The media has featured various reports on the conference, including this piece from the BBC. Since the first notice from the press, however, a handful of reporters have turned to the con angle, one every serious Potter student is familiar with: academic dismissal. Both the Telegraph and The Guardian have run stories in which they’ve found some reasonably credentialed speaker to claim that:

“I’m not against Harry Potter, my children loved it, [but] Harry Potter is for children, not for grownups… It’s all the fault of cultural studies: anything that is consumed with any appearance of appetite by people becomes an object of academic study.” (John Mullan, professor of English at University College London, to The Guardian)

Or that:

“The books themselves don’t merit study because the prose is too basic… It’s written awkwardly and is clumsy in places – although it does tell the story well. And it lacks subtlety. Even Professor Snape, who is meant to be complex, is so obvious.”–author and literary critic Philip Womack, to The Telegraph

The Guardian’s piece was titled, comparatively inoffensively, “Harry Potter and the order of the 60 scholars gets mixed initial reception.” The Telegraph piece, which may perhaps be counted simply as opinion journalism, ran under the heading “You can’t be serious about Harry Potter!” and contained the following closing paragraph:

“As the first Potter literary conference draws to a close, let’s hope the delegates have learnt something: J K Rowling may be a great storyteller, but she’s no Shakespeare. Her books, though enthralling, weren’t written for academic study. It’s an injustice to Britain’s true literary greats to pretend otherwise.”–Sarah Rainey

It would be difficult, in a single post, to answer all these claims to satisfaction. The entire conference itself is, in its way, an answer. But we can begin with a few challenges for the subset of academia that dismisses all literary exegesis on the works merely because the prose itself is not particularly worthy of notice.

First (after we who lived through Potter prognostications circa 2007 finish rolling our eyes at the idea of Snape being “so obvious”), we can quote Rowling herself, speaking in an interview with Larry King:

ROWLING: I thought I was writing quite an obscure book that if it ever got published would maybe have a handful of devotees because I thought — it is kind of a book for obsessives. I thought, well, maybe a few people will like it a lot. I never expected it to have broad appeal.

KING: You might have thought it would be a cult following, a small intense group.

ROWLING: Yes, I think if you’d sort of given me a multiple choice one and one of them had been mass acclaim and one had been cult I’d have picked cult, yes.

While writing simplistic children’s-book prose, Rowling knew she was putting in details at a level that would appeal to a very specific crowd. For those of us who have studied her work professionally, when we look at those details, we’re not seeing goofy Latinish spell names to memorize as fanboys and girls. We’re looking at connections to Chaucer, Dante, Austen, Lovecraft, Shakespeare, and mythology. We’re looking at complex alchemical scaffolding that has its traditional zenith in works like Romeo and Juliet. We’re looking at symbolism that comes from all over the world and reaches into ancient history. We’re looking at the relationship of the story to social justice, both in history and in our own time. In other words, we’re successfully doing the sort of literary analysis that English professors are said to do.

Second, we can question whether accessibility and popularity are really wise reasons for throwing out all possibility of the works’ meriting academic interest. It’s true that quality prose is important to studies of literature, and we cannot so quickly write off the fact that comparison of a single page of Rowling’s writing next to, say, Lewis’ or Gaiman’s, also writing for children, will show off her weaknesses in vivid detail. But while Rowling is no great prosist, she is also not illiterate, and her text is quite readable. Her prose does not raise her to the level of academic investigation, but it has obviously not barred all serious academicians from investigating her tale.

It’s also true that there are a lot of great books to study. That said, none of the academics quoted gave a direct response to this point made by Mr. Pond (John Patrick Pazdziora):

We can’t avoid the fact that Harry Potter is the main narrative experience of an entire generation – the children who quite literally grew up with Harry Potter. The Harry Potter novels are simply the most important and influential children’s books of the late-twentieth and early-twenty-first centuries.

