HARRY POTTER and the SORCERER'S STONE: A Marxist and Feminist View of the Boy Who Lived

In 1997, the Harry Potter series by author J. K. Rowling burst onto the publishing scene in England then the rest of the world with the somewhat surprising and phenomenal success of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, (the Sorcerer's Stone in the U.S.) a tale about an orphaned boy who enrolls at a school for budding witches and wizards. It is inevitable that student readers, teachers, and/or scholars studying the Harry Potter book series will encounter strong criticism of the books, movies, and the author who wrote them. This criticism can even become hostile. The criticism can even be considered Marxist and Feminist in approach. This paper will show the why I believe Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone can be viewed in both Marxism and Feminism criticism theory. It will then show what I hope to prove in citing these forms of criticism in this novel.

Critics of this book complain that the focus on witchcraft is objectionable and subversive. It is important to note that most of the classic fantasy titles have been considered controversial. It is part and parcel of the genre. Ms. Rowling has even commented that, "If you ban all books with witchcraft and the supernatural, you'll ban three-quarters of children's literature" (Nel 58). However, it is neither the focus nor desire of this paper to expound upon the moral obligations of using magic, witchcraft or sorcery in a novel written about children for children. It will be my goal to show how this novel can also be criticized for using Marxist theories and the negative portrayal of women in the novel.

Marxist literary criticism is based upon the political and economic theories of the German philosopher Karl Marx. In works like The German Ideology and The Communist Manifesto, written with Frederick Engels. Marx proposes a model of history in which economic and political conditions determine social conditions. Marx and Engels were responding to social hardships stemming from the rise of capitalism. Appropriately, their theories are formulated specifically to analyze how society functions in a state of upheaval and constant change. Harry Potter's world, the Muggle (non-magical) world, but especially his magical world illustrates the properties of a Marxist society.

For those who follow Marxism you know that everything relates or refers to the obtaining and securing of economic power. This is the motive of all social and political activities, included in these areas such as education, philosophy, religion, government, the arts (literature), science and technology. In Marxism, "literature does not exist in some timeless, aesthetic realm as an object to be passively contemplated. Rather, like all cultural manifestations, it is a product of the socioeconomic and hence ideological conditions of the time and place in which it was written." (Tyson 62-63) The author's intention does not matter. For Marxist, realism may be the best form for the Marxist purpose as it clearly and accurately portrays the real world. Marxist criticism is the intentional or unintentional portrayal of capitalism and/or class structure in the ideologies that represent (either in support of or against) the socioeconomic systems.

In her book, Critical Theory Today, Lois Tyson asks "why we study Marxist criticism now that the Communist Bloc in Europe has failed, thereby proving that Marxism is not a viable theory?" (Tyson, 49) One look into the world of Harry Potter, at least the magical world, it does seem that Marxist theory lives on. According to Tyson, "Communist societies, though they claim to be based on the principles developed by Karl Marx (1818-1883), have been, in reality, oligarchies in which a small group of leaders controls the money and the guns and forces its policies on a population kept in line through physical intimidation." (Tyson, 49) In Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone a group known as the Ministry of Magic governs the magical world. It is reiterated time after time in the novel that the rules set down by this governing body must be adhered at all times or the punishment shall be severe, for example imprisonment in the Wizard's prison of Azkaban where the mind is virtually erased. Or a much worse sentence could be handed down that being death. This ministry uses the veil of intimidation to coerce the witches and wizards into following their rules much like Karl Marx wanted his followers to do.

I am not the first, and surely not the last, to investigate this book for the foundations of Marxist theory. "French professor Pierre Bruno caused an international controversy when the Left wing Liberation published his Marxist-structuralist look at J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter books." (Carnell, 45) "Such fiction is anathema to a strict Marxist theory since it dares to put individuals at the forefront of moral and ethical conflicts and asks us to believe (indoctrinates us, according to the Marxist-structuralist) that what individuals do actually matters as opposed to what patterns of class action over time happen to do." (Carnell, 45)

In yet another way of showing that Marxist view of this novel is the representation of class and society. The lens of Marxist criticism causes readers to focus their attention on the dynamics of class. Marxist critics believe that literature typically supports the social and economic theories of Karl Marx. Most students have at least some vague awareness of Marxist thought. Marxist criticism suggests that readers must closely examine the dynamics of class as they strive to understand the works they read.

