Harry Potter Is Not a Children’s Book.
What defines a children’s book? Is it the intended age of the reader by the author? Or is it the genre, something simple to follow containing a good moral? Maybe it’s the publishers targeting a specific niche for sales? Are children’s books classed as inferiors over classics such as the work by Shakespeare, Dickens and Tolstoy?
As you've probably already figured out by the title of this blog, I do not believe that the Harry Potter series are children’s books. Especially when people try to class them as such to demean them and judge them as inferiors within the literature world. If you look past the magic, the ghosts, the giants and the elves you’ll notice that the Harry Potter series is submerged with metaphors and themes that ‘adult’ books do not cover and adults themselves seem to shy away from.
I am twenty years old. When the first book came out, I was two years old. Not old enough to read them but I remember being around 7 years old when I first picked up Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone and I have never looked back since. I know people that are older and younger than myself who thoroughly enjoy the novels. Does this show that the Harry Potter series is a children’s book?
The series dealt with a multitude of themes and issues such as war, and the tragedies that come with it, racism, classicism, sexism, feminism, religion, homophobia, slavery, mental illnesses, death, prejudice and general ignorance. In my opinion, no other novel or series has covered these issues quite so dramatically.
Let’s take a look at some of the issues that are covered within the Harry Potter series.
Take a prominent character within the series, Remus Lupin, a professor at Hogwarts and one of James Potter’s best friends. Lupin was afflicted with lycanthropy during his childhood. Lycanthropy is the state in which a person finds themselves turning into a fearsome and deadly near-wolf.
Additionally, J.K. Rowling stated that the issue of Lupin being a werewolf was a metaphor for HIV.
“I know that I've said publicly that Remus Lupin was supposed to be on the H.I.V. metaphor. It was someone who had been infected young, who suffered stigma, who had a fear of infecting others, who was terrified he would pass on his condition to his son. And it was also a way of examining why people might become embittered when they’re treated that unfairly.” (Rowling, JK: 2008).
Lupin is looked down on those from the Slytherin house, especially Professor Snape who ‘outs’ his condition which leads to Lupin’s resignation from Hogwarts.
Werewolves tend to live outside of society due to their unwarranted prejudice; however, Lupin doesn't conform to this as he’s come to realise that he didn't have a choice in becoming a werewolf, but he can make the best of it, realising it doesn't make him less of a wizard. There are quite a few similarities between H.I.V. and lycanthropy.
Lycanthropy: is chronic, and while incurable, can be mitigated by the Wolfsbane Potion.
HIV: cannot be cured by medication but can be stalled from becoming AIDs.
Lycanthropy: is thought to preclude having a family but Lupin marries Nymphadora Tonks and they have a non-werewolf child.
HIV: a HIV sufferer can have a child whom does not suffer from the condition.
Lycanthropy: is an acquired disease, often acquired through negligence.
HIV: people must take proper precautions against contracting the virus.
Lycanthropy: can be acquired non-negligently — the young Remus Lupin was not negligent.
HIV: Early AID’s sufferers contracted the HIV virus through blood transfusions — something they themselves were not negligent about.
Lycanthropy: could have been mitigated by earlier government action — Fenrir Greyback was a known werewolf but remained at large until the Battle of Hogwarts.
HIV: A prevention found earlier (amongst the prejudice) would have prevented people from suffering from the virus.
Lycanthropy: is associated with moral turpitude — implicit, but the tone with which most characters discuss werewolves is suggestive.
HIV: sufferers are looked down upon and often shunned from society.
Lycanthropy: is thought to be much more communicable and dangerous to others than it actually is — parents of students rejected a werewolf teacher despite Lupin posing no threat.
HIV: sufferers pose near to no threat to others and yet people fear them just the same.
With just one character, J.K. Rowling addressed the issue of prejudice, and ignorance. Would a children’s book deal with these issues as openly as the Harry Potter series has?
Another example that can be looked at from the series is the protagonist, Harry Potter. The first book alone deals with a double murder of the parents of Harry who leave their baby as an orphan of war. He then grows up in abusive conditions, sleeping in a broom closet,whilst living with the Dursley’s.
Once Harry starts at Hogwarts he’s exposed to a society that focuses on the class system. There are three main social classes within the wizarding world of Harry Potter. There are the pure bloods, half-bloods, and the muggle born (mudblood).
Pure blood wizards are those with a purely magical lineage, half-blood wizards usually have one magical parent and one muggle parent, and muggle born wizards were born to two muggle parents.
Some pure blood wizards (the Malfoy family, for example) tend look down on those who are of less-pure bloodlines, thus creating hatred. Racism is central within Hogwarts with signified by the use of terms such as ‘mudblood’.
Ron Weasley is a pure blood, Harry Potter is a half blood, and Hermione Granger is a muggle born. As Ron associates himself with ‘half-bloods’ and ‘muggles’ he’s also looked down upon, especially by the Slytherin’s who class him as a traitor. Throughout the hierarchy of magical blood and creatures J.K. Rowling creates an entire world of class and prejudices.
It isn't just the human characters who are subject to racist treatment. There are magical creatures that are seen as unimportant; for example, house-elves and giants are seen as dim-witted creatures. Furthermore, despite house-elves possessing considerable power, they are servants to wizarding families.
House-elves are slaves however they seem to love serving their masters — as Dobby does the Malfoys. However, what disgusts most character, and readers, is how no-one seems to care about his mistreatment. House-elves are required to stay loyal to their families even when the families are evil and cruel.
One thing's for certain however, the Harry Potter phenomenon will continue to rise in popularity. As each generation comes to start the series afresh, so do another set of thoughts and conclusions. Maybe one day the series will be classed as a classic within its own rights and J.K. Rowling will listed along with Shakespeare and Austen.
Do you still believe that Harry Potter is a children’s book series with no depth and merely about wizards and witches? Let me know what your opinions are by commenting below! All feedback is welcome. Now to leave Potter-heads with a sign off that ought to make you smile.
Yours Solemnly,
Sadia Parveen.
@Sadia_x95