But it’s the final quote, from Ms. Rainey, that is perhaps most troubling: “[S]he’s no Shakespeare. Her books, though enthralling, weren’t written for academic study. It’s an injustice to Britain’s true literary greats to pretend otherwise.” There are three claims contained there. Upon the first, we agree. The second is most certainly debatable. As for the third: may we not, in our various studies, pursue with interest the use of alchemical principles and the similar social commentary shared by Rowling and Shakespeare, without losing our respect for the latter’s iambic pentameter?

Comments welcome.

One by one they are pierced and blessed and tended to. Belen acts as the priest’s assistant, anointing their tiny prick wounds with ointment, wrapping them in bandages, giving the occasional cryer a quick hug.

When it’s my turn, Father Alentin smiles sadly, even as he grasps my neck and pulls my forehead against his own.

“What is it you seek, child?”

Last time, I prayed for wisdom. God must have answered my prayer, for I certainly feel wiser now. Older. Different. But I still don’t understand what God wants from me. I sigh. “Alentin, I need faith. I have so many doubts about God and His will.”

His lips, moist and warm, press against my forehead. “Everyone has doubts,” he whispers. “Pray through them. God will show you what to do when the time comes.”

Author: Rae Carson

Synopsis: Though chosen by God for an unknown task, Princess Elisa, heavy and awkward, has always lived in the shadow of her beautiful and capable older sister. When she’s secretly married at sixteen to the handsome but hesitant king of a distant country, however, Elisa must face up to her destiny both as queen and as bearer of the Godstone. Before long, she’s bringing the strength of her knowledge of the sacred texts and war to bear not only on King Alejandro’s councils, but on the fate of a small revolutionary desert people, among whom is the one man who truly loves her.

Notes: With the recent openness to unsoftened violence in young adult fiction (The Hunger Games, Divergent) and the popularity of no-character-is-safe authors like George R.R. Martin and Jodi Picoult on the bestseller lists—not to mention an overall focus on diversity of representation—the doors have been opened for Rae Carson, whose powerful debut refuses to conform to expectations on a number of levels.

Lucero-Elisa de Riqueza, princess of Orovalle, is no pretty, wiry YA heroine stuck choosing between two good-looking and possessive young men. She lives for two things: her studies of the Scriptura Sancta and the Belleza Guerra, and food. We meet her as she’s on her knees, about to be squeezed into a massive wedding dress, praying that her arranged-marriage bridegroom will be ugly enough to love her. The only thing she feels is attractive or special about her is the living stone God installed at her navel by means of a beam of light on her naming day, but anything relating to the meaning of that, or what God’s will for her might be, is carefully kept from her.

As most of those difficulties—excepting the Godstone—are far more common in reality than fiction, it’s to Carson’s credit not only that Elisa is what she is, but that her struggles are carefully described and deeply sympathetic. Elisa’s early passive weakness and self-disgust could make her uninteresting; instead, they serve to interest the reader and set up a strong trajectory for growth.

Elisa’s culture and religion are as surprising as the character herself. Carson, rather than mining cultures foreign to the modern West or developing entirely in fantastical directions, unashamedly adapted Spanish high-church Christianity minus the obvious figure of Christ. The rose—elevated over an altar as part of the main sacrament—is a not-so-subtle stand-in, perhaps. Quotes from the Scriptura Sancta strongly resemble verses of Scripture, such as “Wherever five are gathered, there am I in their midst” (cf. Matthew 18:20: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them”, KJV). The Lengua Classica (plain Spanish, though not called so by name) and the Lengua Plebeya are flatly reminiscent of Catholicism’s use of Latin and vernacular, and the reference to Orovalle’s Via Reformas is an equally blunt parallel.

The religion is wholly fantasy, of course, despite the open basis in Christianity. The Christian faith claims a lot of wild and weird miracles, but nothing quite resembling the placement of a Godstone in the navel of a newborn child every hundred years. There are also little twists that would subtly distort the teachings of Christianity if Carson’s work were meant to be a faithful representation. The fixing of the sacred number at five, as noted above, is one such. That said, the religion is portrayed sympathetically, which is always a delight to find.

