Last weekend marked the launch of the 6th in the now 8 part movie saga that is Harry Potter. As is surely apparent by now, the movies sit not as a substitute for the books but a complement to them. They succeed where they can visualise magic that cannot be done in words -- the creatures, the castle and a large part of the action. But they fail where the books have their most significant: in the complex characters and the deeper moral issues.
But in Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince one of those deeper but unstated moral issues arose neatly and somewhat humorously in the movie: the role of academia. It came in the form of Professor Slughorn, a marvelously imagined character who is a teacher who cares only about the best in the class and seeks them out to the exclusion of all others. He, in turn, is a character that is perhaps the most instrumentalist of at least the 'good' guys in the saga. Slughorn at various points commits self-interested acts claiming 'academic purposes.' For instance, he is caught removing valuable leaves from a plant, claiming their scientific merit but we know being motivated by the black market value.
That, however, is not where this issue comes to the fore. It is hard to describe it without giving away too much of the plot but Slughorn cites the very same 'academic' disclaimer when handing over clearly dangerous knowledge to a young Voldemort. Slughorn later clearly realises his error and attempts to cover his tracks but the message is clear: there is a danger to the academic shield.
Now I am not going to opine about that dilemma although being an economist who routinely puts research into the public domain, I have faced Slughorn's choice and have worried about it. But what is more interesting is the entire subtheme in Harry Potter of an anti-academic bias. This might seem funny with so many respected characters being affectionately and authoritatively titled 'Professor' but let's look at the evidence.
First, why is a High School education considered enough in the wizarding world. It would seem to me that having to learn magic as well as standard fare would put a greater premium on a longer period of education. Where is the secret college at Oxford that surely must come next for the academically-gifted Hermione? Can a secondary education really be enough for the career paths the students started choosing early on?
Second, dropping out of high school is something not treated with concern. Fred and George fly away on brooms out of school and into a flourishing retail business. But by the seventh book, and I am not giving too much away here, all three main characters have dropped out of school -- yes, to pursue the greater good -- but what other childrens' novels would have ever contemplated such a message?
And then finally, there is an underlying current of what all that magical knowledge is good for. Wizards know how to cure the ill, repair efficiently, and also a variety of psychological enhancements we need not go in to. But somehow, all that knowledge remains tightly held apparently to protect the Muggles from greater disruption but surely some leakage could do a world of good.
Standing back, there is an uneasiness with academia and knowledge throughout the series. But unlike other issues they remain unstated as an undercurrent. One wonders whether the apparatus of the saga could actually have been put to good use opening them up to debate.
By the way, we took all of our kids -- ages 5 - 10 -- to the latest movie. All enjoyed it. No really scary bits.
But in Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince one of those deeper but unstated moral issues arose neatly and somewhat humorously in the movie: the role of academia. It came in the form of Professor Slughorn, a marvelously imagined character who is a teacher who cares only about the best in the class and seeks them out to the exclusion of all others. He, in turn, is a character that is perhaps the most instrumentalist of at least the 'good' guys in the saga. Slughorn at various points commits self-interested acts claiming 'academic purposes.' For instance, he is caught removing valuable leaves from a plant, claiming their scientific merit but we know being motivated by the black market value.
That, however, is not where this issue comes to the fore. It is hard to describe it without giving away too much of the plot but Slughorn cites the very same 'academic' disclaimer when handing over clearly dangerous knowledge to a young Voldemort. Slughorn later clearly realises his error and attempts to cover his tracks but the message is clear: there is a danger to the academic shield.
Now I am not going to opine about that dilemma although being an economist who routinely puts research into the public domain, I have faced Slughorn's choice and have worried about it. But what is more interesting is the entire subtheme in Harry Potter of an anti-academic bias. This might seem funny with so many respected characters being affectionately and authoritatively titled 'Professor' but let's look at the evidence.
First, why is a High School education considered enough in the wizarding world. It would seem to me that having to learn magic as well as standard fare would put a greater premium on a longer period of education. Where is the secret college at Oxford that surely must come next for the academically-gifted Hermione? Can a secondary education really be enough for the career paths the students started choosing early on?
Second, dropping out of high school is something not treated with concern. Fred and George fly away on brooms out of school and into a flourishing retail business. But by the seventh book, and I am not giving too much away here, all three main characters have dropped out of school -- yes, to pursue the greater good -- but what other childrens' novels would have ever contemplated such a message?
