August 6th, 2007
by
Naamenblog
The thoughts in this post came along because when I began to read Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows (HP&tDH) by J.K. Rowling I had just recently finished Zahrah the Windseeker (ZtW) by Nnedi Okorafor-Mbachu. Since ZtW was fresh in my mind I began to find myself comparing the books. I’m not even talking about the fact that ZtW involves PoC in prominent roles, or the fact that I think ZtW is much more appropriate for the YA set. I’m actually talking about the overall message of the books or at least the message I took from them.
Let me also say that I am not anti-Harry Potter. I own all the books I go to the movie midnight showings. I am a fan but being a fan means that we are able to look at something critically and recognize it’s shortcomings.
Contains Spoilers for HP&tDH and ZtW (but more minor ones for ZtW, ’cause less people have read it and more need too, so I don’t want to spoil y’all too much)
From the very beginning Harry wants to be like everyone else. I’m not discussing the fact that he’s a Wizard among Muggles because we only get that viewpoint for 1 or 2 chapters every book. What he wants to be is the normal of his parents and the world he navigates for 75% of the year. He is not like other Wizards, he is created as a savior, expected to be powerful, he has abilities beyond his friends (such as parseltongue) and a celebrity status that he loathes. He hates all of this he doesn’t want to be different, he wants to be just like his friends, normal (or ordinary depending on how cynical you are). This is constantly reemphasized within the text, this need to be the same, to be like everyone else.
Zahrah has the same impetus she is different (because of her hair and other abilities) and she longs to be the same as the people in her community, as her parents and best friend. She wants to be accepted to have friends. The difference here is that Harry’s differences mark him out as some to be in awe of, someone to be treated with respect. Zahrah’s differences mark her as a true outsider, someone to be feared and ignored, someone to be treated as less than. Harry has many friends and acquaintances who like and treat him well. Zahrah only has her parents and her best friend. This however is not about comparing crappy lives, this is about the message these books send.
In the next 7 books of HP and the book ZtW a lot of dangerous ish goes down, none of which I will spoil here. When we come to the end of the HP saga we are greeted with the fact that Harry has achieved his greatest wish, not only has he been rid of the things that make him different, he is now (aside from being a wizard) part of the typical heteronormative family structure. He has assimilated into the mainstream. He now lives “the ideal life”. Harry has shed his difference and can now blend in with all the wizard folks. A bit ironic that a series that started as a representation of difference has ended on an note of conformity that would not be remiss in any 50′s school approved video on the evils of “the different”.
ZtW on the other hand ends on the note of acceptance, not acceptance by society at large but the idea that only in accepting out own differences can we truly be happy.
Maybe the difference is a matter of choice. Harry does not make the decision to go into danger of his own accord. He is forced into it by circumstances beyond his control. Harry is all about reaction. The world expects him to fight, the villain is trying to kill him and so he fights back. Zahrah on the other hand makes a deliberate choice to go into danger. Yes circumstances have conspired to make the choice necessary but no one would look down on her if she did not go into danger. In fact no one in their wildest dreams expects her face the danger she faces. She is about action. Which is more of a hero the one who simply reacts to things that are thrust upon them or the one who makes the decision to enter danger with no prodding?
Whatever the cause the result is the same. HP gives us the lesson to fight hard against the things that make us different and we may be able to overcome them. Zahrah tells us that difference should be accepted that there’s nothing wrong with it.
Which lesson would you want your child to heed, to be angry at her differences and strain to be like everyone else? Or to accept her differences and be happy with herself even if no one else is?
![[Slashdot]](http://slashdot.org/favicon.ico)
![[Digg]](http://digg.com/favicon.ico)
![[Reddit]](http://reddit.com/favicon.ico)
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif)
![[Facebook]](http://www.facebook.com/favicon.ico)
![[Technorati]](http://technorati.com/favicon.ico)
![[Google]](http://www.google.com/favicon.ico)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.stumbleupon.com/favicon.ico)
- More blogging by
Naamenblog at
http://naamenblog.wordpress.com/
Previous:
Moral vs. Pragmatic Arguments --- Next:
“masters” of horror
Filed under Books & Literature | Comments (18)
[...] Words From The Center, Words From The Edge Writing, Race, Gender, Science-Fiction…etc. put it all in a pan and bake @ 350 for 24 years « My world, all mine! I control every aspect of it! I hold life and death in my hands! Hahahahahaha (mine is an evil laugh) Lazy…. August 6th, 2007 I’m feeling extraordinarily lazy lately but I’ve just finished my 3rd post for the Feminist SF Blog: Harry vs. Zahrah: Assimilation vs. Acceptance (Warning, contains spoilers). [...]
