Canon or Canon You Not Ignore The Cursed Child
Or How I learned to stop worrying and love JK’s twitter
Books and series’ today are facing issues that academia has not had to worry about in the past. When Tolkien finished publishing The Lord of the Rings in 1955, the canon for that universe was finalized. Since no film adaptations were created until after Tolkien’s death, the adaptations are viewed as derivative of the original books and any inconsistencies mean that the movies contradict the canon. But what is considered canon when the author has input into the film adaptations? Or runs an interactive website centered around the universe? Or approves and then co-authors plays? Or keeps tweeting new information nearly a decade after the last book was released? This is exactly what J.K. Rowling has done with the Harry Potter universe and while all of these platforms should be considered “canon” these things can (and in the past, have been known to) contradict each other. As academics, the community needs to ensure that we are discussing the same thing.
Therefore, there needs to be an agreed upon hierarchy of canon for fans and academics that allows for discussion of any existing universe.
Why do we need a hierarchy of canon?
A thorough understanding of the extensive Harry Potter universe should be essential before any serious discussion about the texts begins. Harry Potter is one of the most popular literary franchises in history. The original book series has been adapted into a variety of print and digital mediums, and continues to spawn spinoffs to this day. It is also a universe that is still actively discussed on social media and in academia. It is especially important to have an agreed upon hierarchy because some of these sources contradict one another and it is essential that there is consensus on which sources supersede the others.
There are many ways to determine the importance of each source but the three most important factors are authorship, audience size, and medium permanence. While looking at authorship, the most important factor is JK Rowling’s role in the text. As the universe’s creator, her ideas on this universe are more legitimate than anyone else’s. This includes sources in which her role has been watered down. Regarding audience size, a larger audience will legitimize a text. Since defining the canon is important because it decides how we discuss the texts, texts that have reached larger audiences will be more easily adopted into that canon. Finally, on the subject of permanence of the text, the longer a text is guaranteed to last, the more legitimate the source. As academics speculate on literature by building off of the ideas that came before, it is helpful to have sources that are more permanently accessible.
The Hierarchy
The hierarchy I’ll examine in this article examines only five sources. However, since we have an understanding of the rationale behind their order, any source can fit into this schema. The tiers from most legitimate to least are as follows: Dumbledore Tier containing the main book series, McGonagall Tier containing the Pottermore website, Hagrid Tier containing the movies, Snape Tier containing The Cursed Child, and Generic Defense Against the Dark Arts Professor Tier containing statements made by J.K. Rowling on social media and at press events.
Dumbledore Tier
Dumbledore Tier sources are placed into this group because there is no higher authority. What is written in these sources is “law of the land”, or “law of the fictional universe” so to speak. These sources will be well legitimized in all three of the categories. It could be argued that the main book series is the only source that can occupy this tier.
The main book series consists of ideas that are completely comprised by J.K. Rowling. The only time the audience wavers from her sole authorship is when the books in this main series are translated into other languages. There is also the issue that audio book actors such as Stephen Fry and Jim Dale have added their own interpretations through tone and voice. With Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone selling 107 million copies (sixth highest in units sold), and the other seven installments selling between 50 and 65 million units, the original series has an improbably large audience. Finally, unlike digital sources, print sources offer a permanence that ensures those ideas will be around for generations. It is impossible to edit, redact, or delete things that Rowling put into these books.
McGonagall Tier
McGonagall Tier sources fully support the higher tier, but at the same time, bring their own magic to the canon. One exceptional example of this is Pottermore, the website for the Harry Potter fandom which features new writings from J.K. Rowling. These writings often explore undeveloped (or barely developed) aspects of the world around the books. Exploring international schools was only touched on in one book, and even then, the action happened at Hogwarts and we only catch little snippets of information. Rowling has provided more information on Durmstang and Beaubatons as well as a handful of other schools and has even written a new 5,000-word story about the founding of the American school, Ilvermorny.
While Pottermore is an interactive multimedia site, which J.K. Rowling isn’t solely responsible for creating, the elements that help expand the Harry Potter Universe are Rowling’s writings. These writings never contradict anything in the books and generally are used to expand the universe outside of the plotline that follows Harry, Ron, and Hermione. This is usually done by fleshing out background characters, creatures, and locations. These writings are composed and signed by J.K. Rowling herself. Even though J.K. Rowling is sole author of the Pottermore writings, one thing that keeps this source from becoming a top tier is the fact that the audience is quite a bit smaller. The Pottermore website did not have 1 million users sorted into houses until about a year after release, and that was when the site was much more interactive. Being a digital source, the permanence of the text can also be called into question. In 2015, the site was completely reconstructed from the ground up. Users were still able to sort themselves into houses, and pick their wands, but the exploration of the magical world was cut to make more room for Rowling’s writings and promotion for Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. This further legitimized the text because it strengthened Rowling’s role on the site, but also serves as a reminder of how temporary this source could be.
Hagrid Tier
Hagrid tier sources are so named, because while well meaning, they often make poor choices. These choices may be made for a variety of reasons, but the fact remains that they can go against the rules established by the higher-order tiers. The most notable example would be the films based on the original books. Aspects such as internal dialogue are lost on film audiences and must be represented with dialogue or action that isn’t in the book. The inevitabilities of working within the real world means casting changes occur to accommodate headmasters who pass on a few years earlier than expected. This is the first tier where we see contradictions occur, sometimes to the detriment of the universe itself. For example, some feminists have criticized the portrayal of Hermione throughout the series for being a Mary Sue. In the books, Hermione is portrayed as an excellent student, and strong female lead, but she had her flaws. She was often unsure of herself, was overly concerned with failure, and had to work hard to fit into the wizarding world. In the films, however, these faults are either omitted, or cast onto other characters such as Ron.