It should be noted, of course, that Carson’s use of Christian imagery doesn’t make her a Christian. In fact, according to herself on Twitter, she’s an atheist. Which might also explain the lack—unless I missed something—of religious themes on the symbolic level, as well as the phrasing of some “faith in myself” lines at the end. It’ll be interesting to see where she takes the next two books, but right now it’s at least hard to imagine Elisa turning her back on her faith in God.

The book breaks from expectations on one more level, in that Carson allows certain bad things to happen in shameless defiance of the likely wishes of her readership. This reader actually went to bed unsettled and annoyed after staying up late “finding out what happens”, but later discovered that it’s only the first in a trilogy. Again, it’ll be interesting to see where the story goes.

The book is well written and engaging, and I enjoyed it despite my growing dislike of present tense narrative. The portrayal of religion intrigued me, and Elisa is an appealing heroine, one I felt a lot of affection for. To add to the interest, the desert-heat atmosphere, the systematic breaking down and reforming of Elisa’s character, and the emphasis on the number five leave me suspecting that Carson may have plotted her trilogy alchemically. I expect to read A Crown of Embers when it comes out.

Recommendation: Read it for an intriguing fantasy tale of a seemingly unlikely heroine, a girl with great weaknesses but greater inner strength.

Maurice Sendak provided me with what will be one of my favorite memories forever: reading through Where the Wild Things Are with my two-year-old daughter, while she recited it from memory (always showing me her “terrible claws”). We even recorded it once. I decided to start reading that book with my daughter because she started having nightmares. I wanted to do what Sendak did best: demonstrate the power of the imagination to overcome fear.

Both the book and the film, which Sendak was very involved with, produce very raw and unexpected emotional reactions in me. I don’t even know that I fully understand it, but I’m certain in lies in Sendak’s willingness not to hold back on where he was willing to go with his subject material. In his own words, “I refuse to lie to children.” His works were controversial and there may be many Hog’s Head readers who think he crossed the line, but I appreciate him. I intend to become more familiar with his other works in the very near future.

Please feel free to share your thoughts and experiences with Sendak’s work below.

Clive Staples Lewis once wrote, “a man needs a few ‘friends.’” [1. C.S. Lewis. The Four Loves (Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1960), 87.] These words were true in his case for he acquired a great many friends during his lifetime. Perhaps none of his friends were as prolific as John Ronald Reuel Tolkien. Both persons went on to write fantasy classics – Tolkien exposing us to Middle Earth and its history while Lewis took readers on a journey to Narnia.

The circumstance that Lewis and Tolkien met and became friends is very interesting because they were different individuals. For example, Tolkien was a religious Catholic while Lewis was an atheist during much of his undergraduate studies at Oxford and didn’t have any religious commitment leading up to their meeting. However Lewis at this time was engaging in a search for God. Tolkien was older than Lewis and a family man – he already had a wife and three children. Even though they were both professors at Oxford, they engaged in different areas of study in the English language. Tolkien was the Rawlinson and Bosworth Professor of Anglo-Saxon after being elected to that position in 1925. Around the same time, Lewis was elected Fellow and Tutor in English Language and Literature at Magdalen College. Lewis noted these differences by saying, “Friendship with the latter [Tolkien] marked the breakdown of two old prejudices. At my first coming into the world I had been (implicitly) warned never to trust a Papist, and at my first coming into the English Faculty (explicitly) never to trust a philologist. Tolkien was both.” [2. C.S. Lewis. Surprised by Joy (Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., 1955), 216).]

On May 11, 1926, Lewis and Tolkien attended a meeting with the English faculty at Merton College. It was there that they met for the first time. Tolkien was thirty-four while Lewis was twenty-eight. The English faculty usually met in a confined library, cramped with books and papers on an array of subjects, mostly dealing with English studies. The library was situated in an attic of the Examinations Schools associated with Merton College. According to Lewis, this meeting started at 4 p.m. and tea was being served before it started. The meeting commenced and Tolkien noticed a new face in the crowd of faculty members, many of whom he was familiar with. This person is atypical and not bland. He is a stout sized man with baggy attire and he seems equipped with a quick sharp mind, which includes a sharp memory. He is a tutor at Magdalen College, which Lewis describes as “beautiful beyond compare.” [3. C.S. Lewis to his father, Albert Lewis, 21 October 1925, Letters of C.S. Lewis, 104.] Based on all of this, Tolkien is automatically drawn to the man that his friends refer to as ‘Jack.’

