Oh Christ ... Forgive me, I've had too much wine, so my coherence (and spelling) may not be what they should be.
It's unclear whether Rowling's "magical" world (which lies, hidden but connected, to our own) is a democracy, but it is clearly one in which the government is assumed to be benign.
The government is definitely a part of her world, a beaurocratic overseer over the magical realm, run by politicians holding the portfolio of Minister of Magic (who also interface with the (British) Prime Minister). The governing body - with an analogue of police and army at their service (however munitinous parts of those may be) - is (a) subject to some kind censure (she doesn't make it clear whether or not the ballot is part of this) and (b) makes mistakes.
Rowlings vision of a beauracracy is one of an organization that mistakes its own status with that of the Greater Good. Her beaurocrats are not (mostly) "evil", rather they are too narrow-minded to remember their primary duty, to serve the greater good. Instead, they seek to pass the buck; they worry about public approval ratings; they convince themselves that innocent men sent to the dundgeons are the foes they seek.
Living as I do in the year 2005, I could easily (though wrongly) claim she is writing an allegory for my era. But, I think, what she is doing is telling a story applicable to any era.
Harry Potter's world is a complex one, where the government is often wrong and, even, where his hero and saviour - Dumbledore - is a man, who has made more than one very important mistake.
Her politics are not allegorys, though they are connected to the real world. But she is clear that truth is better than lies; that love is better than hate; that trust is better than paranoia.
Yes, J.K.R. has politics. But she knows better than to turn a story into a Manifesto.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dancing_serpent
(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-01 11:42 pm (UTC)It's unclear whether Rowling's "magical" world (which lies, hidden but connected, to our own) is a democracy, but it is clearly one in which the government is assumed to be benign.
The government is definitely a part of her world, a beaurocratic overseer over the magical realm, run by politicians holding the portfolio of Minister of Magic (who also interface with the (British) Prime Minister). The governing body - with an analogue of police and army at their service (however munitinous parts of those may be) - is (a) subject to some kind censure (she doesn't make it clear whether or not the ballot is part of this) and (b) makes mistakes.
Rowlings vision of a beauracracy is one of an organization that mistakes its own status with that of the Greater Good. Her beaurocrats are not (mostly) "evil", rather they are too narrow-minded to remember their primary duty, to serve the greater good. Instead, they seek to pass the buck; they worry about public approval ratings; they convince themselves that innocent men sent to the dundgeons are the foes they seek.
Living as I do in the year 2005, I could easily (though wrongly) claim she is writing an allegory for my era. But, I think, what she is doing is telling a story applicable to any era.
Harry Potter's world is a complex one, where the government is often wrong and, even, where his hero and saviour - Dumbledore - is a man, who has made more than one very important mistake.
Her politics are not allegorys, though they are connected to the real world. But she is clear that truth is better than lies; that love is better than hate; that trust is better than paranoia.
Yes, J.K.R. has politics. But she knows better than to turn a story into a Manifesto.