More People Need(ed) to Read Harry Potter

[annoni-no.livejournal.com]

I know, a provocative title in this community, but we have concrete evidence that reading Harry Potter leads to a small, but significant, increase in antipathy toward Donald Trump and his policies.

https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/news/new-study-shows-reading-harry-potter-lowers-americans%E2%80%99-opinions-donald-trump ; (Link through to the actual study in article.)

A while back I posted about a study that found that identifying with Harry Potter led to decreased bias toward stigmatized minorities.  At the time, I wondered how reading the series led people to feel about how to deal with their enemies given the vindictiveness the series shows in a close reading.  As it turns out, the more Harry Potter books someone has read, even controlling for "party identification, gender, education level, age, evangelical self-identification, and social dominance orientation," the more opposed they were to violence and punitive policies (like torturing their enemies as advocated by Trump) and authoritarianism.  This is in addition to confirmation of the decreased bias against outgroups.

You don't have to like Harry Potter, and I completely agree that the books have a lot of problems.  But let's not loose sight of the fact that the world is entering a dangerous, if not outright fascistic period.  There's too much hatred and divisiveness driving our politics; hate crimes have risen by several hundred percent since Trump's election.  If reading Harry Potter does help lead people to greater tolerance and mercy, we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Comments

[fdsfd (from livejournal.com)]

Hmmm... is this paper really good science? Wouldn't the researcher's hypothesis here include the authors own preconceptions of the book - that its a book about harmony, tolerance, justice mercy, etc, which may not be true? "A book I think is about justice and democracy makes people believe more in justice and democracy" regardless of whether the book actually sends those messages. Garbage in, garbage out, wouldn't that be the argument???

My more cynical view is that any research that includes the words "Harry Potter" is more likely to be featured on a clickbait website and get the author some fame/recognition, and maybe some funding???

***** the more opposed they were to violence and punitive policies (like torturing their enemies as advocated by Trump)

But Harry, our plucky boy hero, was a torturer himself, no? Surely he'd be in favour of doing bad things to people who deserve it, like Amycus Carrow??

***** If reading Harry Potter does help lead people to greater tolerance and mercy, we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Honestly, the idea that just reading a thinly disguised conservative fable like Harry Potter is all we need to do to re-mould Trump supporters into liberal democratic voters is, to me, symptomatic of the very retreat into fantasy that almost certainly contributed to Hillary's loss. I hate to be rude, really, I do, but fidelity to Harry Potter and other cultural commodities like Hamilton, won't help anyone.

If you want to resist fascism, to the extent that you think Trump embodies it, you have to put your magic wand away
This article explains it pretty well (http://thebaffler.com/blog/crash-pop-culture-party-silverman)


While this turn to the many cherished worlds of fiction may well be helping people work though their bewilderment, it reveals not imagination but a dismal lack thereof. By refusing to engage with the world as it is, by seeing in every political disaster an opportunity to indulge in escapism and dime-store nostalgia, pop-culture liberals overlook the very real horrors already looming for swaths of the population, including those who have never seen Doctor Who. It is its own kind of filter bubble, a self-contained world of soothing bedtime stories.

Harsh but fair, imho.

Anyway my own opinion is that Harry Potter has a fascist weltschaltung as explained here (https://samkriss.com/2016/09/13/jk-rowling-and-the-cauldron-of-discourse/)

In which case, what we may need is more critical opinions of beloved cultural commodities, not less.

Just my opinion :)

[oryx_leucoryx]

I am curious to know how views and values differed between people who just read the series once or twice vs people who just read it multiple times vs people who actively discussed the series (whether online or in physical space). Also differences between readers who identified as fans and those who did not, between people who had a positive view of the series and those who did not (but read it entirely nonetheless).

[madderbrad.livejournal.com]

Just wanted to say 'thanks!' for that second link, the Sam Kriss article. I'm not sure about the climax of the piece; it sort to sneaked up on me because I was having so much fun cheering at his depiction of Rowling as her own #1 fan and his mocking of her tweets (I've been criticising same in another forum). Great stuff!