Publication History |
Published just after the release of the fourth book but before the release of the
first movie, “Exploring Harry Potter” states that its intended audience is
students, teachers, and parents. However, after reading the book, it is unclear
whether any of these groups would actually benefit from reading it. For
example, parents and teachers should know that London is a large city in
England, as should, frankly, any student capable of reading this book.
Schafer includes a variety of information in her book, including biographical
information on JK Rowling and the history (and controversy) surrounding the
Harry Potter series. There are also trivia sections, questions for discussions,
games, glossaries, and such. The bulk of the book is spent on the series itself, in
the form of plot summaries and topical groupings. Unfortunately, most story
information could just as easily (and more entertainingly) be obtained by
reading the Harry Potter books.
Further, Schafer’s work suffers from irritating factual inaccuracies: she
misspells characters’ names, and gets plot details wrong.
Worse, Schafer’s work suffers from simultaneous over- and under-analysis.
She states, for example, that the name Hermione “can represent… hormone,
both alluding to her feminine tendencies to be sisterly and motherly to her
friends.” (pp. 53-54). Are we to believe that only females – not males -- have
hormones? And is really true that “hyper-parental” Hermione more “motherly”
to Harry than Hagrid and Dumbledore are? And I always thought that prudent
Hermione represented the voice of reason, commonsense, and caution! What
makes this section of the book particularly funny and ironic is that the author
concludes it by accusing Rowling of stereotyping her female characters.
An example of under-analysis… Schafer comments that “Harry does not… offer
to share his wealth” with the Weasleys. (p. 51). Would it not be rude (and
inappropriate) for a child to reimburse his friend’s parents for sleepovers?
Would it not be ruder for that rich child to tell adults, “Hey, let me spot you
some cash. You’re looking a little low”? Would it not humiliate Ron Wealsey –
already sensitive on the subject – to have his friend give him money? Perhaps
some of those reasons are why Harry takes every opportunity to share his
wealth with Ron by offering gifts.
Despite having obviously done a lot of research, Schafer does not connect her
research to the Harry Potter series. In some places, she gives no explanation at
all for her “insights.” For example, Professor McGonagall’s “Scottish last name
hints that she is both bold and bitter.” (p. 58) How so? Are we to believe that
people of Scottish ancestry are bold and bitter? And how does “Pettigrew’s
missing finger symbolize his inability to make his point effectively”? (p.66)
From where does the author get the notion that the basilisk “has a gaze that is
deadly, symbolizing the blindness of racism”? (p. 69) What does this statement
even mean?
If I did not go very far into the book to quote the above examples, it is because
I did not have to; “Exploring Harry Potter” is chock full of such unsatisfactory
and muddled reasoning. Schafer’s book is a difficult read – not because it is at a
high reading level, but because her “analysis” is little more than random
connections of Harry Potter trivia to history, mythology, psychology, and
other disciplines. It is as if she believed simply inserting the words
“symbolizes” or “represents” into every other sentence is a reasonable
substitute for critical examination and genuine insight.
Should you choose to read this book, you will (within a few pages) understand
why the cover states that it is “NOT approved by J.K. Rowling.” What is
particularly sad is that the Harry Potter world and series are so rich that they
should easily lend themselves to the fascinating commentary promised on the
book jacket. Instead, my recommendation is to look elsewhere. 3 out of 10.
first movie, “Exploring Harry Potter” states that its intended audience is
students, teachers, and parents. However, after reading the book, it is unclear
whether any of these groups would actually benefit from reading it. For
example, parents and teachers should know that London is a large city in
England, as should, frankly, any student capable of reading this book.
Schafer includes a variety of information in her book, including biographical
information on JK Rowling and the history (and controversy) surrounding the
Harry Potter series. There are also trivia sections, questions for discussions,
games, glossaries, and such. The bulk of the book is spent on the series itself, in
the form of plot summaries and topical groupings. Unfortunately, most story
information could just as easily (and more entertainingly) be obtained by
reading the Harry Potter books.
Further, Schafer’s work suffers from irritating factual inaccuracies: she
misspells characters’ names, and gets plot details wrong.
Worse, Schafer’s work suffers from simultaneous over- and under-analysis.
She states, for example, that the name Hermione “can represent… hormone,
both alluding to her feminine tendencies to be sisterly and motherly to her
friends.” (pp. 53-54). Are we to believe that only females – not males -- have
hormones? And is really true that “hyper-parental” Hermione more “motherly”
to Harry than Hagrid and Dumbledore are? And I always thought that prudent
Hermione represented the voice of reason, commonsense, and caution! What
makes this section of the book particularly funny and ironic is that the author
concludes it by accusing Rowling of stereotyping her female characters.
An example of under-analysis… Schafer comments that “Harry does not… offer
to share his wealth” with the Weasleys. (p. 51). Would it not be rude (and
inappropriate) for a child to reimburse his friend’s parents for sleepovers?
Would it not be ruder for that rich child to tell adults, “Hey, let me spot you
some cash. You’re looking a little low”? Would it not humiliate Ron Wealsey –
already sensitive on the subject – to have his friend give him money? Perhaps
some of those reasons are why Harry takes every opportunity to share his
wealth with Ron by offering gifts.
Despite having obviously done a lot of research, Schafer does not connect her
research to the Harry Potter series. In some places, she gives no explanation at
all for her “insights.” For example, Professor McGonagall’s “Scottish last name
hints that she is both bold and bitter.” (p. 58) How so? Are we to believe that
people of Scottish ancestry are bold and bitter? And how does “Pettigrew’s
missing finger symbolize his inability to make his point effectively”? (p.66)
From where does the author get the notion that the basilisk “has a gaze that is
deadly, symbolizing the blindness of racism”? (p. 69) What does this statement
even mean?
If I did not go very far into the book to quote the above examples, it is because
I did not have to; “Exploring Harry Potter” is chock full of such unsatisfactory
and muddled reasoning. Schafer’s book is a difficult read – not because it is at a
high reading level, but because her “analysis” is little more than random
connections of Harry Potter trivia to history, mythology, psychology, and
other disciplines. It is as if she believed simply inserting the words
“symbolizes” or “represents” into every other sentence is a reasonable
substitute for critical examination and genuine insight.
Should you choose to read this book, you will (within a few pages) understand
why the cover states that it is “NOT approved by J.K. Rowling.” What is
particularly sad is that the Harry Potter world and series are so rich that they
should easily lend themselves to the fascinating commentary promised on the
book jacket. Instead, my recommendation is to look elsewhere. 3 out of 10.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Exploring Harry Potter (Elizabeth Shafter) By SC Bryce |
First Printing:
FantasyBookSpot.com (Oct. 9, 2006).
FantasyBookSpot.com (Oct. 9, 2006).
Second Printing:
SCBryce.com (Dec. 22, 2006).
SCBryce.com (Dec. 22, 2006).
|