Lewis, on the other hand, also noticed Tolkien during the meeting. Lewis described Tollers (his nickname for Tolkien) as “a smooth, pale, fluent little chap.” [4. C.S. Lewis. All My Road Before Me (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers, 1991), 393.] Aside from that he notices Tolkien’s long face with a keen eye as well as a knack for the study of Old and Middle English. Despite the fact that Tolkien was full of intellect and wit, Lewis had a less than favorable first impression of him. Tolkien was a philologist, which is a person who studies the origins of languages. Philology was considered an area of study most at odds with the literature camp at Oxford, which emphasized modern vernacular literature. Tolkien at that meeting started proposing a new syllabus that should be instituted emphasizing Anglo-Saxon and Middle English prose in the introductory courses in English. Lewis who was of the literature camp saw Tolkien as a potential opponent. This was in accordance with the prejudices that were instilled in him by the English faculty to never trust a philologist. Lewis writes, “[Tolkien] can’t read Spenser because of the forms – thinks language is the real thing in the school – thinks all literature is written for the amusement of men between thirty and forty… No harm in him: only needs a smack or so” (emphasis not mine). [5. Ibid., 393.]

Tolkien and Lewis actually talked to each other after the meeting, although what they discussed Lewis doesn’t write down. Despite the differences between both individuals and the otherwise uneventful first meeting, they became good friends. Several years later Tolkien convinced Lewis to become a Christian in a momentous conversation with each other on September 19, 1931. With them was Hugo Dyson, who knew Tolkien since 1919 and a fellow Christian. Tolkien convinced Lewis that in Christ the myth had become history. They developed many common interests, including their Christian faith and their writing. As Lewis said, “Friendship arises out of mere Companionship when two or more of the companions discover that they have in common some insight or interest or even taste which the others do not share and which, till that moment, each believed to be his own unique treasure (or burden).” [6. C.S. Lewis. The Four Loves, 96.]

The Avengers starts with Nick Fury and his associates at SHIELD experiencing difficulty with the Tesseract, a cube of unspeakable power. This cube opens a portal for Loki (Tom Hiddleston), adoptive brother of Thor, to Earth where he steals the Tesseract in order to summon an alien army to the planet. Fury gathers several superheroes together to form the Avengers: Black Widow (Scarlet Johansson), The Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), Iron Man, and Captain America (Chris Evans). They are joined by Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner). The result is a humorous (and sometimes serious) exchanging of back and forth insults and retorts. Through the incessant fighting, the members of the Avengers have to put aside their differences and egos to unite against Loki and his army from taking over Manhattan and ultimately the world.

The Avengers succeeds where other superhero ensemble films failed (Fantastic Four anyone?). A good mixture of humor, action, and drama (not to mention Hulk Smash) to please both the Marvel fan as well as the regular person who just wants to see an action film; The Avengers is a fantastic film, and a good start to the summer movie season.

On more Library-related notes, how did you feel when you entered the Library on Pottermore?  What more do you wish you could do there?  I for one would love to be able to pull down books from the shelves–say, Hogwarts: A History–and be able to leaf through a few pages to find out some magical details that Prof. Binns didn’t tell us….

And what are your favorite “Library moments” in any of the Harry Potter novels?

In the lighter forms of news, Katniss makes Tor’s Top Ten Favorite Fictional Archers, sharing notoriety with Robin Hood, Cupid, and Legolas, among others. Also, the tale is inspiring baby name trends; Katniss, Rue and Primrose are all pretty enough (if a little… well, unique to that story) to reasonably achieve some popularity. But Cato–really? He must have come off a lot better in the movie than the book.

