Harry Potter and the Privileges of Birth

[foxmoth at qnet.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 29141

Thanks, Bexis, for the thought provoking post.
     It's true that the books encourage children, and everyone else, 
to think independently. Anyone who thinks that's a bad thing is 
going to have problems with the series. It's also true that   
Harry's morality is not the same as JKR's. That's  a subtle point 
and kids may need some help in understanding it, just  as they 
might need help in understanding the Bible or Shakespeare, or 
even Peter Rabbit. Peter, after all, is never found out or punished 
for his daring escapade in Mr. MacGregor's garden. Instead, he  
ends up miserably ill and deprived of his possessions, just like 
Harry.
    Like Peter Rabbit, the series shows that breaking rules can be 
fun and even profitable in the short run, but it's also  dangerous.  
If you can't count on a flock of sparrows or Albus Dumbledore 
showing up at the last moment, you'd be better to do as you're 
told. Of course some children who identify  with Harry will do  
foolish things. There was a young lady who wrote to this list 
quite a while back about playing backyard Quidditch, which 
involved jumping out of a second story window onto a trampoline 
while straddling a broomstick and trying to catch a tennis ball. My 
own brother once tied a bathtowel around his neck and jumped 
off the garage to see if he could fly like Superman.  If you've got a 
kid like that, I'm afraid the only answer is Constant Vigilance. 
	  JKR loves poking fun at authority. Does this  mean she's 
advocating anarchy? She obviously doesn't want to see a society 
where the likes of Mundungus Fletcher, not to mention Fred and 
George, carry on unchecked. JKR's opinion on indulging children 
is also not ambiguous: Dudley Dursley is  a clear indication of 
that. On the other hand,  Dumbledore's behavior is  a mystery. 
We're obviously meant to weigh it for ourselves. Does the 
Headmaster spoil Harry, or is it only that he believes the rules 
are made for the students, not the students for the rules? 
    Then there's Percy. He  is ridiculous not because he 
advocates following rules but because he's a hypocrite with no 
sense of proportion. He tells off Ron and Harry for being in the 
girl's bathroom, but meanwhile he's sneaking around with 
Penelope. He's rightly agitated about poor Bertha's 
disappearance, but he's just as upset about cauldron bottom 
thickness. Rowling shows most everyone in a poor light when it 
comes to exercising authority.   This is a problem only for those 
who think managing children is easy. 
   What about Harry as the Chosen One? Fantasy stories are 
often criticized for promoting elitism. This is a misunderstanding, 
IMO. Exclusivity in fantasy stories is not meant to teach the virtue 
of aristocracy, far from it. It symbolizes the nature of our 
imaginations.  No one else can enter our hopes and dreams, no 
one else can see the monster under the bed. Imagination is a  
separate realm. Within it we are both supreme being and 
miserable slave. 
    One of the uses of literary fantasy is to help us realize that 
even though we can't directly experience what someone else 
imagines, we all like to imagine the same sorts of things. This 
means that even though we can't see what other people are 
thinking, they can know an awful lot about us. If we don't become 
familiar with our imaginations, if we don't cross into the hidden  
wizarding world, the hidden Gryffindor Common Room, we won't 
recognize when people are using our imaginations to 
manipulate us. 
	 There are plenty of people who'll promise to make us special if 
we join their secret superior order. We have to understand that 
just like the Sorting Hat, those promises are not for real. Adults, 
conditioned to think as much as possible in logical, rational 
terms, seem to have more trouble with this than children. An 
adult hears  a child wish that Hogwarts were real, and figures 
the kid is looking for a Kwikspell course. A child who wishes 
Hogwarts were real has  recognized that it isn't. 
    Because Rowling doesn't wish to advocate aristocracy, 
Hogwarts doesn't train its wizards  to colonize Muggles or reduce 
them to serfdom. In  the real world, I suppose it would, but the 
gates of Hogwarts are flanked by a pair of winged boars for a 
reason. It may be 1991 when Harry starts Hogwarts, but it's also 
When Pigs Fly.

Pippin