On racism in the Potterverse-
Nov. 29th, 2011 12:02 pmThis quote was in our advent bulletin, and it struck me very strongly.
There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations – these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat.
That, of course, is C.S. Lewis. I believe the quote is taken from Mere Christianity. Once upon a time, when the Potter books were becoming enormously popular, Rowling gave an interview - I think in Time magazine. In this interview, she took some pains to distinguish herself from C.S. Lewis. One thing I remember her saying is that her books were different from his because, in hers, the children would be allowed to grow up. One can ask whether, in the end, the trio did grow up. I rather think not. But that's not the major difference I see in the two authors' works.
If you read the Narnia books attentively, you can see that Lewis really believed the extraordinary statement he made above. Yes, from a modern pov, one can read him as racist and sexist. But NO ONE in the Narnia books is condemned because of their birth, social status, or genetic heritage. Everyone has free will and everyone, in the end, can choose to come to Aslan's country. It's up to them whether they will so choose or not.
In the Potter books, there is a sort of Venn diagram of specialness. The vast majority of people are Muggles. They cannot even see Hogwarts, and the special people treat them, at best, with condescension. Inside this large circle is a tiny one, of all the Witches and Wizards. They are the real human beings, the people who matter. Inside this tiny circle, again, is another circle, consisting of perhaps 1/4 of the magical people. These are the Gryffindors, and they are the elect.*
Nobody can choose to be magical, as Calormenes like Emeth and Aravis, Dwarves like Poggin and Trumpkin, beasts like Reepicheep and Puzzle, and ordinary humans like the Pevensie parents can choose to love Aslan. If Muggles could choose magic, Petunia would surely have accompanied Lily to Hogwarts. She didn't. You are either born a Wizard, or you're nothing.
Nor, some fans to the contrary, do you get to choose whether you're a Gryffindor. We've all beaten this dead horse repeatedly, I know, but it's worth repeating. Dumbledore does not tell Harry that our choices make us what we are. He says our choices show what we are. If we choose to be in Gryffindor, that is because we are predestined to be among the elect. If we choose to be in Slytherin, then there is probably no help for us - at least, not as far as I can see.
Against this background of extreme privilege, Rowling attempts to tell a story in which racism is the primary evil. The fact that every Witch and Wizard we see is racist against Muggles simply doesn't matter - because Muggles don't matter. And there is no analysis, in the books, of how anti-Muggle racism leads naturally to anti-Muggleborn racism. It's perfectly okay to mock and torment the Dursleys. But it's not okay to mock and torment Hermione, who is a Witch. It's especially not okay to mock Harry, the hero.
Contrast this, again, with Lewis. He says, ...it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit–immortal horrors or everlasting splendours...Next to the Blessed Sacrament itself, your neighbor is the holiest object presented to your senses.
Quite a contrast, isn't it? Whatever you think of Lewis, ask yourself this: what sort of boy would Harry have become if he had realized, even for one moment, that Uncle Vernon and Aunt Petunia were immortals?
Just a thought.
There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations – these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat.
That, of course, is C.S. Lewis. I believe the quote is taken from Mere Christianity. Once upon a time, when the Potter books were becoming enormously popular, Rowling gave an interview - I think in Time magazine. In this interview, she took some pains to distinguish herself from C.S. Lewis. One thing I remember her saying is that her books were different from his because, in hers, the children would be allowed to grow up. One can ask whether, in the end, the trio did grow up. I rather think not. But that's not the major difference I see in the two authors' works.
If you read the Narnia books attentively, you can see that Lewis really believed the extraordinary statement he made above. Yes, from a modern pov, one can read him as racist and sexist. But NO ONE in the Narnia books is condemned because of their birth, social status, or genetic heritage. Everyone has free will and everyone, in the end, can choose to come to Aslan's country. It's up to them whether they will so choose or not.