This is a startlingly direct representation of a key Marxist idea: the power-hungry ownership class (or bourgeoisie) is necessarily tiny, and survives only because the sacrifice of an overwhelming majority, the working-class proletariat makes survival possible. The capitalist system and the bourgeoisie were seen as ripen with weaknesses and contradictions, which would become increasingly severe as industrialization progressed and would manifest them in increasingly severe economic crises. According to the Communist Manifesto, it would be in a highly industrialized nation, where the crises of capitalism and the consciousness of the workers were far advanced, that the proletarian overthrow of bourgeois society would first succeed. Although this process was inevitable, Marxists were to speed it by bringing about the international union of workers, by supporting (for expediency) whatever political party favored the momentary interests of the working class, and by helping to prepare workers for their revolutionary role.

In standard postmodern fashion, Rowling created an alternative universe in which to play out the heroic destiny of her protagonist. The world of wizards exists side by side with but separate from the world of ordinary non-magic people, Muggles. In terms of one theory of postmodern fiction, the dominant note of Harry Potter is ontological: we see two separate worlds capable of existing apart from the other, with only a shimmering passageway between them. The Muggle world functions as a foil to heighten the excitement and the moral superiority of the contrasting wizard world. "I'd like ter see a great Muggle like you stop him," (Rowling, 52) Hagrid tells Harry's Uncle when confronted on whether Harry is allowed to attend school. This shows the lack of respect wizards like Harry and Hagrid have for Muggles.

The wizard world overlaps with the world of Muggles here and there, notably when the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry recruits the children of Muggles. In Harry Potter's story, the overlap matters less. Muggle world is the place where Harry has been living. It is an unexciting, uncomfortable, and morally questionable world, but not one that Harry is bent on understanding better or transforming. In his book The Irresistible Rise of Harry Potter Andrew Blake, a postmodern literary scholar, claims to be a Marxist critique of Harry Potter. In other words, Blake has written a book that analyzes the Harry Potter books in terms of class struggle. Now that is not a stupid thing to do. Rowling has put some overt class elements in her work. The wizards hate the Muggles, the Muggles hate the wizards and the house elves are literal slaves.

"The core of the class system that runs through the Potter books is in the facts of admission to the school." (Adams, 23) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone represents a political allegory of the triumph of the socially ascendant petite bourgeoisie. The four houses at Hogwarts-Gryffindor, Slytherin, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw-are seen as competing social groups. Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw are the lower orders, hardworking but stupid. Slytherin -- named after the aristocratic Salazar -- represents the propertied-classes and Gryffindor -- Harry's house -- the ascendant class of the bourgeoisie. The whole series is therefore not about the traditional struggle of Good and Evil but "the conflict between established and rising classes." (Adams, 24)

Extending this focus to works of literature which do not call particular attention to class struggle will be a challenging and potentially rewarding endeavor. Like our use of Marxist criticism, our use of Feminist criticism will produce provocative discussions, which seek to apply the method's ideas both to works of literature and to the world of daily experience.

Feminist literary criticism, arising in conjunction with sociopolitical feminism, critiques patriarchal language and literature by exposing how these reflect masculine ideology. It examines gender politics in works and traces the subtle construction of masculinity and femininity, and their relative status, positioning, and marginalizations within works. Beyond making us aware of the marginalizing uses of traditional language (the presumptuousness of the pronoun "he," or occupational words such as "mailman") feminists focused on language have noticed a stylistic difference in women's writing: women tend to use reflexive constructions more than men (e.g., "She found herself crying"). They have noticed that women and men tend to communicate differently: men directed towards solutions, women towards connecting.