On the theme of games–any games–Yahoo’s Unplugged blog has Fiction’s Most Famous Games, and How to Play Them for Real. Quidditch makes the list. So does Pooh-sticks, of course.

One of the great genre-blending novels, Madeleine L’Engle’s A Wrinkle in Time, recently turned 50. NPR weighs in on the unlikely wonder of the story, and Barnes and Noble Review discusses “the amalgam of space opera and theurgy” that helps make the book the intellectual and spiritual delight that it is.

In J.K. Rowling news, she somehow didn’t make Time’s list of the 100 Most Influential People in the World (apparently Claire Danes and Rihanna have contributed more to society?) She did, however, make Sir Peter Blake’s 80th-Birthday re-draw of the Beatles’ Sgt. Pepper album cover. Meanwhile, over at The Atlantic Wire, adult YA reader Jen Doll begs–speaking for many of us in the process–”Please Don’t Grow Up, J.K. Rowling!”

In awesome Potter fan news, ChicagoBusiness.com ran an interesting and beautifully titled “From Muggle to Media Mogul” piece on Emerson Spartz this week.

Lewis and Tolkien talk seems to be common lately. Time recently re-ran a 1947 cover story on Lewis. The Egotist Club’s Melpomene, speaking over at Pages Unbound, wrote a beautiful post titled “She Who Weeps: The Value of Sorrow in Tolkien”. Lev Grossman, in a piece titled “The Magician’s Book: Actual Smart Things about C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien”, comments at Good Report on Laura Miller’s work, The Magician’s Book: A Skeptic’s Adventures in Narnia. Grossman makes the common harsh judgment on Lewis’ treatment of Susan, so to counter that: here, as linked in Good Report’s comments, is Andrew Rilstone’s old piece “Lipstick on my Scholar”, which expresses a positively indefensible perspective on the relative merits of Pullman and Rowling, but nonetheless provides an excellent deconstruction of the Susan myth.

And in the miscellaneous:

Fantasy author L.B. Gale has a few recent win-the-internet posts, with Top 15 Sci-Fi/Fantasy Honeymoon Destinations, 12 Best Words and Phrases from Invented Languages in Science Fiction/Fantasy, and Ten Unforgettable Deus Ex Machina Moments in Science Fiction and Fantasy.

In WTF moments, Cthulhu has recently undergone an image transformation; The Guardian notes that he’s now cuddly.

And lastly we return to the New York Times, where Elizabeth D. Samet takes on the very crux of nerd culture: The Grand Allusion. It’s a fascinating piece, questioning the endless little inside jokes most of us dorky literary types love to throw into our conversation for the surprise and delight of anyone who will understand. As PotterMom05 notes, it also makes an interesting addition to the discussion of shared text–or in this case, non-shared text. Helpful or harmful, of course, we’ve been making these references for centuries; it’s doubtful that anyone plans on stopping now.

Special thanks to revgeorge and PotterMom05 for providing at least half of these links. Your butterbeer’s on me tonight, you two.

I had a chance to catch up for an hour today with John Granger. Unfortunately, we weren’t recording the conversation, as it was on a regular phone, and I’m not the U.S. government. Although perhaps it’s on file somewhere with the U.S. government.

I digress.

I’ve been more behind on Hogwarts Professor than I have here. But John explained that he’s got an interesting thing happening with Mugglenet: Academia! Looks like a great podcast. If you need something to listen to, especially as you’re waiting for me to get the PubCast going again, I’d recommend this.

We also talked about getting the Pundits back up and rolling again. Stay tuned. We mean it.

Share and enjoy!

A Note on Beings

As we don’t encounter veelas in OotP and learn very little about them, I don’t include them but will reference them under the Weasleys. I also didn’t include werewolves, being/beast hybrids, “shunted between the Being and Beast divisions for many years,” according to Newt Scamander in Fantastic Beasts & Where To Find Them (xiii). As they are a danger to others (as well as themselves), they lack family structure and don’t usually breed (which is why Remus Lupin fears for his unborn child). Although they share anger against wizard oppression, they seem to be loners who unite under Fenrir Greyback under Voldemort only to achieve power over wizards through infecting others, especially children.