In the Potter books, there is a sort of Venn diagram of specialness. The vast majority of people are Muggles. They cannot even see Hogwarts, and the special people treat them, at best, with condescension. Inside this large circle is a tiny one, of all the Witches and Wizards. They are the real human beings, the people who matter. Inside this tiny circle, again, is another circle, consisting of perhaps 1/4 of the magical people. These are the Gryffindors, and they are the elect.*
Nobody can choose to be magical, as Calormenes like Emeth and Aravis, Dwarves like Poggin and Trumpkin, beasts like Reepicheep and Puzzle, and ordinary humans like the Pevensie parents can choose to love Aslan. If Muggles could choose magic, Petunia would surely have accompanied Lily to Hogwarts. She didn't. You are either born a Wizard, or you're nothing.
Nor, some fans to the contrary, do you get to choose whether you're a Gryffindor. We've all beaten this dead horse repeatedly, I know, but it's worth repeating. Dumbledore does not tell Harry that our choices make us what we are. He says our choices show what we are. If we choose to be in Gryffindor, that is because we are predestined to be among the elect. If we choose to be in Slytherin, then there is probably no help for us - at least, not as far as I can see.
Against this background of extreme privilege, Rowling attempts to tell a story in which racism is the primary evil. The fact that every Witch and Wizard we see is racist against Muggles simply doesn't matter - because Muggles don't matter. And there is no analysis, in the books, of how anti-Muggle racism leads naturally to anti-Muggleborn racism. It's perfectly okay to mock and torment the Dursleys. But it's not okay to mock and torment Hermione, who is a Witch. It's especially not okay to mock Harry, the hero.
Contrast this, again, with Lewis. He says, ...it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit–immortal horrors or everlasting splendours...Next to the Blessed Sacrament itself, your neighbor is the holiest object presented to your senses.
Quite a contrast, isn't it? Whatever you think of Lewis, ask yourself this: what sort of boy would Harry have become if he had realized, even for one moment, that Uncle Vernon and Aunt Petunia were immortals?
Just a thought.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-29 10:11 pm (UTC)As expected, Rowling shoots herself in the foot further with Pottermore. She wrote there that Neville wanted to be placed in Hufflepuff, but the Hat insisted to place him in Gryffindor. See, if by mistake a deserving person makes a 'not good enough' choice the Powers That Be correct it for hir.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-29 10:17 pm (UTC)I guess, in her way, she's consistent, too. I just find her vision rather appalling. Immoral, as my sister said the other day.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-30 12:39 am (UTC)It's occurred to me that Rowling's morality might actually have "worked" (though still would have been problematic) if the Gryffs really *were* shown to be morally superior to the others- but often it's easier to feel sorry for the other houses than for the Gryffs. Rowling really does seem to think that being sorted into Gryffindor absolves you of all moral responsibility!
The big question is, where does Peter Pettigrew fall into all this? Because he's a Gryffindor, but he's also the one Gryffindor who's never presented in a positive light.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-30 05:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-30 06:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-01 02:15 pm (UTC)I do not see what Dumbledore said to be anywhere close to a complement. He turned Severus' bravery into mockery by suggesting he's someone else other than he is; oh you really belong with our house because you've got far to many good qualities to be where you are. It's probably one of the worst sentances in the whole series if you ask me. Dude, Severus picked Slytherin, but somehow Dumbledore seems to believe Severus was too brave for that house. More proof that Dumbledore is a dumbass.
Salazar Slytherin didn't even stay at the school - he supposedly left.
That means someone else took over Slytherin, hell there have been over close to 1,000 years of someone else being in charge of Slytherin.
Plus for the last X number of years (I think 14 or 15 when Dumbledore made that comment) Severus had been in charge of Slytherin - and there is no evidence to suggest that he pumped out more Dark Magic loving evil children in his house than any of the other houses.
Just because assholes exist in Slytherin doesn't mean they're all assholes - which clearly JKR's trying to preach about racism and bigots but I don't know if she realizes her good characters are willing to accept statements like Hagrid makes about all bad wizards coming from Slytherin - and her good characters don't seem to have any better opinion of muggles than bad characters because the way they speak about non-magical people speaks of deep seeded prejudice that doesn't get erased becasue you've got a shinny red/gold badge that reads Gryffindor.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-02 10:28 am (UTC)I think Rowling and Dumbledore probably intended it as a compliment, although as you say it reveals some rather... troubling attitudes to Slytherin house.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-12 02:23 am (UTC)I'm sure that's why Severus' reaction was to "look stricken".