Brain Drippings

Jenny Sawyer wrote a review in the Christian Science Monitor of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in which she posits that the series “lacks the cornerstone of almost all great children’s literature: the hero’s moral journey.”

I have to wonder if she read the same books I did.

(spoilers follow)

Harry Potter, after all, willingly sacrifices himself, knowing he will die at Voldemort’s hand, but willing to go to that length to ensure Voldemort’s destruction. Can you imagine the Harry in the first book doing the same? I can’t, so obviously Harry has changed. Quite simply, he’s grown up. He’s come of age as a wizard and his actions in the last book are those of an adult faced with an impossible task and accepting it. What could be more moral?

Ms. Sawyer goes on to parrot one of the most common mistakes about the seventh book when she states that Harry defeated Voldemort. Anyone has who actually read the book knows this is not true, and the whole point of the conflict between Harry and Voldemort—from the very beginning when Voldemort marked Harry as the fulfillment of the prophecy—is that it has always been Voldemort himself who has defeated himself, over and over again. So it was in their final conflict when Voldemort tried to kill Harry, Harry tried to disarm Voldemort, and Voldemort’s own spell killed him.

Harry did not kill Voldemort. That is the most important truth of the books.

Ms Sawyer goes on to claim that Harry “walks the path of good unwaveringly”. I don’t agree with that, but I can see how someone might think that. However, the fact is that Harry had many people who were looking out for him and helping him and setting him right all along the way. He’s no more unwavering that Frodo Baggins or Charles Wallace, to use characters Ms Sawyer refers to herself, although her mentioning The Lord of the Rings in the same breath as ‘children’s literature’ I find as proof positive she’s never read The Lord of the Rings. It is most assuredly not a book written for children or intended for children and is quite above the grasp of many adults, much less children. But that is another argument for another time.

Harry is a heroic character who manages to navigate the many obstacles in his way over the course of seven books. He is a hero, and in that mold he is obviously for the most part good. That said, there are things that he’s done that are most certainly not good. Think about his attack on Draco, for example. He’s been conflicted in his choices and he’s had one glaring flaw all along, and that is his absolute certainty, sometimes justified and more often not, that Snape was loyal to Voldemort. In most children’s literature the absolute certainty of the child hero nearly always proves out; to find such a glaring error on the part of Harry shows him as merely mortal.He’s also found it very difficult to trust the adults in his life, and we have many examples throughout the books where he has obfuscated, prevaricated, or outright lied, in particular, to Dumbledore. He’s been more willing to trust his friends, but even here we see the echoes of the potential Voldemort in Harry as he has at times concealed things from his friends he shouldn’t have.

Now, as for the level of interest for each character, of course the ‘dark’ character of Snape is more compelling. Who’s more compelling, Darth Vader or Luke Skywalker? Beowulf or Grendel? Caesar or Brutus? Jesus or Judas? Is there even a contest? We are always drawn to the ‘dark’ characters. This is why the whole concept of the anti-hero exists in modern (and by modern I mean post-Austen) literature.

Also, keep in mind that Harry is very much the anti-Voldemort. Both orphaned as infants, both raised in less than wholesome homes, both descended from a long line of wizards on one side (opposite sides of the family too) and from Muggles on the other. Harry and Voldemort are more alike than any other two characters in the series short of Fred and George; yet they are also polar opposites. Voldemort never had friends and saw no value in things like friendship and love, while Harry never had friends and was desperate for that connection. His friendships with Ron and Hermoine one could easily argue are what kept him from becoming another Voldemort. Imagine Harry sitting on the train with Draco and becoming a Slytherin. Would we have had someone to challenge the rise of You-Know-Who? Certainly, but only to settle who was going to be the next Dark Lord.

It is natural, on reading the final book of a series, to review the entire series rather than just the final ‘chapter’, and I will do that; but first I want to look at just this book on its own.

The most impressive thing about The Deathly Hallows is that it is not merely a wrap-up of the story thus far. It is not simply a tying-off of all the story threads, but is its own book and its own story as well. Of course, the key parts of the book are going to be the resolution of the long-standing threads.

On its own merits, the book really works well. The frustration of Harry, Ron, and Hermoine as they spend months in hiding with no clear direction makes the culmination of Harry’s quest all the more suspenseful. And it is interesting that once more the forces assailed against Harry are the very source of the key information that ultimately leads to their destruction. Had Harry not been captured and taken to Malfoy Manor how would he have ever found out that there was something in the Lestrange vault at Gringots? Had he not been captured, where would he have found the help to break into Gringots?

We see this repeated throughout the books, where the key decision that allows Harry to succeed is made on the part of his enemy. It is an old theme of evil containing the seed of its own destruction, but it is used masterfully in these books, and in this one especially.

From the time of our heroes’ capture the book races toward its conclusion at a near frenetic pace; we really feel the immediacy of the choices that Harry makes, and to some extent the choices he’s made all along.

In concluding the series, Ms Rowling has managed to wrap up just about every outstanding thread and give a resolution to most of the characters. There are no unanswered questions left over from the story thus far and the only frustration is in not knowing more about what happened after to some of the characters. What happens to Luna? What do Harry, Ron, Hermoine, and Ginny do other than settle down and have kids? What about the staff at Hogwarts, and who is headmaster after Snape? Sure, there’s a lot more that we would like to know about the events after this book, but I think every question we had from the first six books is covered, and covered well.

Ms Rowling has done something remarkable that very few authors manage to really do, and that is to create a fully realized world for their story to take place in. Oh sure, ever writer does that to some lesser extent, but it is very rare to see the attention to detail and the internal consistency that the Harry Potter books exhibit.

These are masterpieces that will take their rightful place atop the mountain of great children’s books. The Hobbit, The Chronicles of Narnia, The Wind in the Willows, Kidnapped and Treasure Island, The Secret Garden, White Fang, The House at Pooh Corner, the Dr Seuss books, The Little House on the Prairie series, Tom Sawyer and even such non-children’s books as The Lord of the Rings and Huck Finn.

Now, just to be clear, despite the fact that the Harry Potter books are quite clearly children’s literature and, for example, Huckleberry Finn is not, that is not in my mind a denigration of Harry Potter. There’s nothing wrong with children’s literature; at its best it proves itself to appeal to the child in all of us. Huckleberry Finn may be read in eager anticipation by 12 year-olds fresh from reading Tom Sawyer. They may struggle through it, but they aren’t going to really enjoy it and it will be a bit of a let-down when they were expecting a sequel to Tom Sawyer. Technically it is, but of course as adults we know better: Huckleberry Finn is a book for adults and only the rarest of children will be able to read it and appreciate it for what it is.