Introduction
J.K Rowling’s Harry Potter story began in 1997 with Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. It instantaneously created a frenzy in the adolescent reading community. Parents and teachers alike were amazed at how the story captured children’s imaginations and hearts worldwide, resulting in a phenomenon not seen in years–the preference for books over television (Blake, 2002: p. 27). The book discusses the story of an orphaned boy who finds himself under the brutal guardianship of a middle-class “muggle” (an epithet for “mortal”) uncle and an aunt who resent their “different” nephew. When the magical community recognizes him as the most powerful wizard in the world, his relatives reluctantly allow him to attend Hogwarts. He can perfect his magic skills at this boarding school. In the tradition of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, the book illustrates the archetypal cosmic duel between good and evil (Gupta, 2003: p. 33). However, some critics have missed this overarching theme and characterized the book as Satanic by focusing only on the fact that the story is set in the supernatural world (Whited, 2002). A significant body of texts circulates in online domains that attempt to ideologically undermine, resist and intentionally re-work J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter intent. To understand why fans hate it, why they enjoy these texts and find pleasure in them, it is imperative to identify what is causing the anti-Harry Potter frustration among a group of fans. Using Ian Eng’s critical analysis of audience-text responsiveness, I will examine anti-Harry Potter commentary through a detailed assessment of textual displeasure, its reasons and how the audience justifies their textual discontent.
Harry Potter critics
When texts reach international recognition, hatred is often expressed. Some individuals wish to undermine these texts and challenge their legitimacy in cultural institutions such as education (Zipes, 2001: p. 41). Harry Potter is one of these texts. Because of its artistic success, individuals feel it would threaten the cultural order if these texts were placed in educational institutions. Ian Eng’s theoretical framework provides insightful observations. Here is an example of an individual who dislikes Harry Potter with a furious passion:
I remember when Harry Potter consisted of shitty books that only stupid kids enjoyed. It made insulting their worth quite painless and easy – though with this upcoming Harry Potter revolution, including movies, action figures, colouring books, cartoons, comics, and all sorts of other absolutely pointless bullshit marketing… – Justin (http://potterforums.com/)
Justin is frustrated by Harry Potter’s mass cultural motivations for perpetuating capital by any means necessary. In this case, Justin states that the Harry Potter phenomenon is accompanied by various worldly goods, such as “movies, action figures, colouring books, cartoons, comics…” Harry Potter receivers feel it is simply the societal need to generate more capital consumption (Gotz, 2005: p. 21). Ang (1985) says an individual who resists mass cultural ideologies disapproves of mass-produced and mass-marketed products. For simplicity, we shall call them “haters.” Harry Potter also attracts haters. Haters state that it is a “bad culture.” Subsequently, a “good culture” is formulated (Ang, 1985: p. 94).
Dichotomizing Harry Potter
Justin and many others dichotomize exemplary textual production. Consequently, they assert that the results of consuming these “worthy culture” texts are uninteresting. These individuals justify their dissatisfaction with Harry Potter because of its mainstream orientation (Whited, 2002). This view coincides with Theodore Adorno’s mentality and popular culture essays. Adorno says popular cultural texts undermine the legitimacy of a “democratic” state (Adorno & Horkheimer, 1997: p. 20). These texts divert democracy members to other irrelevant objects (television, magazines, mass-produced literary texts) (ibid, p. 35). Mass cultural texts have attracted discontent since the dawn of the Gutenberg Press when ready-made texts were circulated worldwide. Today, textbooks are produced massively and promoted through every means necessary (ibid, p. 29).
As Justin stated, these texts exemplify multiple forms and cross-genres. Adorno felt that this was a threat, and Justin did as well- this is the reason for their hatred of such texts. Since haters know these mass cultural ideologies (that mass products are created to facilitate capitalist goals), their logic is centred around Adorno’s traditional views that there is high and low art. Adorno says common arts are products promoted by mass culture for mainstream consumption and to generate more capital (Reijen, 1938: p. 22) — a reason for their discontent, their disapproval of mainstream “pointless bullshit,” as Justin has conveniently stated. Their presence ensures the struggle to maintain a “positive culture” versus a “naughty culture.”
