 
the assumptions of the hp universe.

is this true in general, or is this just because i'm a resident of 
the Potterverse? if kids grow up with rowling magic rather than 
rapunzel and sleeping beauty, does that strike you as fascinating... 
or potentially just a teensy bit sad?

i'm not sure!

rrishi