Hmm, I think you’ve put your finger on exactly what’s been making me uncomfortable about HP for so long. Like you, I love the books and am a big fan, but now I realize why they’ve all made me a bit . . . itchy. It’s my allergy to conformity kicking in. Because you’re right, HP is all about nice, tidy, middle class conformity, esp. British middle class conformity: go to a good school, get a good job, don’t stand out (Harry’s often despised for his celebrity too, unwanted as it is), keep your head down and do your job. Wizarding society is really a mirror of the British Middle Class with its traditions slightly warped. And in the end, that’s exactly what he does. The contrast that comes to mind for me is the kids in Madeleine L’Engles Wrinkle in Time books. You can’t get much odder than Meg Murry and Charles Wallace. And their mother’s a scientist, for Pet’s sake. How odd is that (especially at the time the book was written). But there’s no attempt at conformity, just a celebration of the outsiders, which made me feel a heck of a lot better as a kid than reading HP would have.
Good critique, in other words. Thanks.
Harry does not make the decision to go into danger of his own accord. He is forced into it by circumstances beyond his control. Harry is all about reaction.
Actually, this isn’t true, and it’s a very important point. There’s a pivotal scene in Half-Blood Prince in which Harry is bitching about the prophecy and Dumbledore finally makes him realize that he’s not doing what he does because of the damn prophecy; if it had never existed, he would still be doing his best to stop Voldemort. Which, as you say, makes a huge difference.
That being said, Harry is not the most imaginative wizard ever, and there are long stretches in Deathly Hallows in which he’s clearly at sea and waiting for the next thing to happen so that he can respond to it. He is rather a reactive character.
In Zahrah (which I loooooove!!!!!1), there’s also the fact that she accepts her difference but also tries to change the norms of society @ the end (er, trying not to be spoilery here but I think you get what I mean). Whereas Harry just sorta runs right into the norms, w/the happyhappy heteronormative family thing.
vito_excalibur said: “There’s a pivotal scene in Half-Blood Prince in which Harry is bitching about the prophecy and Dumbledore finally makes him realize that he’s not doing what he does because of the damn prophecy; if it had never existed, he would still be doing his best to stop Voldemort. Which, as you say, makes a huge difference.”
But in the end it is in large part because of the prophecy (if not in the expected way) that he does defeat Voldy, which rather undermines that message. At least to my mind. Then again, I have never cared for “The One” as a plot for a number of reasons – it is more reactive and outside of the character’s control, it suggests that only special people can effect change, and it tends to suggest that it’s better to act on your own than with a group of friends or like-minded people, which leads to some damned odd stuff in fiction, never mind how that would work in reality.
Lee – Good points all of them. I especially like the comparison to the Wrinkle in Time books that I adored when I was younger. HP, as much as I love it, has a lot of scenes that make me twitch because they’re nothing more than the enforcement of conformity. Whereas with the WiT books made it okay to be yourself and still be a useful member of society. HP is divided into two camps the workers and those who have a family. I could go into the fact that as far as we know none of the prof. have a life besides teaching. The only adult in Harry’s life who has a domestic sphere as well as a professional one is Arthur Weasley and Molly is a domestic goddess to make up for it. That’s a whole other post though.
And thanks I’m glad you liked the critique.
vito_excalibur – The thing with that is that it’s very easy to play ‘what if?’. I mean saying that if everything in Harry’s life was completely different he would be the same person is good in theory but in practice I don’t think so. Harry can only react and speak from the perspective he has now, anything else is pure conjecture. Which can be taken as fact is you’re so inclined, I’m personally not. Harry is far from the most imaginative character which is another thing that bothered me, he never bothers to attempt to think outside of the box. Well neither does the author really so that shouldn’t surprise me.
