The latest Harry Potter book, The Deathly Hallows, is the most action packed adventure in the series, and it shows Harry as a very different kind of hero than we might have expected him to be. If you don't want to know any more, go away now.
What surprises about this final book in the series is how much Potter is a prisoner of history and of his conscience. In the end it is the secretive prescience of Dumbledore that introduces Potter to his fate. It is finally Dumbledore's and Harry's recognition of their imperfection and unsuitability to wield absolute power that delivers them finally to victory over the hubris of Voldemort.
Unfamiliar as I am with many classic stories, it is clear that among contemporary stories of heroism and conflicts between good and evil, Potter's series is unique in many ways. Foremost and most striking about Rowling's series is the extent to which so much depends upon Potter because he is afraid of involving other people. I never get a sense in this book that the themes and the terms of the conflict much envelop many other characters. It's a war, but it's Harry's war. Rowling does not use the passive voice at all - there is no grand sweep of history, no mass hysteria nor groundswell to frame the actions of the main characters. There is only their own personal sacrifice and what they can see individually. They are trading the chance to fight and perhaps die not with patriotism or some abstract good or destiny, but the things they can see in their own lives. Harry's anger at Dumbledore for not being more forthcoming is a constant theme. Part of me is wishing for him to get over his anger and raise the crowd, but Harry's mission is Harry's mission and he wishes other people to stay out of his fight. This turns out to be a fateful decision.
Rowling does back up a piece to larger contexts. One finally makes some sense of the scope of the wizarding world in context with its relationship to Muggles and magical creatures. Some of the murky origins of racism within the wizarding world is brought to light, but in a somewhat clumsy fashion. Certainly the relationship between Goblins and Wizards has been troubled, but it has never really been discussed in any of the books before. The nature of such running feuds don't impinge on Harry's world except in the rather high-minded persnickety antics of Hermione regarding SPEW and the question of house-elves. But that is isolated as a co-dependent relationship throughout the series, not as something wizards like Dumbledore and Grindelwald might have cooked up according to legends of wizarding power and destiny. So we are left to figure out exactly what the origins of Voldemorts attractions are aside from him just being a lonely brilliant kid with a sad childhood, and what reasons the Death Eaters have for coming to power. In other words, they are just ordinary baddies and stupids instead of some eventuality of ethical conflicts within the wizarding world itself. Ahh, clear. Well, it is a book for kids.
But the great triumph of Rowling is her love-centric model, and in the end, it has to be said that finally the most sympathetic character in the entire series is Severus Snape. Snape's tale puts him directly between the forces of good and evil and as his bargain with Dumbledore is revealed, every one of us that had faith that he was truly a prince in disguise is vindicated at long last. Ahh poor Snape. I almost want to go back and re-read other books just so I could give him an extra dose of love for his sacrifices. Of course we all had an inkling from the very first when Snape saved Potter in the Quidditch match, and during his tender mercies towards Lupin.
Rowling has provided Americans with a peak at Britain's ideas about schooling and bureaucracy. It's interesting that she hadn't included any Americans in her tale at all. Yet we ate it all up. I do wonder what's next for her, not that she needs to do anything else.
Recent Comments