[the_old_crowd] lit. crit. and Potter

[Randy Estes]

I agree with many of your points listed below.

I often wonder about the allusions to World War 2, and
the direct references to "the Great Elf Rebellion" and
the power of elves against wizards once it is
unleashed (Dobby vs. Mr. Malfoy).  Dobby obviously
represents the poor people on this earth who do all
the thankless jobs.

During World War 2, those same people fought alongside
the middleclass and maybe even a few upper class. 
This was the great equalizer when you consider the
poor person's ability to fight evil was just as valid
as the next person's.

I see the references to the "Great Elf Rebellion" and
I think that the ending must involve another one in
which the poor are again asked to make the greatest
sacrifices to end tyranny just like they did in World
War 2.  

Having grown up in America during the Cold War, I find
it remarkable that the US and Russia could work
together to stop the Nazis.  Obviously when everything
is on the line, huge differences in beliefs can be
overlooked to fight a common foe.

I think the Elves, the Giants, the Wizards,
(represented in the statue at the Ministry of Magic is
an overt symbol of this alliance to end the tyranny of
Voldemort.  I get the feeling that JKR wishes to
assert the importance of the "little people" (pun
intended).  Perhaps those in Britain understand class
struggle to a much greater degree than those in the
US.  I see the class divide growing larger every year
in the US.  I think the divide was smaller after World
War 2, but the lessons have been lost over the years
as the WW2 generation passes away.

People may make fun of these books as pure childish
fantasy, but I think there are important themes being
discussed just like in Gulliver's Travels.

Randy
--- Sean Dwyer <ewe2 at ...> wrote:

>.
> 
> Naturally we are fans, and prefer to immerse
> ourselves in the Stimmung
> (excellent word!) JKR has dreamed up for us, and
> seem to prefer questioning
> the internal logic of characters. But insofar as we
> are trying to see where
> JKR may be going, the external logic of the story
> must be also examined, and
> we should not shy from that. 
> 
>
> 
> Archaism is a good starting point, because it
> references many other notable
> aspects of WW society. The Point to it (a few Points
> actually), is that the WW
> is an alternate non-scientific society. As if
> medieval metaphysics and alchemy
> had survived relatively unscathed (more oddly,
> essentially unchanged) because
> magic had been found to be the way forward, except
> here we have a bifurcation
> with one side of Western culture staying underground
> with the secret societies
> and mystery cults of the 17th century, and the other
> towards the brave new
> world we now inhabit. JKR is saying such a society
> wouldn't change all that
> much, but it is obviously under enough external
> pressure to now be cracking.
> The Harry-Voldemort conflict, while polarizing the
> WW, is still an archaic
> struggle. The class war, exemplified by Dobby and
> not a few other disgruntled
> magical creatures, is clearly not. Dobby and his
> leading SPEW advocate,
> Hermione, are meant to put us in mind of modern
> labour struggles, and Fudge is
> a quintessential Chamberlain. To standard criticism,
> it might seem obviously a
> bizarre mix of medievalism and postmodern culture
> filching; on the other hand,
> you could ask why, for instance, is British Royalty
> so fascinating to
> Americans? Why do Australians like myself
> instinctively latch on to the class
> assumptions inherent in the WW? In other words, the
> Old World is still with
> us, we've only just painted the New World over it.
> 200-old years of
> industrialism hasn't quite stamped out the
> assumptions of feudalism yet.
> 
> The WW problem, seen from a Muggle viewpoint, is
> that magic is a Bad Idea, a
> dangerous Power that must be contained else an evil
> one will wield it, like
> nuclear capability. Such an evil one has appeared,
> but we aren't given the
> response of the Muggle PM, although we can probably
> guess it ("fix it or we'll
> fix YOU").  Integration of the WW internally and
> externally with the Muggle
> world is seen from the WW side as an unscalable
> cliff face, but the impending
> alternative is cultural implosion. A divided WW may
> be just the thing for an
> ambitious Muggle PM.  These conflicts are merely
> implied by the Opus, JKR
> doesn't even begin to hint whether they even merit
> resolution; perhaps she
> will allow the H-V denoument to suggest the WW may
> be facing up to such an
> integration. 
> 
> Are there integral religious aspects to the WW?
> Certainly we're meant to
> examine redemption, sacrifice, and not a little
> situational ethics (which
> somehow philosophy hasn't quite wrested from
> religions grasp). I think it's a
> bit glib though to paint Harry as a Christ-figure,
> however superficially
> persuasive. Religious certainties would have to pale
> in the face of a Snape,
> to say nothing of the self-contradictory Harry. To
> the standard lit. critter,
> Voldemort is altogether too remote a figure. With a
> bwaha here and a bwaha
> there, and a 'nurture gone wrong' backstory, he
> comes perilously at times to
> panto. Beelzebub he ain't, although he tries hard.
> So perhaps we are meant to
> look more closely at the conflicted middle rather
> than the certain extremes.
> But when we step back from the characters, we're
> still left with that
> Manichean duality of the bright swords vs. the green
> fire. (Why green? Why
> couldn't the AK be red? Spoils the symbology,
> what?). Normal lit. crit.
> projection defence mechanisms come into play here by
> deeming the whole thing
> 'confused'.
> 
> Back to the class war: how we react to it is the
> interesting thing. In real
> life, we still pretend class is a thing of the past,
> when of course it isn't
> and pervasively so. You don't need a belief in
> massive social conspiracies to
> see that. Apply it to the WW and we are confronted
> with the same bemusement of
> Ron, the same quiet rage of Hermione, the careless
> glee of Dobby and the
> despairing shame of Winky. What answer do we give
> her? Interesting that Harry
> refrains from entering that debate. It is one of the
> cleverest parts of Potter
> that JKR gave us an alternate society to mirror our
> own concerns. She paints
> the Muggle world as a endless dreary Suburb, of
> people so concerned to be
> Equal they are nothing much at all. The WW is
> ultimate from-birth-to-grave
> inequality, impossible to be otherwise, yet under
> sure strain of the outlook
> of the New Witch and Wizard. Are we meant to think
> it's too easy to make a
> grey blob of society while assured we are free from
> the old-world order?
> Politics naturally comes into such discussions but I
> think real-world events
> are beginning to teach us how much of a cultural
> phenonemon politics are.
> Because it is not such a stretch to see Hermionie as
> a cultural imperialist.
> Or Ron as an unconscious feudalist.
> 
> Is this the stuff that book 6 will hopefully either
> dispense with or finally
> address, or does JKR even need to?
> 
> Sean
> 
> -- 
> "You know your god is man-made when he hates all the
> same people you do."
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail