.png)
I’ve reread the Harry Potter series about a million times now, and I’ve always enjoyed reading it. But during the summer break, I decided to go back to the series and explore it through the lens of feminism. As I’ve become more and more involved in feminist principles and ideologies, I wanted to test if Harry Potter genuinely lived up to the heralding of women’s empowerment that it has been known for, especially in its feminist icon, Hermione Granger. In this article, I will discuss some observations and discoveries I have developed over the course of my midterm holiday.
Firstly, let’s discuss the shallow depiction of Lily Potter. For all intent and purposes, Lily Potter was portrayed as a Mary Sue and a factor of the men’s pain. In fact, Snape’s entire storyline was dependent on his love for Lily Potter, and that love manifested through him. Yet Lily Potter was not genuinely presented as a human being separate from her relationship with Harry, James, or Snape. For the majority of the series, she was used as a symbol of love and sacrifice which had allowed Harry to be protected in his endeavors.
What was she good at (besides Potions as Slughorn constantly repeats)? What were her dreams and aspirations? From the feminist perspective, it seemed completely unfair how James Potter and the rest of the Mauraders received a complex story arc despite being dead, but she did not. As we know from Snape’s memory, James Potter was arrogant and condescending. We gradually learned of his character because it was mirrored through Harry, but did we truly understand who Lily was? Not really. She was only defined throughout the series as a beacon of protection instead of an individual filled with love and sacrifice. There’s a difference.
Most of my annoyance stemmed from the fact that the majority of the male characters were allowed to be morally grey. Sirius, James, Snape, Dumbledore, Grindelwald, and Draco Malfoy were allowed to have morally ambiguous backstories that never undermined who they were as characters and were always offered a chance of redemption.
Meanwhile, I rarely saw the female characters in the series portrayed the same way. They were either solely on the good side or the bad side. Mrs. Weasley, Tonks, Professor McGonagall, Aunt Petunia, Luna, and Hermione were all placed firmly on this “good” side. Although they were distinguished characters, they were by no means ambiguous.
Secondly, Hermione, herself, the feminist icon, although she had her flaws and her strengths did not have much character development. At times it felt like she was just a plot device, especially in the last book where she repeatedly got Harry and Ron out of sticky situations but never truly fixed anything.
One instance occurred in the Chamber of Secrets where she discovers that the monster lurking in the dungeons is a basilisk. The information she discovers is “accidentally” found by Harry who then proceeds to fight the antagonist while she remains to be petrified in the hospital wing. Another instance occurred in Luna’s house where they were able to escape because of Hermoine’s knowledge on assessing the situation by knowing difficult spells and locating ways to destroy the Horcrux. It was clear that Harry and Ron would not have survived without Hermione.
When it came to character development, I had a hard time understanding her aspirations. It is adamantly clear, however, that Ron and Harry had more character development over the series. Ron was allowed to walk out in the middle of an important mission and had his own time to figure things out for himself. Hermione did not get that luxury. As readers, we were also not informed on who her parents were and what they were like, contrary to the wholesome introduction of the Weasley family. The events of the book spoke to how Hermione, who constantly used her intellect to get things done, was constantly overshadowed by her friends who haven’t achieved much in the story. This was a consistent pattern that I continued to see in books and movies where a boy’s recklessness was valued over a girl’s intellect.
Just because female characters are strong and smart does not mean that the context itself is feminist. Hermione may be intelligent and someone every little girl wants to be, but it doesn’t erase the fact that she is often presented as naggy and a complete rule follower. It also does not negate the fact that although JK Rowling has mentioned in interviews that when you take away physical strength from the equation, you will find that witches are just as powerful as wizards, most of the major characters of the Harry Potter world are male; the ones who propel the story forward, the ones who have higher positions of authority, and even the ones that are deemed the most important to the narrative of the story. The lack of distinguishing characteristics to females as opposed to males is disheartening and negates these women to specific roles rather than seeing them as distinct people on their own.
Reading Harry Potter once again through the feminist lens has allowed me to realize that most popular books do not live up to feminist critique. This series will forever have a special place in my heart but I will also bear in mind that Harry Potter is not infallible.
Comments