Feminist criticism concern itself with stereotypical representations of genders. It also may trace the history of relatively unknown or undervalued women writers, potentially earning them their rightful place within the literary canon, and helps create a climate in which women's creativity may be fully realized and appreciated. "Harry Potter is a sexist neo-conservative autocrat." Pierre Bruno wrote in the Liberation. (Adams, 52)

Harry Potter's "fictionalized realm of magic and wizardry perfectly mirrors the conventional assumption that men do and should run the world." It starts in the beginning of "the first Potter book, it is boys and men, wizards and sorcerers, who catch our attention by dominating the scenes and determining the action. Harry, of course, plays the lead. In his epic struggle with the forces of darkness-the evil wizard Voldemort and his male supporters-Harry is supported by the dignified wizard Dumbledore and a colorful cast of male characters. Girls, when they are not downright silly or unlikable, are helpers, enablers and instruments. No girl is brilliantly heroic the way Harry is, no woman is experienced and wise like Professor Dumbledore. In fact, the range of female personalities is so limited that neither women nor girls play on the side of evil." (Schoefer, 66) One often-argued point against the novels is that, with a male lead and fewer central female characters, the Harry Potter series is sexist. Therefore, feminist quite often attack the books as being against women forming a misogyny in the way women are treated in the series.

"Could it be that the Harry Potter books . . . fit into that chauvinist world of male literature where women are either absent, weak, silly, evil or vaporized by car bombs?" (Ramos) Rowling claims she never consciously wanted the novels to be seen as either sexist or feminist. Whether or not she intended the novels to be read in this way, through the themes explored with the female characters in the Harry Potter novels, Rowling has created feminist works of literature.

To understand what about the Harry Potter novels constitutes a feminist work of literature, one must first understand the complexities of feminism. "Feminism" as a singular noun is often seen as a misrepresentation due to the fact that there are so many different types of feminist movements with different goals. Because of this, many refer to the all-inclusive plural noun "feminisms" instead. As a part of several types of "feminisms," feminist literary criticism embraces subjectivity in literary interpretations. A reader "cannot leave [herself] out of the picture when describing what [she sees] . . . to claim that we are objective, as patriarchy encourages men to do, is merely to blind ourselves to the ways in which we are different" (Tyson 95).

Due to the fact that there is no one explicit way to define what feminist literature is, some feminist critics may see J.K. Rowling's novels as sexist without directly disagreeing with the arguments presented in this paper. The feminist ideals in Harry Potter are most easily seen through the lead female character, Hermione Granger, as she is a manifestation of the author herself within the text. "Hermione is me," Rowling has said in several interviews, "A caricature of me when I was younger." (Rowling, 1)

As Rowling made Hermione a character with many strengths and weaknesses, feminist critics often attack Hermione for her weaknesses, criticizing her for being whiny, "bookish," and "a stickler for rules" (Heilman 225); however, these criticisms ignore Hermione's many strengths. Hermione, for instance, is more dependable than her male friends and so she is often trusted with more responsibility.

"There is one difference, in that Hogwarts accepts girls, and the books give the appearance of inclusively. Three girls are in the seven members of Harry's house Quidditch team, one of Harry's best friends is a girl, Hermione, and many of the teachers are witches." No woman aside from Hermione, "all the principle characters are male. Even Hermione's character is a stereotype: the hard working middle-class swot, who spends most of her time in the library and reading books, and talks Harry out of taking risks: her parents are dentists. And in the second book of this series Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets it is the female students who are easily taken in by the most palpably ridiculous teachers: Gilderoy Lockhart (a wizard double for Robert Kilroy-Silk) the vain and egocentric teacher who turns out to be a coward and a liar in the second book, and Sybill Trelawney, the tea leaf-reading divination teacher who has only made two correct prophesies in her career." (Adams, 74) I mention this to prove that Rowling continues this line of thought in respect to feminism in the series.