Johanna – For sure! At the end of Zahrah we can see that she is no longer satisfied with the breadcrumbs society has provided her and will attempt to fight for more in opposition to Harry who does his best to slip into the mainstream unnoticed. Just one of the traits that makes her more admirable in my opinion. Also in HR&tDH the line where HP wants the house elf to make him a sandwich just proves that any social knowledge Hermione has beat into him is just as quick to fly out the window.
depizan – I completely agree with your opinion on “the One” it’s so bothering to me that they have to be somehow special to change the world. It’s much m,ore interesting to me to have ordinary people pushed into extraordinary actions because I think that’s how the real world works. “Well yes she found the magical sword but she still has the free will to leave at any time without endangering hundreds of lives.” is better to me because it implies that yes the hero could change the world but she could also die of a stray arrow at anytime, there is nothing inherently special about her. Much more interesting than a hero who’s trapped into her role, at least to me.
I’m one of the weirdos who never liked Harry Potter at all (I only read the first book and decided I was done with the series). There are some very clear reasons in my mind for my dislike, but I never thought of it in this way, Naamen. It really resonates with me, so thanks for so clearly explaining it.
Re: “the One”, there’s an interesting essay written by Jane Espenson in the online version of The New Republic that talks about this very thing. According to her, having a main character who is “the Chosen One” is a sure-fire way to make sf and fantasy appeal to the mainstream. I have a lot of problems with this, both as a theory, and a reality if it is in fact true.
therem – Thanks. I’m glad you said it was clearly explained. I’m such a perfectionist when it comes to essays/serious posts I always think they are hopelessly muddled.
I’ll definitely read that essay but I also have problems with that idea. To me it seems as if “The One” is actually a tool of white supremacist heteronormative patriarchy because it posits that the everyday person can’t change the world. It’s basically saying that without that one special person the world/city/country is doomed. What a way to convince us to sit back and wait for “The One” while saying there’s nothing we can do.
I agree about “The One” both as a plot device and as a larger philosophical issue. But I suspect that Jane Espenson is also right (in terms of appeal to the mainstream). How far this is related to the old Victorian Great Man theory of history I don’t know, but it does have amazing staying power in our culture, perhaps because of its essentialist argument which, of course, reinforces the status quo.
I don’t know if this was just me, but I increasingly got the impression as I read that while Harry was a good wizard, he wasn’t a spectacular one beyond his Quidditch play (which falls away as a central element of his life), his wand, and his Patronus. So in the end he ended up where he was comfortable (that and him wanting ‘normalcy’ – as defined by the author – because of his childhood experiences). It’s also a place that I suspect a lot of people are also comfortable. Thus, comforting all around.
I haven’t read Zahrah The Windseeker – must rectify this situation.
Kate – I think you’re absolutely right “the One” does have a staying power in our society and personally I’ve always loved the stories of ordinary people called to do extraordinary things. I just always prefer it when they have a choice in the matter. It’s always more powerful to me when someone chooses to be a heroine as opposed to being forced into it. Although I will admit to loving certain book with the forced perspective.
You’re right about HP, it was meant to be comforting and I think it was such a bizarre twist from where it was that it really did not work well. Having all this horrible pain and grief and not even giving it a little lip service before jumping ahead 19 years seemed to me a disservice to the characters. We loved some of those characters so much and they didn’t even get a proper goodbye. There’s a way to comfort without turning it into “Ozzy & Harriet” but I don’t know if J.K. knows that.
Yes read Zahrah. I’ve re-read it about 3 times now and just love it. Reading it for me was almost like being reacquainted with an old friend. I don’t know why but the story just reminded me of…I don’t know. It’s just good.
Kate said: “I don’t know if this was just me, but I increasingly got the impression as I read that while Harry was a good wizard, he wasn’t a spectacular one beyond his Quidditch play (which falls away as a central element of his life), his wand, and his Patronus.”