What Is Family?

I have a magnet on my refrigerator that says “Friends are family you choose for yourself.” For the purposes of this essay series, the terms “family” and “community” may be interchangeable in both the exact sense—those related by blood or adoption (such as Harry, Hermione, and Remus being absorbed into the Weasley family)—and the broader sense—those who regard each other as if they were biological family, through love and shared values. A family community may also be a workplace, school environment or ideal-driven brotherhood.

Of course, not every family or community operates smoothly, or treats its members well.

Family in Institutions and Groups

After having examined the global magical world and the racial families/tribes within it, let’s narrow down the focus within Britain’s magical community. We’ll look at personal families in Part 3 (and at the rate this is going, Part 4). All page references are from the Scholastic editions.

The Ministry

The Ministry is a dysfunctional government entity, a bureaucracy that is an uneasy microcosm of competing wizard values, ideologies, and methodologies, who yet work together to keep the wizarding world functioning. We spend the most time with these people representing these competing values:

Cornelius Fudge, Prime Minister. A weak politician who values his position over his responsibilities, makes dangerous compromises, and is easily bought. To him the ends justify the means. Therefore he denies Voldemort’s return, and discredits and persecutes Dumbledore and Harry.

Dolores Umbridge, Fudge’s Senior Undersecretary, High Inquisitor of Hogwarts. An ambitious, spiteful, tyrannical abuser who in her thirst for power and control undercuts her own boss (hiring dementors to attack Harry) and makes Hogwarts a living hell for students and staff. Umbridge manipulates the law, hates non-wizard magical beings and is an accomplice of Death Eaters.

Lucius Malfoy, Influence Peddler. “Malfoy’s been giving generously to all sorts of things for years…. Gets him in with the right people … then he can ask for favors … delay laws he doesn’t want passed … Oh, he’s very well connected, Lucius Malfoy….” (Arthur Weasley, 155)

Arthur Weasley, Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Head of Office. A pureblood who believes in equality for all wizards no matter their blood status. Scorned by those like Malfoy, he has a small, inconvenient office and is neither well-respected nor well-paid, but is satisfied with the good he accomplishes.

Bartemius Crouch, Sr., Head of the Department of International Magical Cooperation, former Head of Magical Law Enforcement. A rules stickler so rigid that no one noticed he was Imperiused during GoF. Exacting harsh measures, he authorized Unforgivable Curses, and sent people to Azkaban without trial. “I would say he became as ruthless and cruel as many on the Dark Side” (GoF 527)

Percy Weasley, Administrative Assistant. A proud perfectionist, obsequious and ambitious, he cherishes the letter of the law over people, even his own family. He is so focused that he didn’t realize his first boss was Imperiused. In OotP he is assistant to Minister Cornelius Fudge and supports Umbridge. At the Battle of Hogwarts he reunites with his family, and agrees with Fred’s assessment that he has been “A Ministry-loving, family-disowning, power-hungry moron.” (DH 606)

Rufus Scrimgeour, Auror, Prime Minister. An orchestrator who replaces Fudge, keeps Dolores Umbridge on staff, and enacts ineffectual measures and arrests and incarcerates innocent people to improve the Ministry’s image.

Kingsley Shacklebolt, Senior Auror, covert Order operative. A brave and judicious man, who successfully diverts the search for Sirius Black, and inspires confidence in all, including Vernon Dursley and the Muggle Prime Minister.

