Abstemiousness with truth - the careful fantasy world of Potter
tbernhard2000
dark30 at vcn.bc.ca
Fri Aug 30 04:34:42 UTC 2002
No: HPFGUIDX 43358
In all situations in my own life, I have found it both easier and
more rewarding when the context that obtains is one of open
communication and transparency, which by extension, creates the kind
of equality between involved parties that results when little is
hidden, when information, or knowledge, cannot or is not owned, or
held as a private possession. A far cry from the so-called magical
world of Harry Potter.
The hardest thing to accept about the apparent magical world of Harry
Potter is that, in spite of Dumbledore's reticence regarding the
reason Voldemort wants Harry dead, in spite of "the restricted
section," which, I point out, contains information essential to the
so-called heroes' quest, in spite of so many characters being
mysteries, as they say, to other characters, as Black and Snape, for
instance, are, or Neville is to the trio, signs both of
intransigence, in the first case, or betraying every sign of
Rowling's unravelling of facts on a "need to know" basis - that is,
in the context of her literary career, in terms of making the
series "make sense" at the end of it all - as is the case with
Neville, in spite of Hermione's secret use of the Time Turner, a
secret that proved quite dangerous, in particular to Hermione, and a
secrecy that had to be pierced in order to complete the given quest,
all of these ignorances involving core aspects of the story, Harry
and the trio can still succeed.
How is this possible? Are we to assume fate, a grossly misunderstood
concept in my opinion, being myself something of a secular calvinist,
declares that Harry and the trio will succeed whether or not those
around them attempt to keep them in the dark, to impose, in a way,
ignorance upon them? Do we really believe Harry's successful
encounters so far have been written beforehand, and the outcome
assured? His response to the 2nd task seems central here. His success
depends upon some inner quality, which may or may not be connected to
his so-called magical qualities, that makes him stay. He goes through
no internal debate. His staying was not quite a decision; rather, as
he later reflects, it was an action, the right one, we agree, made in
ignorance. A bit of pathos.
Let me try to demonstrate my reading of Rowling like this - The so-
called magical world of Harry Potter is, on one level, on perhaps the
most fundamental level, unequivocally nothing more than the extended
fantasy-world of an abused boy stuck in a closet. I cannot state this
strongly enough. Whether the boy is in fact adopted, or is imagining
that he is adopted, taken from his so-called real parents, whether he
attends a regular school or isn't even allowed to do that, it is his
fantasy world to which we are exposed. And the abstemiousness with
truth characteristic of that world is the signal, the flashing
lights, as it were, of the guard towers, of the circumference of
Hogwarts' famous ancient magical protection - read, the constricted
limits of the abused boy's knowing. That protection, I submit, is
directed inwards as much as it is directed outwards. Even the
widespread anti-muggle charms appear to me to be defenses against the
reality of sustained punishment. There is also mention of some
similar sort of ancient magical protection regarding the Dursley's
residence. This too, in my reading, seems as much an inwards pressure
as an outwards one.
Do we agree with Dumbledore's assessment that Harry should grow up
away from what we are supposed to believe are the horrifying and
dangerous consequences of fame, and be, rather, reared by people who
hate what he represents, mistrust and abuse him? Of course not. So we
must accept that Dumbledore's assurance about the safety of the
Dursley's house is true - otherwise, he's just being a stupid old man
who assumes family is more important than human rights. This so-
called safety certainly looks like the rationalization of someone in
a hopeless and helpless situation to me. And for someone deprived of
information, of ways of obtaining it, someone for whom the paths to
knowledge are closed, ignorance might seem strength. In a real way,
however, for such a person, ignorance would surely be some measure of
protection. Ignorance about one's actual hopeless and helpless
situation, the extent of it, or rather, intensity of it.
I'm not sure how much of this line Rowling is conscious of when she
writes. I have no intention in this post of addressing that
particular moot area. Rather, this is my reading, and as it seems
both a general response to the digests I've been getting, on one
hand, and an idea that has been an acute difficulty for me since I
first read the books, I thought I'd post it in a new thread, see if
perhaps this one gets past the Ministry of Moderators.
darkthirty
"The truth is not a crystal that can be slipped into one's pocket,
but an endless current into which one falls headlong." Robert Musil
More information about the HPforGrownups
archive