Further musings on ethnicity; Pratchett & JKR

[Tabouli]

No: HPFGUIDX 33802

jchutney:
> I don't think JKR's depiction of race is utopian - I think it 
is "realistic" considering the rest of the wizarding world.  All of 
the kids at Hogwarts are presumable British born (we know there are 
wizarding schools all over the world).  This leads one to believe 
that even though Cho is ethnically Chinese, or the Patels are 
ethnically Indian, that all the children at Hogwarts were born and 
bred in the UK.  So "culturally", these kids act "British". Fred and 
Angelina undoubtedly have MUCH MUCH more in common than Fred and Fleur.<

Actually, this is a different point from the one I was arguing... as jchutney points out, it appears that JKR has *created* a world (a utopia, if you like) in which the cultural distinctions that are significant in the real world do not apply, presumably because the "wizard culture" bond is stronger. With regard to the real cultural differences in the Muggle world, the Wizarding World is a utopia where they really do not seem to matter.  Of course, as a couple of people have pointed out, JKR *is* exploring the theme of prejudice through her own "ethnic" categories (Muggle-borns, Squibs) which enables her to avoid the baggage attached to writing about "real" ethnicity.  I wrote a post about this myself, once, many many months ago.

Note also that being "born and bred" in the UK does not at *all* guarantee that a child has undiluted British cultural values!  I myself was born and bred in Australia and have one Anglo-Australian parent, and yet I am still discernably Chinese in a lot of ways (particularly in the social domain).  Complete "assimilation" isn't as common as people might think (one reason being that the way you look is closely related to the way people behave towards you: you are identified with your ethnic group even if you don't identify with it yourself).  In fact, migrant communities, sticking together for comfort and familiarity, often react against the majority society and become "more Greek than the Greeks", and raise their children accordingly.  My mother has been in Australia over 30 years and she is still extremely Chinese in her values.  I've read lots of research which shows that some cultural values (especially those relating to the family and relationships) last for three generations or more of residence in a new culture, especially if there is no marriage outside the ethnic group.  I also know many, many Australian-born people of non-Anglo/Celtic ethnicity who definitely have a lot of values and behaviours which are more typical of their ultimate culture of origin than of the majority Australian culture.

If Cho and Angelina and the other non-Anglo children were Muggle born and went to British Muggle primary schools, they would probably *sound* British, and have mostly British norms about classroom behaviour (i.e. be "educationally" British), but it's likely that some of the social values they picked up at school would not at all be appreciated by their parents.  Cue for intergenerational conflict and developing two different modes of behaviour: home (behaviour and even accent fitting in with parents' ethnic group) and school (as British as can be managed with parents' opposition).  I did it myself even within my family: Malaysian accent with my mother, Australian accent with my father.  As Hogwarts is a boarding school, I imagine it would promote rapid acculturation towards British Wizarding norms, but this doesn't mean there will be no differences at all.

If some or all of the non-Anglo children were home schooled pure wizards, it depends on other factors.  If Cho was British born but her parents were migrants, 11 years of home schooling from her Chinese parents without the high level of contact with British children she would have got in school might well make her culturally very Chinese indeed.  Of course, as judyserenity suggests, it's possible that the strength of the Wizarding community identity overwhelms the ethnic identity in most domains... at this stage we really don't know enough to judge.

Alas, poor JKR.  Putting "ethnic diversity" into creative writing is a minefield.  As Rita says, it's a no-win situation for the author.  Speaking as writer more than cross-cultural psychologist, if you pretend people are "All The Same Regardless Of Skin Colour", some people will see this as admirable, and others as tokenistic and unrealistic.  If you have only a few characters of non-majority culture, a lot of people seem to believe they have to be impeccable and above criticism in every way, otherwise the author is being "racist".  If you explore the typical cultural issues associated with a particular group, some people are bound to accuse you of stereotyping; if you don't, people will accuse you of inaccuracy.  Some people will declare it invalid for anyone to write about an ethnicity to which they do not belong.  As far as I can see, whichever option the writer chooses is going to upset *someone*.  I don't know.  Perhaps the best option is to ensure you have a good insight into and knowledge of any of the cultures you are writing about (interview people?  read about it?), so that you can represent them with a level of understanding and accuracy appropriate to your work, and beyond that let your own artistic integrity rather than a thousand factions' conflicting political opinions be your guide (and be prepared to defend your approach, whatever it is...).  It would probably also be a good idea to arrange a couple of informal reviewers from the ethnic groups you are representing, for feedback.

On Terry Pratchett:

Once upon a time, I made one of my attempts to stir up some rousing discussion comparing Pratchett and JKR, and after Ronald's comments (as well as recent debates on gender roles) methinks it might be worth another go.  I'm quite curious to compare Pratchett's portrayal of the bossy, smart token girl in the Johnny series, the Nomes series and Good Omens, with JKR's depiction of Hermione.  An interesting comparison, given that both are British authors writing in the same era.  I always mused that Pratchett was a little nervous with his female characters, being male himself and all too obviously anxious to be Non-Sexist.  I always got the impression that he was much more comfortable writing about male characters (boys' school education?), and tries to compensate by adding one Strong Smart woman and throwing in a few other comic relief female characters.  Not that I mean to slam Pratchett's work in general... I like his books very much, it was just something I always noticed.

(NB The above problem with ethnicity also applies to gender!)

Probably the best parallel is between Kirsty in the Johnny series and Hermione (Johnny=Harry?  The parallel isn't bad).  In the grand tradition initiated by David on OT, let's have a comparison:

K: Bossy girl who hangs around with boys
H: Bossy girl who hangs around with boys

K: Frizzy red hair
H: Bushy brown hair

K: Child prodigy who goes to a "school for the terminally clever" and is brilliant at everything
H: Top student in Hogwarts, academically very bright, extremely studious, good at everything except Divination and flying

K: Left wing politics (esp feminism), stridently held ideological views in the face of opposition but sometimes rather misguided
H: Signs of feminism ("A couple of what, excuse me?"), SPEW (see above)

Certainly a similar "character type", if such a thing exists.  The main difference I see is that Hermione is more sympathetically portrayed, and becomes increasingly fleshed out and believable (and likeable!), whereas Kirsty is quite a harsh parody of the academically brilliant ballbreaker with no social skills.  This is partly because Pratchett's work is closer to pure satire than JKR's, but I also suspect it may have something to do with the gender of the writers...

Any thoughts?  (or is the problem that no-one else on this list has actually read the Johnny series??)

Tabouli.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]