Notes on Literary uses of magic in Terabithia, Pan's Labyrinth and Harry Potter

[lealess]

No: HPFGUIDX 167959

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tbernhard2000" 
<lunalovegood at ...> wrote:
>
> dan:
> > > Magic presents  circumstances equivalent to real world 
> circumstances in Rowling, so that Rowling can present, with some 
> degree of safety from reactionism, a leftist, probably anarchist 
> message.
> 
> SSSusan:
> > Could you explain this final point a little more?
> 
> dan:
> 
> Let me add something unfinished from my essay in response to you.
> 
> If magic is practical in Rowling, magic folk are not - they are 
> subject to the same foibles as muggles-Arthur's plugs are as silly 
> in the magic world as in the muggle one - politicians are just as 
> corrupt, and motived by self-interest.The importance of maintaining 
> the appearance of peace, law and order is more important than any 
> tangible, albeit hidden threat. Newspapers mislead or outright lie. 
> Government interfers directly in the affairs of education, if they 
> deem it necessary. Abuse occurs where self-satisfied administrators 
> are blind to it. In fact, these foibles reaffirm on every page that 
> Rowling is talking about THIS world, the one we live in, and not a
> separate artificial magical one. We are not muggles-muggledom is a 
> state of ignorance we have left by picking up the books - our world 
> is best described by Rowling's magical one - we are magic - we have 
> tools that can be and are used for good or evil-the chrome of magic 
> is what allows Rowling to create situations where ethical dramas
> can be played out. The special circumstance is that the raw 
> emotional honesty of youth can be brought to light because the  
> youth in the magical world have powerful tools for making 
> themselves heard, and their idealism, their learning, is essential 
> in learning to use the machinery of magic. Yes, machinery - and I'm 
> not the first to identify Rowling's magic as a machinery.
> 
> Can you, however, imagine having items in our real world schools 
> that kill with a couple words spoken properly? In Rowling, kids 
> have power, kids are the saviours of the world, the real ethical 
> leaders, with assistance from sympathetic elders, like Dumbledore. 
> It reminds me a little of the anarchist youth pre 9/11 in Seattle 
> and Goteburg and so forth. But these kids are wiser and have more 
> tools. Yet they are struggling with the same stupid leadership in 
> political terms. 
> 
> We cannot talk about it the same way, without the chrome of magic. 
> Rowling's genius is that she can.
> 
> dan
>

Interesting thoughts.

I don't think it is unusual for literary works to take the view that 
children know best and adults are idiots.  This has been discussed in 
this list before.  This doesn't translate to anarchism for me, 
however.  I agree when you say that Rowling's view of magic is 
Calvinistic, that is, predetermined.  In fact, she posits a sort 
of "natural" authoritarian hierarchy, growing out of inborn magical 
power.  Then there are those pesky matters of destiny and magical 
constraint.  Anarchy for me involves not only self-determination, but 
the conscious choice of alternate arrangements to answer the 
questions posed by arbitrary and forceful authority.  The D.A., a 
voluntary organization closed to some, was alternate only in its 
illegality and willingness to act against expectation, but it was 
still set up with one unquestioned leader and power was not 
distributed throughout the organization, nor was dissent tolerated.  
Perhaps Harry will grow to reject his/our world's lines of authority, 
but I realistically do not see that happening.  I do not see his 
group opposing the Ministry directly.  Unless utter catastrophe 
happens, the Wizarding World will continue as it has, with a 
haplessly coercive government and perhaps a few more conscious 
adjustments towards equity for non-Wizarding magical creatures.  I 
honestly see Rowling's message as being more reactionary than 
anarchist in its setting up of extra-state militias seemingly 
answerable to no-one but a strong leader like Dumbledore or Harry.  I 
cannot feel confident that Rowling would champion the loose 
federations formed by leftist anarchists who protested the WTO in 
Seattle.

And, unfortunately, I can imagine kids with tools that destroy in an 
instant, like guns and even words on the Internet, who do not use 
such tools wisely.  There are all kinds of kids and situations.  Even 
Rowling's kids make disastrous mistakes, whatever their intention.

lealess