And then finally, there is an underlying current of what all that magical knowledge is good for. Wizards know how to cure the ill, repair efficiently, and also a variety of psychological enhancements we need not go in to. But somehow, all that knowledge remains tightly held apparently to protect the Muggles from greater disruption but surely some leakage could do a world of good.
Standing back, there is an uneasiness with academia and knowledge throughout the series. But unlike other issues they remain unstated as an undercurrent. One wonders whether the apparatus of the saga could actually have been put to good use opening them up to debate.
By the way, we took all of our kids -- ages 5 - 10 -- to the latest movie. All enjoyed it. No really scary bits.
Posts
4 comments:
The Harry Potter books do suffer from a "big picture" problem that is only hinted at by the question of schooling. There seems to be a large population of wizards who even have their own towns (Hogsmeade), though most live in mixed-Muggle/Wizard places. How do these wizards earn a living? They can't create food from nothing (a rule arbitrarily introduced in the last book), so there must be wizard farmers somewhere. But what do all the other wizards do? Most of the wizards whose occupations are known are working in service industries:
Bill Weasley works at the bank.
Percy and Arthur (and many other characters) work for the government.
Many wizards work in education.
Some wizards work in stores, but it seems that those that do also manufacture their own goods; Ollivander makes his own wands; Fred and George make their own Wheezes, etc.
Harry and Ron want to be Aurors, i.e. police. Do wizards pay taxes to support the police?
Also it seems that even as the young wizards approach their final years of school they have nowhere near the skills of the teachers in the school. This suggests that there must be a higher education institute somewhere, but it is never mentioned.
Finally, as you mention, the wizard community is remarkably aloof and isolationist when it comes to the Muggles. They can never understand anything non-magical, not even the money, though basic math should fix that... oh wait, they don't study math at Hogwarts. In fact they don't study anything mundane. But surely someone who can understand how to run a household or investigate a crime or make change in Galleons and Sickles should be able to understand how to use a telephone after a try or two. But there seems to be some kind of mental block that applies to all the characters not raised by muggles.
I can only conclude that either Rowling couldn't figure out how to resolve these issues in her writing, or else such issues miss the point entirely, which is, Harry Potter is a book about a kid in school, growing up. The rest is a detail. I wish Rowling had addressed these issues, however; it would have made the books truly incredible.
It's not really too different from Disney where the primary story arc is:
Father makes sensible decision, disallows dangerous behavior.
Daughter disobeys father and runs away from home.
Daughter finds true love.
All is forgiven.
I think Rowling wanted to limit the story arc and, as mostly kids-focused books, high school was the natural period to cover.
Similarly, the muggle-wizard interactions are more humorous than to send a strong moral message.
Of course a wizard hanging out on the wards of hospitals helping muggle recovery would be better than ignoring muggles in pain, but the stories are about WIZARDS not muggles.
There is some implied leakage, if I remember correctly, regarding the Prime Minister having some Wizard contact, no?
Dropping out of high school is shown as the morally right thing to do and in any case, the experience outside teaches them more than school ever would. That is not going to be the case in the muggle world. You don't pick up math skills by being forced into a Sudoku battle by your arch enemy if you drop out.
Actually, I got the impression that there simply isn't a large enough Wizard population to support a college or university. Hogwarts itself is apparently the only Wizarding school in Britain, yet it schools every witch and wizard in Britain (with some exceptions, like the Gaunts, who wanted nothing to do with it). Only 3 schools throughout Europe are mentioned. Hogsmeade (a village, not a town) is specifically mentioned to be the only all-Wizarding community in Britain. So really, how many people does that imply? Not every Hogwarts graduate would be fit for higher education anyway.
In Order of the Phoenix, Harry has a career counseling session with Professor McGonagall, in which she tells him that becoming an Auror would require several more years of schooling, though there is no mention of where this would take place. Again, my impression is that higher or continuing education is probably handled in a guild-like manner, with specific organizations or professions handling the training of new recruits, who would have to undergo apprentice and/or journeyman training before becoming certified. Some wizards are also mentioned as doing the own continuing research - I'm thinking of Dumbledore working with Nicholas Flamel.
I didn't really see it as an anti-academic bias, so much as just a part of the anti-classism that runs throughout the books, and typically British in that way.
Post a Comment