Sins of Hagrid -- Subversive bigotry; Rowling's political intent

[ftah3]

No: HPFGUIDX 33960

Elkins wrote:
> I like to think that we're supposed to notice this unsavory
> tendency of Hagrid's, that this is Rowling's way of showing
> the subversive power of institutionalized bigotry.  

Well, it takes, as they say, all kinds.  

I've never really considered Hagrid a thinker of complex thoughts, 
and his slap-dash judgements and inopportune/inappropriate comments 
and actions seem to support this.  He understands what is 
overwhelmingly Good versus Evil, but doesn't necessarily take the 
time to muddle through the grey details.  Rather, he lumps the 
details in one pot or another; Slytherins have produced Riddle, 
Snape, and Malfoy Sr., ergo Slytherins are horrible nasty people.  
And even: he thinks that all magical creatures are interesting and 
wonderful, ergo everyone should think that magical creatures are 
interesting and wonderful.  All in all, I see Hagrid's mindset to be 
one part subverted bigotry, and three parts a simplistic way of 
understanding the world.

As far as Rowling's intent in creating Hagrid, your postulation made 
a concept that lives in my head finally click into coherent thought.  
Much has been discussed in regards statements Rowling may be making 
with her stories, but I am of the mind that I don't wish to try to 
pin intent on her based on text nor even on the very brief and 
unexplicated statements she has made in terms of intent.  

I do see in her books distinct 'types' existing in everyday life, and 
by way of that I find myself musing not on what I think the book 
should be teaching or promoting, but on what those reflected 'types' 
say about the society in which I am personally involved.

For example, I don't think that Hagrid was meant to be an example of 
institutional bigotry; rather I'm struck by how he reflects a certain 
type of colorful rural personality. Hagrid doesn't so much provide a 
political statement by the dissection of his character, as open doors 
to a dissection of a similar social norm on the basis of, say, the 
benefits/negatives of such a personality in a teaching position; or 
the causes/effects of the subversive power of institutionalized 
bigotry.  It also causes me to consider how I, in real life, deal 
with that sort of person.  I do know Hagrids of varying similarity.  
Most of them I find colorful but not friend-material; some of them 
(i.e. relatives, whom I can't escape) I argue with when they have the 
bad sense to air their occasionally un-thought-through black and 
white views in front of me.  Others I ignore.  And then it occurs to 
me that I *shouldn't* ignore them, because so often silence amounts 
to de facto agreement, and I usually severely do *not* agree....

This is how I approached the discussion about gender/minority stats 
in the HP books.  If I will focus my attention on the disparate 
percentage of women/minorities in the literary world, I'll pretty 
much ignore the number of women/minorities *within* works of 
literature and focus on the number of women/minority *authors* who 
are not given their due.  I don't see that counting characters proves 
any points one way or another, and I don't see that attempting to 
label a work as prejudice, period, serves any purpose at all.  

On the other hand, I will focus on, say, the roles played by female 
characters in the Harry Potter books insofar as it applies to the 
world around me.  Although, if I cared to, I could write a feminist 
critique of the books for a bit of mental mastication; but, along 
more (personally) interesting lines, I might want to look at social 
trends or mythological archetypes that match or enlighten Rowling's 
use of women.  That would go beyond the traditional feminist 
approach, as it would include the resurgence of respect (in some 
arenas) for traditional roles/personality types that have been 
heretofore decried by feminists; the positives, as opposed to the 
negatives of stay-home mothers, which would quite possibly take me 
off on a tangential exploration of Molly Weasley as an 'earth mother' 
or Goddess character type, or as the female equivalent (quite 
possibly the Wise Woman/Mother to Dumbledore's Wise Man/Father for 
Harry) of the Wise Man archetype....

Which is all to say, I think I'm somewhat incapable of plumbing the 
depths of speculation in terms of Rowling's political intent by way 
of her books, or for passing judgement on her along those same lines, 
for the simple reason that author intent analysis and judgement feels 
like a house of cards in my mental hands ~ too easily toppled.  

Though it's highly energizing to read the comments of others....

Mahoney