The Order of the Phoenix

The Order, composed of mostly biologically unrelated wizards, is a family united by a cause—defeating Voldemort and his blood purity agenda. In OotP Order members share the Black house as headquarters at Sirius’ invitation, even lodging there as necessary. In August and at Christmas we see them cleaning house, celebrating the holidays, showing affection, and having squabbles like any family. The family aspect of the Order is captured in the photograph that Moody shows Harry of the early days, naming past and current members, and pointing out the dead, including Harry’s parents and Gideon and Fabian Prewitt. (We later learn that Gideon and Fabian were Molly’s older brothers; Molly and Arthur give Harry Fabian’s watch for his seventeenth birthday, further showing their love for Harry as a son, and in the Epilogue he still wears it.) The photo also includes the tortured-into-insanity Longbottoms.

As the book opens we’re surprised, along with Harry, that his cat-loving babysitting neighbor, Arabella Figg, is a member of the Order family, and that she’s watched over Harry for fourteen years. She reveals herself during the dementor attack in Little Whinging (19-24) and testifies for Harry at his Wizengamot trial (143). Contrast Arabella with Order member Mundungus Fletcher, who abandons his protective post to pursue shady business deals (23).

Apart from problems with Mundungus’ operations, conflicts arising in the Order are personal, mostly the one between Sirius and Severus, arising from schoolboy cruelty and inability to forgive. This causes much grief and is a factor in Sirius’ death.

Blood Purists and Death Eaters

Blood purists don’t really operate as a family, per se, but they have a strong bond of unity in their desire for racial purity. Scamander writes regarding classification of being and beast: “We are all familiar with the extremists who campaign for the classification of Muggles as “beasts” FB&WTFT xiii). We see this view reflected in the Ministry’s Magic is Might statue. The carved Muggles are naked, “all with stupid, ugly faces, twisted and pressed together to support the weight of the handsomely robed wizards “(DH 242).

The obsession with blood purity exemplified by the Blacks (“Tojours Pur”) and the Malfoys has been a uniting factor amongst many purebloods since the days of Salazar Slytherin. Albus Dumbledore and Gellart Grindelwald would have quickly found an army of willing purebloods to subdue Muggles “for the greater good.”

In contemporary times this blood prejudice produced the Death Eaters. Sirius Black tells Harry that his own parents weren’t Death Eaters, but “they thought Voldemort had the right idea, they were all for the purification of the Wizarding race, getting rid of Muggle-borns and having purebloods in charge. They weren’t alone either, there were quite a few people, before Voldemort showed his true colors, who thought he had the right idea about things….” (112).

Death Eaters, sycophantic servants to their master, are a brotherhood like the Klan or Mafia. They wear hoods and masks, have a brotherhood tattoo (the Dark Mark) that summon them to their master, and a behavioral code with severe punishments for minor failures.  They use forbidden curses. Voldemort, with no love or respect for them, plays them against one another, with more than one believing that only they are his “most trusted.” These henchmen are also a good ol’ boys club with only one female Death Eater amongst them, Bellatrix Lestrange. Bella is always desperate to prove herself as not only equal to the men but better.

Being a Death Eater appears to have generational intent. Those who joined up during Voldemort’s first war would likely see their sons join “the family firm” (as does Draco Malfoy) before Voldemort’s defeat.

The Hogwarts Family

Hogwarts is the educational training ground for the majority of British wizards, and students are together for seven years, apart from family and society. Hogwarts is the heart of the wizarding world, fostering strong school ties lasting a lifetime.

This Hogwarts family includes four sub-families:

STAFF:  We don’t learn of staff relationships outside the school, but the staff does act as family to each other. We see this in Hagrid’s affections for his fellow teachers and defense of Severus Snape, Minerva McGonagall’s kindness to Sybil Trelawny (595), and the staff’s alliance against Umbridge, the only teacher they universally despise.

HOGWARTS PORTRAITS:  These include the castle portraits and the portraits of former headmasters in the headmaster’s office. Portrait subjects visit and find refuge in each other’s paintings, visit paintings of themselves elsewhere for helpful information, support the school, and interact with staff and students. The Pink Lady allows (or doesn’t allow) Gryffindors into their common room. Sir Cadogan, galloping through the paintings, cheers Harry on during the Battle of Hogwarts (DH 621). The headmaster portraits advise the current headmaster, and joyously weeping, give Harry a standing ovation after the battle.