“See what I have become?” he asked. “Mere shadow and vapour…I have form only when I can share another’s body…but there have always been those willing to let me into their hearts and minds…Unicorn blood has strengthened me, these past weeks…you saw faithful Quirrell drinking it for me in the forest…And once I have the Elixir of Life, I can create a body of my own…Now why don’t you give me that Stone in your pocket?” (Harry Potter, p. 213)
Ang (1985) had yet to account for another exciting hatred. Harry Potter has a distinct audience-textual critique. These anti-Harry Potter commentators have a tertiary level of hostility. They have found a way to compare it to the present day by arguing that its universe is questionable. They also say that these texts seek to change religious thinking. Many readers situate Harry Potter as the anti-Christ, and Harry Potter promotes occultist practices. They cite passages from Harry Potter to situate their frustration, which runs very much like this:
Fans enjoy Harry Potter ironically
Ang (1985) also describes another type of audience that enjoys a product but realizes its mass cultural innovations (96). These audiences are called the “ironical viewing audience,” according to Ang (1985). These individuals “state explicitly that they are fond of it while simultaneously employing the norms and judgments the ideology prescribes” (Ang, 1985: p. 96). Here is an example of an ironic viewer:
I love reading Harry Potter, but I know everyone says it’s driving capitalism, but I don’t care what they think. I know it does, but that’s not the point, you understand. I love reading it because it’s funny sometimes, especially the storyline, even though it’s severely clichéd, hahaha – JackRabbit (http://potterforums.com/)
Jack Rabbit likes Harry Potter ironically. While he sees Harry Potter as a clichéd story that promotes capitalism, he enjoys it because of its pleasing qualities. His pleasure, on the other hand, seems ironic since he finds the plot humorous. Jack Rabbit knows this story is a “bad object” (Ang, 1985: p. 96); therefore, it contradicts his enjoyment of Harry Potter. However, he “‘solves’ the contradiction between mass culture ideology’s moral and experiencing pleasure in [Harry Potter]: with mockery and irony” (Ang, 1985: p. 97). These people love Harry Potter. They find it increasingly difficult to justify their pleasure, knowing it is mass-produced.
How do Harry Potter Fans Justify their Fandom?
The final audience type Ang illustrates is a “loving” fan community. These fans express their enjoyment in two ways: 1) by “internalizing the judgements of the ideology of mass culture” (Ang, 1985: p. 104) and 2) by deploying protectionist strategies to “[challenge] the ideology of mass culture” (ibid: p. 105). Firstly, an example of how they internalize mass cultural ideologies can be seen in this example:
I realize how terrible it can be for someone to conform to Harry Potter’s morals automatically. I’m also aware of how it can reproduce Western cultural beliefs, but these books are worthwhile because they can help you explore what they are about. You can’t be gullible to it. I think this is an insightful way of looking at our society – JimBeanFan
This comment appears vague and ambiguous, as Ang explains. JimBeanFan likes Harry Potter because he can explain his position; however, he is very vague in his moral stance (Ang, 1985: p. 105). Secondly, Harry Potter fans may exercise perfectionist strategies in arguments confronting and disintegrating mass cultural ideologies. Here are two examples of perfectionist strategies:
Harry Potter helps us all, even if we don’t know it. If we don’t like what’s happening now, it is another world to jump into. For a while, you can disappear and get immersed in the character’s thoughts and emotions. And you can relate to them at times! You know them and gain a friend. Way to go, J.K. Rowling, you rock – Nashi110 (http://potterforums.com/)
Sorry on anyone’s behalf, but we are Harry Potter fans and proud of them, too, so we tend to protect the story. However, it is an excellent story from someone who thought reading was a waste of time. However, I believe it has changed me. I love it and now I love to read, so why not try it or watch the movies so you won’t feel alienated from your friends? – Clau_goddess (http://potterforums.com/)
Here, Nashi110 and Clau_goddess must defend themselves against those critical of their Harry Potter fan interests. These individuals recognize these cultural forms as disdaining popular cultural forms. Therefore, they must stand out from them by liking [Harry Potter] and not disavow it (Ang, 1985: p. 106). To defend themselves, Nash and Clau both maintain a “state of unease” (ibid. p. 106). Their emotional defences are usually hurled at by haters and accompanied by rationales for their dynamic resistance.
Grossberg (1992) divides the world into a dichotomy of those who understand them (Us) and those who do not (Them) (58). People who dislike famous texts and dislike their readers often make this distinction. Justin, for example, ridiculed those who liked Harry Potter, and his discontent grew once the “Harry Potter revolution” started. However, each fan invests time significantly differently than the next. These investments can come in the form of “affect.” Grossberg (1992) states that “effect is what gives ‘color’, ‘tone’, or ‘texture’ to our experiences” (57). Those who hate Harry Potter do not understand its fans’ affective sensibility, so they resist haters.
Conclusion
The Family-Friendly Libraries Association cautions that Harry Potter books are inappropriate due to their “occult” themes, violence, and anti-family bias (Gotz, 2005: p. 22). Most parents disagree with the public reading of the book in elementary schools. Yet, American municipalities placed restrictions on students in the first to fourth grades taking the book out of school libraries (Blake, 2002: p. 73). In 2000, after a handful of parents complained that the story glorified witchcraft, the Durham Regional School Board. The school board got parents to sign a consent form before allowing students to read Harry Potter books in classrooms (Gotz, 2005: p. 12).
Nevertheless, others see in Harry Potter a Christ figure that alone can save the world from the Prince of Darkness (Reijen, 1938: p. 16). The book has even become the subject of theological reflection groups for families in several Canadian Christian churches. With the production of films based on novels, Rowling’s books continue to soar, and they are quickly becoming classics in children’s literature. It was still possible in 2007 to buy a hardcover first edition for $11,000 (Gupta, 2003: p. 35). The American Library Association has bestowed on this acclaimed children’s classic the dubious distinction of being the most frequently challenged book of the twenty-first century.