The world of Harry Potter does not show many women in roles of authority. There are women professors at Hogwarts yet they report to their male supervisors. It is surprising that more women are not shown in a higher authority role because J.K. Rowling is a woman and therefore should write to show that women can be authority figures. Rowling may be making a statement on how she sees our world and is simply translating her feelings to her magical world where Harry Potter goes to a school for wizards. "Contrary to the opinions of many students new to the study of feminist literary criticism, many feminists like men, think that woman should be able to stay home and raise children if they want to do so, and wear bras." (Tyson, 81)

If indeed this is Rowling's goal then she shares a feminist literary trait with Lois Tyson beliefs. "All feminist activity, including feminist theory and literary criticism, has its ultimate goal to change the world by promoting gender equity. Thus feminist activity can be seen as a form of activism." (Tyson, 91) Rowling's views and novel is definitely seen by most, not just women, as a form of activism and a supporter of women's rights despite the outward appearance of women still reporting to men in the book.

Marxist criticism, very simply put, champions the downtrodden of socio-economic class, in this case Harry Potter, critiquing texts assume classist society (Malfoy being of the upper class, Potter of the lower to middle class, and the Weaslys being of the lower class) of economic elitism and hegemony, and championing texts that support the "common man." (Again Harry.) Feminist criticism, simply put, champions the downtrodden of the "war of the sexes," critiquing patriarchal texts and championing neglected "pro-woman" (Hermoine) literary works. Like Marxism, feminism quite often teams up with post-structuralism in its critique of the dominant male "hegemony." (In the magical world men rule.) Either way Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is a great example of each of these types of theories. I claim that neither is a negative way to interpret the book and state that each may, in fact, be positive ways to read this wonderful novel. However, Rowling's female characters constantly fight against the patriarchal subjugation inherent in both the real world and in their fictional world, taking charge of their own identities and empowerment.

WORKS CITIED:

Adams, Richard. "Harry Potter and the Closet Conservative." The Voice of the Turtle. (online). http://www.voiceoftheturtle.org/show_article.php?aid=170 (2001)

Beech, Linda Ward. Scholastic Literature Guide: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone by J. K. Rowling. New York: Scholastic, 2000.

Blake, Andrew. Irresistible Rise of Harry Potter. Verso. London, England. 2002.

Carnell, Brian. "Harry, Holden and This Year's Reading List." Leftwatch.com (online). http://www.leftwatch.com/archives/years/2001/000012.html January 29, 2001.

Heilman, Elizabeth E. "Blue Wizards and Pink Witches: Representations of Gender Identity and Power." Harry Potter's World: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer, 2003. 221 - 239.

--Vorbeck, Tammy Turner. "Pottermania: Good, Clean Fun or Cultural Hegemony?" In Harry Potter's World,, 2001.

Kern, Edmund M. The Wisdom Of Harry Potter. Prometheus Books. Amherst, N.Y. 20003.

Lichfield, John. "French Marxist Attacks "Bourgeois" Harry Potter." The Independent (UK) January 28, 2001.

Nel, Philip. J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter Novels: A Reader's Guide. New York: Continuum Publishing, 2002.

Ramos, Andreas. "The Trouble With Harry Potter - Teaching Our Children Sexism."
Advancing Women. 2004. Advancing Women Network. 3 December 2005.

Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. Scholastic. New York, N.Y. 1997.

--"Conversation With J.K. Rowling." Time Pacific. October 30, 2000. Time Pacific. 1

Schoefer, Christine. "Harry Potter's Girl Trouble." Salon.com (online). dir.salon.com/books/feature/2000/01/13/potter/index.html (January 13, 2000.)

Snyder, Dr. Tom. "The Differences Between "Harry Potter" and "Lord of the Rings". Ankerberg Theological Research Institute. (online) 2005.

Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User Friendly Guide. Garland Publishing, Inc. New York, N.Y. 1999.

-- "Feminist Criticism." Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide.
New York, NY: Garland, 1999. 81 - 116.

Whited, Lana A., ed. The Ivory Tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a Literary Phenomenon. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2002.

Yates, Emma. "Harry Potter and the Fight against Global Capitalism." Guardian Unlimited. (online). books.guardian.co.uk/news/articles/0,6109,621826.00.html (December 19,2001)