More Thoughts on Potter

Anti-Semitism rampant at Hogwarts:
I don't want to classify this as anti-semitism on Rowling's part, because it might just be the perception of her characters. Nevertheless, some anti-semitic character descriptions still seem to bubble up. In particular, this seems to be the case with Prof. Snape. Harry is convinced that Snape is a conniving, ambitious villain. Rowling describes him as "hook-nosed." He is seen as essentially engaging in nepotism regarding Slitherin House, and accused of trying to poison other professors. The latter is, I am sure, going to be debunked in the story, but the fact of the matter is that the kids see this guy and cast him as the typical medieval stage-Jew.

Anti-Catholicism at Hogwarts?:
On page 101 of Azkaban, a knight in a painting wanders off into another painting containing an image of "some sinister-looking monks." Now, she doesn't identify what kinds of monks these are. They could be pagan Druidic monks or Tibetan monks. However, one would think she would specify either of these two categories since they are probably not what the average person thinks of when they imagine a monk. At the very least, I think it's safe to say that Catholic readers are going to see the word monk, and imagine a Franciscan or Dominican...and be very put off with the description of them being sinister. I was.

Genetic Superiority:
On page 103, Prof. Trelawney asserts that only those with the Sight will be able to succeed in her class. The others will simply not be able to do it at all. Again, I'm completely sympathetic to the view that some people are naturally more talented and gifted than others...but I'd like to know from where Rowling thinks "the Sight" originates in her fantasy world.
That being said, this issue actually brings up the first interesting conflict in the novel so far. Hermione and another professor have been dismissing the Divination class as hogwash. This suggests that, finally, there is some place for rational skepticism in this world. Unfortunately, it becomes clear very quickly that Hermione's skepticism is derived from an immature jealousy, since she seems to lack "the Sight" and therefore will not be able to succeed in this class as she has in all her others. This renders skepticism a somewhat bogus ideological standpoint, although I suspect Rowling will redeem her text by falling somewhere in the middle. My suspicion is that Trelawney's premonition about Harry Potter is essentially accurate but that she has misinterpreted the signs. Thus, while skepticism of "the Sight" is unwarranted, one must still be skeptical of the interpretation of signs. This dismantles skepticism as a scientific tool, but preserves skepticism as deployed in the humanities. I predict (so to speak) that psychic phenomena occurs is not to be questioned in the novel but that the meaning of psychic visions is still subject to deconstruction.

Three other quick points:
1) Is Lycanthropy a stand-in for AIDS? (And, for that matter, is Lupin a werewolf because his name means "wolf," or is his name Lupin because he is a werewolf? And if you were a werewolf and didn't want anyone to know about your disease, and your name was Lupin, wouldn't you change your name? Or at least ask everyone to call you by a nickname? Or am I assuming too much...My guess is that the potions Snape is giving him to drink are supposed to suppress his AIDS...er...lycanthropy. And when Snape fills in for Lupin and teaches the course on protection against werewolves, is this some kind of AIDS prevention lecture?)

2) Do kids see this book as a commentary on school violence? The Dementors at every door become like surveillance cameras or metal-detectors. When the Fat Lady painting is attacked, Hogwarts essentially goes on lockdown. I wonder if this book was influenced by recent attacks on schools...

3) I want to start modelling my pedagogy after Snape's. I should start dividing my classes into houses and give them "points."

Comments

[Jim]

I lurk quite often, this is my first comment. First, I love your blog, as a fellow CSC alum it's fun to see the opinions and thoughts of people I only knew on the surface.

Anyway, one quibble, as far as "the sight" is concerned. The whole tone of the book is pretty ridiculing of Professor Trelawney; the sight is often mocked and made out to be made-up, as much as she might believe it's real.

I'll attribute that to you probably not having finished the book. So while you bring up a lot of interesting thoughts, the genetic superiority line of argument is probably not best supported by the "sight", and is more supported by the fact that wizards apparently have a genetic supriority to muggles, as you mentioned previously.

Although, the genetic superiority argument is somewhat surpressed; it's very similar to the X-Men conflict. The good guys want to use their powers/genes for good, the bad guys want to enslave the less gifted.

[Peter Terp]

Thanks for the comment, Jim...great to hear from another Catholic Terp.

I actually haven't had a chance to get back to Potter since I made this post, so I'm still in a kind of literary limbo. (It's an easy read, but even easy reads require leisure time.)

Of course, bringing in the X-Men also works for the "queer" theory as well, especially after the movie trilogy.

It is a testament to just how good Western civilization has it that our modern myths so frequently allegorize the alienation of a group based on their appetites as if this were a major plight. There was a time not to long ago when things like slavery and institutionalized racism were the focus of literary outcries.