Characterizing Reality in Harry Potter

Characterizing Reality In Harry Potter The most important component in writing a novel is the creation of characters who are harmonious and who are believable on at least some level. But, regardless of how much influence fantasy has in a text, all characters must inevitably have at least some grounding in reality. I suspect that would be more difficult to include the same amount of reality in writing a fantasy novel, since the author of such a work must first decide how much the fantasy aspect of his or her novel should affect its characters. As near as I can tell, the method of characterization in the fantasy genre can take two directions. On the one hand, the main characters of a novel can express some characteristics which have been de-familiarized from what one would normally expect in a more conventional novel (i.e. a novel not of the fantasy genre). A prime example of this sort of character is one of another race, particularly when the race in question is different in some way from humans, such as the suppressed emotions of Star Trek’s Vulcans, or the exceptionally long lives of Elves. Main characters of this sort exist less as a study in reality, and are more commonly found within the epic fantasy genre. In the other method of characterization, main characters remain strictly mundane in their appearance and attitude and thus gear more towards a commentary on everyday society. Intertwined within the last of these two possibilities that Harry Potter, his friends, teachers, and foes exist in.
Catherine and Jack Deaval claim that “Harry Potter is not really about magic, but about character” (50). All of the important characters in the series are human (or mostly so, in the case of Hagrid) and non-human characters only appear at intervals, both to offer aid and act as a limitation, and even then are not very likely seen again . This alone is a great contributor to the realism of the characters in Harry Potter. The names of characters in the novels contribute to their realism, such as the case of Harry whose “ordinariness” is “magnificently emphasized by his name, which clearly stands out as plain and simple beside Dumbledore, McGonagall, or Draco Malfoy” and “underscores his ‘everyman’ nature” (Nikolajeva 131). Harry’s last name, Potter, may also allude to the trade itself, which serves to further the realism with which he is portrayed. Even names like Albus (which means either “white” or “wise” in Latin), Sirius (the dog star) or Malfoy (French for “bad faith”) are realistic in the sense that they describe the character to which they are attached, allowing the reader to gain some sense of the character’s true nature before even getting to know them. Critics of the series today still continue to attack the dull elements of Harry Potter, going so far as to claim that “it is difficult to assess them as literature” (Zipes 170) and refer to them as “failed fantasy” (Pennington 79). Pennington also states that another sign of the novels’ simplicity is that there is “no discrimination in [Rowling’s] description of the way characters talk” this is particularly emphasized by the statement that “Harry […] should not particularly hiss, for that is a characteristic of snakes and other evil creatures” (Pennington 86). It is argueable that speech styles are insignificant in the novels, as it is the actions of the characters and their choices (as Dumbledore claims in The Chamber of Secrets) which define them. Each character is distinctive, and even Harry’s association with evil is important to the text. Now to the examination of the characters and the places they occupy when compared to reality. We begin with Hermione Granger, who is arguably one of the most important characters in the series, and quite interesting and vibrante in her own right. Hermione, being born to a non-magic family, spans both the Muggle and magical worlds, not unlike Harry and a several other characters. Characters brought up in the Muggle world, especially more prominent ones like Harry and Hermione, are important contributors to the metafictional features in the series. Hermione, as one of these border figures, is able to enlighten the reader to both the differences and similarities of the magical and Muggle worlds. She is also able to explain in which ways they relate to one another, such as in The Goblet of Fire when she reminds Harry and Ron that walkie-talkies and other such mechanical devices cannot function within the Hogwarts grounds (529). Zipes characterizes her as “the bookish and bright girl, who always comes up with the right answers and can be a pain in the neck because of the strange causes that she supports” (180), yet despite this apparent praise (since when have intelligence and responsibility been negative traits?) he still criticizes Hermione as a week and conservative character. Oddly enough, Zipes himself undermines Hermione’s role in the series when he fails to recognize her close friendship with Harry and Ron. Her intelligence is just as instrumental to the success of their adventures as is the presence of either of the boys. Indeed, without her help, Harry would not have gotten past Snape’s riddle in The Philosopher’s Stone, learned the Summoning Charm in time for the first task of the Triwizard Tournament in The Goblet of Fire, or been able to conquer various other challenges he faces throughout the series. In short, Hermione is the “bookish and bright” individual of the