Further Notes on Literary Uses of Magic and Anti-Globalization in Harry Pott

[tbernhard2000]

No: HPFGUIDX 168208

Betsy wrote:

> So you're saying that branding the face of a teenage girl for
listening to her family rather than the popular kids is *always* a
good idea, and perfectly civilized too. 

dan:

I said neither "always" nor did I separate the act of marking Marietta
from her real and actual betrayal. It's not theoretical. No act is
theoretical, ever. It's an act or it's a theory. Rowling abhors the
theoretical, I'd say. Did Harry theorize about saving the others in
the lake, in the second task? He did not theorize, he just did it,
instinctively, cause he's got good heart and wants to help people. No
system of beliefs is going to create that in and/or for him, or anyone
else, and the act is more important than a library of instructive or
moralistic literature.

To be clear, I am trying to explicate what Rowling is saying, not
judge her for her ethical understanding, though I suspect she is
pretty much right on, in my opinion. Rowling's ethic is another
discussion, which, while it may be the majority of some threads, is
entirely irrelevant to what I am interested in in terms of the
literary use of magic. 

The movies I referred to in the first part of this discussion reminded
me that fairy tales and magic are tools all kids use to deal with very
real situations - Bridge to Terabithia is about dealing with bullies,
and with poverty, and ultimately, with death - Pan's Labyrinth is
about dealing with state violence and repression, and a very, very
dangerous step-father - in Rowling, of course, magic is to be taken
quite literally - all the normal problems of adolescence and marriage,
of society in general, are dealt with by magic - she turns magic into
an instrument, a machine, so the humdrum can be dispensed with, and
just the exciting, important parts of life can be discussed - starting
with politics. 

I don't think Rowling is writing a critic of pure technique, or
anything like that at all. She's writing a series of books where our
hero only proceeds by breaking rules, challenging authority, forcing
the issue at every turn, being confrontational, taking big risks, in
the face of complacency by the ministry, agents of darkness in
positions of power close to him and his friends (some of the DA
teachers, for example), state ordered repression and quite possibly
assasination attempts on his life (Umbridge), well-meaning but
impotent adult mentor figures (the Order). He does this by stepping
outside the bounds of this or that theory, this or that instruction.
Courage, love, friendship, says Rowling, courage most of all. It was
even courage let him follow the thoughts of Voldemort, and save
Arthur, in spite of all the advice to ignore such things.

Betsy:

> I would *never* betray my family.  Never.

dan:
But heroes do, in literature, very definitely betray their families,
sometimes - Faramir, for example, or Sirius, even Seamus, and some
hope Draco. 

dan