HOUSE GHOSTS:  According to Nearly Headless Nick, only wizards can come back as ghosts and every wizard has the choice (and that choice is final) of remaining as a ghost “neither here nor there,” leaving “an imprint of themselves upon the earth, to walk palely where their living selves once trod. But very few wizards choose that path.” Instead, most go on. Nick confesses to Harry that he knows “nothing of the secrets of death…for I chose my feeble imitation of life instead” (860-861). Ghosts seem to remain at places where they have connection; ghost Professor Binns continues teaching his History of Magic class uninterrupted by the Great Divide.

Ghosts still have their human personalities and frailties. Moaning Myrtle nurses her grudges and interest in unclothed prefects. Nick tells Harry after the year’s welcome feast that “I have never been guilty of cowardice in my life,” (209), yet later tells him that he remained behind as a ghost because “I was afraid of death” (861)

Despite some competitiveness and rivalries, ghosts “maintain links of friendship” (209), and Nick refers to “the spirit community” (HBP 165), which may include the larger ghost community, such as those who participate in the Headless Hunt and come to his deathday party (CoS 124; 129). The Hogwarts ghosts are loyal to the school and celebrate Voldemort’s defeat with the victors. One of them, Rowena Ravenclaw, gives Harry key information about the diadem.

PEEVES: Apparently without human origin, Peeves is not a ghost, but a mischief-making poltergeist, a spirit solid enough to move objects, throw things, fly, and cause destruction. Despite his annoying hostilities, he creates havoc against Umbridge (678), fights on the school’s side during the battle, and sings a victory song (DH 746).

HOGWARTS ELVES: These are happy and contented elves, treated well (GoF 376-382). They bravely fight with kitchen implements during the battle, led by Kreacher.

Hogwarts Students

Hogwarts students are a family within the wizarding world itself, and throughout their formative school years have opportunity to build friendships with those of differing ideologies; most, sadly, leave school with their prejudices intact. The frictions handed down by the four Hogwarts founders thrive and perpetuate in the Sorting of students into four competitive Houses according to character and personality. The Sorting Hat warns that these divisions are dangerous and that unity must prevail to save their way of life, “or we’ll crumble from within” (206-207). Dumbledore also makes pleas for unity. He tells Snape in the Prince’s Tale that “I sometimes think we sort too soon,” instead of giving children a chance to prove themselves (DH 680).

Each House has its own quarters, restricted to students in that House, in different areas of the castle, and students in each class share the same dormitory room during their seven years there. “While you are here,” says Professor McGonagall, “your house will be something like your family within Hogwarts” (SS 114).

Quidditch Teams

In a subset, we have the House Quidditch teams, which bond House and team members, but further House frictions; even the staff members, former Hogwarts students themselves, encourage this subtly or overtly. It would be more unifying to have teams comprised of students from all four Houses, to build understanding, tolerance, and friendship.

The DA

Hogwarts students from three houses form the revolutionary Dumbledore’s Army and work together as a family to learn defense against the Dark Arts. A secret club, the DA members sign an oath of secrecy, meet in a secret room for secret training, and have secret coins to inform them of meetings. They work together to learn defensive spells, and cheer each other on. This is the kind of unity the Sorting Hat would approve. When one member betrays them, it devastates them all.

The bonding goes further for some, including Neville, Luna, and Ginny, who keep their coins on them at all times, hoping for more of the connection that meant so much to them, and that faith and those coins help save Hogwarts during the Death Eater school invasion at the end of the next year and the persecution during Voldemort’s reign. The DA carries on during the Trio’s absence in DH, welcomes Harry back to Hogwarts as leader, and fights in the battle.

For Good or Ill

Family bonds extend beyond bloodlines and race. They are found in institutions, workplaces, teams, brotherhoods, clubs, social groups, organizations, and in Harry Potter, among the dead. These ties can be healthy or twisted, but they matter. None of us goes through life without such bonds.

I’m sure you all have so much to add, so fire away!