class which I am sure everyone has experienced at some point in their lives. Her most important attribute, aside from her strong sense of friendship to Harry and Ron is her advanced intellect. Teachers also have a prominent role in the series, so let us next examine Minerva McGonagall. McGonagall is the embodiment of what a schoolteacher should be. Her name, an obvious reference to the Roman goddess Minerva (also called Athena), signals her wisdom and level-headedness, not undesirable traits in a teacher. She is strict with her students, as she must be since she is responsible for raising them while they are away from their families, but this strictness is not at the expense of compassion. She exhibits signs of pity, such as after she refuses to sign Harry’s form that allows him to visit the village of Hogsmeade on certain weekends in The Prisoner of Azkaban (113), and offers kindly advice. She is also exceptionally fair to all students at the school, even to the extent that she is willing to punish members of her own house despite the negative light this punishment casts upon her as the adult responsible for them. She is a matronly character, somewhat reminiscent of a grandmother figure and therefore highly identifiable to the reader. Compared to McGonagall, Severus Snape comes across as a truly loathsome individual. His role in the novels is as the archetypal teacher whom very few students are able to tolerate. Again we see a character whose name is important in setting out his characteristics, as Severus is Latin for “strict,” “severe” or “grave.” He is not only unfair in favoring some students over others, but he his also unnecessarily cruel to certain students who have done nothing to earn this sort of disrespect. I would suggest that this is exactly the type of person which certain laws and teacher evaluations are designed to eliminate. Nevertheless, excepting the instance in The Order of the Phoenix where Harry comes into contact with the pensieve containing a certain memory of Snape’s and when he manages to break into Snape’s mind during the Occlumency lessons, we are not privy to the inner workings of Snape’s mind. What we see of Snape in the novels is strictly from the point-of-view of the students, and a select few at that. Therefore, quite likely, Snape is painted as worse than he actually is, especially through the constant suspicions of Harry, Hermione and Ron concerning Snape’s involvement in various suspicious acts of an evil nature. The next discussion is of Ron Weasley’s role as a part of a family unit, a larger and more interesting entity than he exhibits on his own. The Weasley’s exemplify the work of a model family, much like McGonagall embodies the characteristics of an ideal teacher. The Weasley’s do put forward a rather unconventional front due to the fact that they are not the typical “Simpson” family, consisting of two parents and two-and-a-half children. Personally I have never known any families with half a child, and all babies must eventually grow-up despite their parent’s wishes. The various members of the Weasley family bicker, tease one another and (typically) look out for one another, all of which is typical of a modern family in western society.
With these descriptions Rowling attempts to accommodate as many people as possible through her description and characterization of her characters. Rather than displaying a lack of imagination on the part of Rowling, this grounding of characters in reality instead indicates just how she desires to use this series as a commentary on reality. It is important to note how even fantasy novels represent reality in such a strong manner. The inclusion of magical feats and beings in a text, although de-familiarized from what is considered customary, does not necessarily bring about an utter change in society. In the Harry Potter novels, Rowling shows magic as nothing more than a tool, and exposes the truth that power is not something which governs individuals, but which must be governed by the morality of those who wield it. This discussion of moral choice is even more pertinent to the reader considering its apparent didactic nature, and the fact that this lesson could be directed towards the reader just as much as it is towards the characters in the stories. It causes the reader to think deeply about what is being said about moral choice in the novels, and is yet another instance in which fantasy novels might bestow certain truths upon those who read them.
Deaval, Catherine Jack and David Paul Deaval. “Character, Choice, and Harry Potter.” Logos 5.4 (2002): 49-64.

Nikolajeva, Maria. “Harry Potter – A Return to the Romantic Hero.” Harry Potter’s World. Ed. Elizabeth E. Heilman. New York: RoutledgeFalmer, 2003. 125-40.

Pennington, John. “From Elfland to Hogwarts, or the Aesthetic Trouble with Harry Potter.” The Lion and the Unicorn 26 (2002): 78-97.
Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 1998.
---. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000.
---. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005.
---. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003.
---. Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997.
---. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. London: Bloomsbury, 1999.
Zipes, Jack. “The Phenomenon of Harry Potter, or Why All the Talk?” Sticks and Stones: The Troublesome Success of Children’s Literature from Slovenly Peter to Harry Potter. New York: Routledge, 2001. 170-89.