One clear reason that these changes are even possible is the shift in authorship. Unlike her books and Pottermore writings, Rowling is no longer the sole author of these texts. Producers, directors, and actors all influence the portrayal of these characters and scenes. Additionally, the director of these films changes throughout the series which drastically changes the tone. Even though the films change what some would consider fundamental details, they still rank highly on the hierarchy because of the large viewership. The audience for the films is a little hard to calculate. Numbers are not released on tickets sold, those tickets sell for varying prices, and some viewers watch multiple times. However, the worst a film has grossed worldwide was Prisoner of Akaban at $796 million, while the best grossing film in the series was Deathly Hallows part 2 with $1.3 billion. If we use an average ticket price of $15, which is rather conservative considering the number of children’s tickets sold, this leaves us with an estimate of 53–89 million tickets sold per movie, resulting in the second biggest audience of the franchise behind the first book, and topping many of the original books in the series. This extremely large audience, as well as the permanence of having texts on physical media like DVDs and Blu Rays that can’t be altered or deleted, make these texts influential in determining canon even if Rowling isn’t the sole author.
Snape Tier
At the Snape tier, the next level down, the authority of the texts as canon gets a little murky, and while some fans may not like it, these texts still are in fact canon and must be shown the respect they deserve. The most controversial addition to the canon since the original septet was completed has been The Cursed Child. While the stage production has been lauded for its showmanship, publication of the screenplay to a wider audience has left some fans in turmoil. The fact that it reads like bad fanfiction and makes the grave error of changing the mechanics of time travel established in the books has many fans and academics wanting to disregard this text entirely because it is not up to the high standards associated with the books and films in the franchise. Herein lies the problem. Can we discard the text entirely? While it may not be a text that academics chose to pour over, or fans chose to reread, the fact remains that Voldemort had a daughter with Belatrix LeStrange, Harry Potter and Draco Malfoy’s sons are best friends, and the Trolley Witch has secret knife hands.
Authorship of this text is the most highly debated issue on whether to accept this text into the canon. The script of The Cursed Child was written by Jack Thorne, the West End production was directed by John Tiffany, and the story is attributed to J.K. Rowling with Thorne and Tiffany. The question that most fans want to know is, how much of that story is Rowling’s? While her name takes center stage on the dust jacket, the story makes some serious flaws by contradicting the established canon such as the aforementioned time travel mechanics. Regardless of how much she contributed to the story, the fact remains that she put her name on it. Additionally, the audience for The Cursed Child is much smaller than the original septet. The stage production has only been performed in a handful of cities, and the script, while having impressive sales in its first month, has come nowhere close to any of the books. Finally, the permanence of the text is more difficult to interpret than other texts. The script has already been published twice, once as a “Rehearsal Edition” in 2016 and then the “Official Playscript” in 2017. I don’t have the patience to reread the text (much less study both versions in depth), but we may very well have or get a text that not only contradicts the original canon, but a previous version of itself.
Generic DADA Faculty Tier
The bottom of the canon totem pole has about as much clout as your run of the mill Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher at Hogwarts. Fans may or may not approve of what they have to say, but if they don’t like it, don’t worry. It may not be important in a year. It is still canon though. A good example of this is J.K. Rowling’s media presence. Between 2011 and 2016, new information about the universe came from sources outside of mainstream publishing. These include official channels such as Pottermore, but also includes unofficial media such as J.K. Rowling’s Twitter and interviews that she had given. This information was often solicited by fans or current events around which Rowling’s social conscious wanted to comment on.
The only reasons that these texts are considered canon is because they pass the test of being completely authored by J.K. Rowling. In regards to audience and permanence, however, these are the worst sources possible. The audience for most of this media is going to be only the most fanatical of Rowling’s fans. The information in her tweets or interviews do not reach the general public unless they get picked up by news outlets, and even then, they are not usually covered in larger sources. The biggest issue with this information is the lack of permanence, especially on social media. This medium can be edited or removed at Rowling’s discretion, and with the exception of screenshots from third parties, there may be no way for academics to refer back to these ideas. With social media’s nature of trying to stay abreast of new information, old ideas are pushed down making existing information from the past even harder to find. Rowling averages about 8 tweets per day which quickly pushes any information about the universe into obscurity. Even if these ideas aren’t deleted, they may still prove near impossible to find.
Why This Is Hierarchy Needed
For fans, this level of understanding is helpful because it now gives them an understanding of what is, so that they can speculate on new and potential possibilities. Every day, discussion continues on the what-ifs of the Harry Potter universe and “headcanons” are being written and shared on Harry Potter themed twitters, tumblrs, subreddits, and blogs. These “headcanons” will not make the hierarchy, but fans can rest assured that they aren’t contracting the existing universe in which they want to discuss. This ranking can also be used to determine the quality of fanfiction. While fanfiction largely focuses on alternate realities of the existing universe, the constants between those universes can be scrutinized more carefully.
As academics, this level of understanding is crucial. With multiple texts depicting the same universe, we need an agreed upon standard with which to discuss the texts. Just as the natural sciences have standards for measuring distance, volume, and time, we need standards for discussing canons in contexts where the established world is critical to analyzing the texts. Additionally, in a time when new media is changing the way we view and interact with texts, it is helpful to know how to organize these texts. Not only will this give academics a way to engage with existing texts, but it will also give us a way to address future texts set in these universes. By focusing on tangible concepts like authorship, audience, and permanence, we can find places for every available text whether it be five new films in the case of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them or Chocolate Frog cards found at The Wizarding World of Harry Potter in Orlando. Academics can choose to debate the importance of these aspects on texts, but with a hierarchy in place, that discussion now has somewhere to start.
Author’s note: This article was presented at the 2016 PCA/ACA conference in Seattle and minimally tweaked in 2019.
