Monday, May 21, 2012

SHOULD HARRY POTTER BE CONSIDERED LITERATURE?

 

HARRY

In the 600-year-old halls of St Andrews University, a group of leading academics is discussing a piece of literature. Not just any old literature: this, they say, is “the narrative experience of an entire generation”. In a series of 50 lectures the scholars will debate themes of death, empathy and paganism, as well as comparisons with J R R Tolkien and Chaucer. Their subject? The seven Harry Potter books by J K Rowling.

The conference, A Brand of Fictional Magic: Reading Harry Potter as Literature, is the first event in the world to look at the series as a literary text. Sixty academics from the US, South Africa, India and Australia will examine the themes, allegories and narrative structure of the boy wizard’s adventures. Organiser John Patrick Pazdziora, from the university’s School of English, has invited discussion on topics such as British national identity, politics and education.

“As a literary text it’s a fertile area of study,” he tells me. “There are so many allusions and connections to myths in her work. Now that the films are over and Pottermore.com has launched, it’s time to start analysing them.”

Harry Potter is the ultimate story of good versus evil; a young hero who battles demons and vanquishes dragons to save the world. They have sold 300 million copies worldwide and been translated into 50 languages. But does its success really elevate it from teen fantasy to the subject of an academic conference?

“The books themselves don’t merit study because the prose is too basic,” says author and literary critic Philip Womack. “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.”

Novelist and children’s critic Amanda Craig describes the conference as “wonderfully eccentric”. “The most important thing Rowling did was to reassert the primacy of storytelling,” she explains. “She may not be a great stylist but she uses myth and fairytale well and writes with brilliant clarity.”

In 2008, a conference at Magdalen College, Oxford, debated the global relevance of Rowling’s fairytale world. There is also a wealth of books on the wizard, including Looking for God in Harry Potter by John Granger, the conference’s keynote speaker. Nine years ago, the word “muggle” – a non-wizard – even earned a place in the Oxford English Dictionary.

And it’s not difficult to apply literary analysis to Rowling’s novels. Hermione makes a nice feminist figure; Ron is the stoical sidekick and Lord Voldemort a Satan-like force of evil. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows has foundations in Chaucer’s The Pardoner’s Tale, while Harry’s move from Privet Drive to Hogwarts has been compared to the Dickens classic Oliver Twist.

But, says Professor Greg Currie of Nottingham University: “It’s difficult to sustain creativity over seven novels. As a result, the ideas get stale quickly. Looking at the phenomenal success of Rowling’s creation – rather than its literary merit – would be more fruitful.”

Indeed, studying Harry Potter as a work of literature turns the literary world upside-down. If Dumbledore and Hagrid can be granted the status of Don Quixote and Hamlet, it’s alarming to contemplate what’s next. A dystopian interpretation of A Very Hungry Caterpillar? The Twilight series as an A-level text?

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.

One thing, however, is sure that many young people were re-introduced to the wonder of reading!

No comments:

Post a Comment