But that’s part of what made his being The One a particularly disgusting version of it – he was special for _what_ he was, not who he was. It reduces him to an object, not a person. Yech. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe did _not_ need company. One object-hero series is quite enough, thanks. (I’m sure there are many, many more, but I’m going to plug my ears, hum, and pretend there aren’t.)
On the other hand, the reason Harry was the One was his mother; if Lily Potter hadn’t saved him, and if Snape hadn’t loved her Voldemort would have killed Harry long before the 7th book.
Syfr – That still makes Harry the one because of who he was related to not who he was himself. He’s the One because his mother died not because of something inherent in him.
As a side note I think Lily Potter is one of the worst things about the books, her only purpose in the whole of the series was to die and to be loved by Snape. We learn all about his father and how he was so great and all we get about Harry’s mother is that they share eye color and a couple of measly tidbits in the 6th book.
Naamen, that’s an excellent point about Lily Potter. I can’t believe that got past me, but you’re entirely right. She exists only through her relationship with three males, not on her own.
I also prefer the ordinary people responding to extraordinary circs stories, too, perhaps in part because so many of my parents’ generation rose to the occasion for things like WWII and the civil rights movement, to mention just two.
I enjoyed the Potter series, and give three cheers to Rowling for writing the later books under what must have been immense pressure, but as far as iterations of the Chosen One theme goes, I prefer Whedon’s Buffy despite its various flaws (uneven plotting in later seasons, dearth of PoC characters in an area that ought to have been demographically far more diverse, etc). She really paid for being the Chosen One in a way that I’m not sure HP ever really did. Of course, Buffy was written for adults, and HP for children, so it probably isn’t fair to compare them in that way.
I’ll back you all the way on personally preferring the “ordinary people called upon… etc.” trope, but I think Espenson is really tapping into something crucial when she talks about the identification fantasy of having others recognise our specialness. It reminds me of an experiment that was looking at why people are gullible when presented with horoscopes and fortune tellers and such like. The subjects were all given a “personal horoscope” that was actually exactly the same for all participants, and almost all of them described it as “highly accurate” or something similar. The horoscope was mainy based around statements like “you have strengths and talents that others generally fail to perceive or fully appreciate”.
Don’t know if anyone will read this, but since I just came across the website recently, I wasn’t able to get into the discussion earlier.
I haven’t read Zahrah, but after reading so many good things about it I will seek it out. I do disagree with some of the points about Harry. Yes, “The One” is an overused plot device, but at least Rowling put a twist into it by having the villain decide who “The One” was. I liked that, because it put an element of randomness into the situation. There was nothing special about Harry that made him “The One,” and thus, no guarantee that he would prevail.
I also liked that Harry became ordinary at the end, because I thought it made a point that isn’t made enough these days in our culture — the beauty of living a normal life free from war and the threat of sudden death. After experiences like Harry went through, raising his kids and doing his job would have been paradise. It’s the same point Tolkein, who lived through the World Wars, made at the end of LOTR. In the U.S. we are pretty blase about dealing out death and judgment to people who live far away. We glamorize war and downplay its consequences. I think that’s because our country has been safe for so long, our imaginations can’t stretch to the idea of how it would be to live in a war zone.
I also have to strongly disagree with the points made about the “Wrinkle in Time” series. As a girl geek, I was overjoyed to find Meg Murray. But talk about becoming ordinary. After all her adventures, Meg doesn’t even grow up to be a scientist like her mother. She becomes a pretty baby-making machine, while her husband, her intellectual inferior, goes on to be a big-time scientist! Charles Wallace, who is trapped by It in the first book and has to be rescued by Meg, gets to do the saving-the-world thing in “Swiftly Tilting Planet,” with Meg as a mostly passive bystander. (As much as I love the book, the racism of “Swiftly Tilting Planet” and its idea of the “Chosen One” could provide fodder for a whole other post.) Even Sandy and Dennys, who are nothing special, go on to become Teachers. Meg gets nothing.
I can’t begin to tell you how disappointed I was as a girl to see what became of Meg.
[...] a whole article comparing it very favorably to Harry Potter on the Feminist Science Fiction blog (Harry vs. Zahrah: Assimilation vs. Acceptance {Contains Spoilers}) and I recommend it to everyone I [...]