Gender Portrayal in J.K. Rowling's “Harry Potter and the Order of the

South Dakota State University South Dakota State University

Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional

Repository and Information Exchange Repository and Information Exchange

Electronic Theses and Dissertations

2007

Gender Portrayal in J.K. Rowling's “Harry Potter and the Order of Gender Portrayal in J.K. Rowling's “Harry Potter and the Order of

the Phoenix”: A Feminist Rhetorical Criticism the Phoenix”: A Feminist Rhetorical Criticism

Nicole Ackman

South Dakota State University

Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd

Part of the Children's and Young Adult Literature Commons, Critical and Cultural Studies Commons,

Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Commons, and the Gender, Race, Sexuality, and Ethnicity in

Communication Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation

Ackman, Nicole, "Gender Portrayal in J.K. Rowling's “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix”: A

Feminist Rhetorical Criticism" (2007).

Electronic Theses and Dissertations

. 5143.

https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/5143

This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research

Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses

and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional

Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Gender Portrayal in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix:

A Feminist Rhetorical Criticism

Nicole Ackman

A thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Master of Science

Major in Communication Studies and Journalism

South Dakota State University

2007

Gender Portrayals in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix:

A Feminist Rhetorical Criticism

This thesis is approved as a creditable and independent investigation by a

candidate for the Master of Science degree and is acceptable for meeting the thesis

requirements for this degree. Acceptance of this thesis does not imply that the

conclusions reached by the candidate are necessarily the conclusions of the major

department.

______________________________

Dr. Laurie Haleta Date

Thesis Advisor

______________________________

Dr. Laurie Haleta Date

Department Head,

Communication Studies & Theatre

iii

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my gratitude and appreciation to my advisor, Dr. Laurie

Haleta, for her guidance, wisdom, and understanding. I would also like to extend my

appreciation to Dr. Elizabeth Tolman. Her enthusiasm and positive spirit provided a

wonderful atmosphere to begin and complete this project. Additional thanks are extended

to Professor Mary Haug for her time and willingness to participate in this process.

I would like to express my love and appreciation to my parents, sisters, and

brother for their support, patience, and strength. Their words of encouragement proved to

be invaluable as I completed this project.

Special thanks are extended to Mary, Kate, Jody, Brandi, Josh, and Marlys as well

as the first year graduate teaching assistants. Each milestone in my journey did not seem

complete until I shared it with all of you. I am thankful to be able to call you all friends.

These two years of graduate school and this thesis would not have been possible

without the support, understanding, wisdom, guidance, patience, and laughter of JD and

Jack Ackman. Words cannot describe how they helped me throughout this journey.

Together, and individually, they have inspired me to consider every possibility. JD, your

belief in me helped me believe in myself. Jack, I am so thankful your smile is the first

thing I see in the morning. Both of you are now, and will always be, my ‘nubbed ones’.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge J.K. Rowling. Your characters have captured

my heart and strengthened my belief that there is magic in the world. I see it in the Harry

Potter novels, in my husband’s and son’s eyes, and in the eyes of my family. It is love.

Abstract

Gender Portrayals in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix:

A Feminist Rhetorical Criticism

Nicole Ackman

April 4, 2007

This study examined J.K. Rowling’s (2003) novel entitled, Harry Potter and the

Order of the Phoenix. Although this novel has not yet been classified as a fairy tale, it

does contain fairy tale elements. This study reviewed literature in the field of folklore,

fairy tales, and feminism. Foss’ (2004) four-step feminist criticism model was employed

to analyze gender portrayals in the novel. According to Foss’ model, the novel was

analyzed for masculine or feminine perspectives of the world, effects on the audience,

improvement of women’s lives, and impact on rhetorical theory. Although Harry Potter

and the Order of the Phoenix is not a feminist tale, it has the potential to affect women

and men positively and negatively. The study found women’s roles were more

realistically portrayed while men’s roles were more traditionally portrayed. The novel

both affirmed and contradicted gender roles created by society.

Table of Contents

Acceptance Page…………………………………………………………………. ii

Acknowledgment Page……………………………………………………………iii

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………iv

Chapter

I. Introduction........................................................................................................... 1

Statement of the Problem………………………………………………….. 3

Background of the Problem……………………………………………….. 5

Definitions…………………………………………………………………. 5

Value of the Study………………………………………………………….11

Research Questions……………………………………………………….. 13

Limitations Imposed………………………………………………………. 13

II. Historical, Contextual Background…………………………………………….. 14

Folklore……………………………………………………………………. 14

Fairy Tales………………………………………………………………… 19

Feminist Criticism………………………………………………………… 23

Feminist Rhetorical Criticism……………………………………………... 24

Feminist Rhetorical Criticism of Fairy Tales……………………………….25

Feminist Views of Fairy Tales……………………………………………. .26

Harry Potter………………………………………………………………....28

Summary……………………………………………………………………54

III. Methodology……………………………………………………………………56

Historical and Theoretical Foundations of Feminist Rhetorical Criticism…56

Procedures…………………………………………………………………..67

Analysis and Artifact Justification………………………………………….70

Summary……………………………………………………………………72

IV. Analysis………………………………………………………………………. .74

Analysis of Gender in the Artifact……………………………………….....74

Discovery of the Effects on the Audience………………………………….97

Discussion of the Use of the Artifact to Improve Women’s Lives………..100

Explanation of the Artifact’s Impact on Rhetorical Theory………………101

Summary…………………………………………………………………. 102

V. Discussion and Conclusions…………………………………………………... 104

Analysis of Gender in the Artifact……………………………………….. 104

Discovery of the Effects on the Audience………………………………...106

Discussion of the Use of the Artifact to Improve Women’s Lives………..107

Explanation of the Artifact’s Impact on Rhetorical Theory……………….108

Implications………………………………………………………………..109

Conclusions………………………………………………………………..110

Suggestions for Future Study……………………………………………...113

References…………………………………………………………………………115

Appendix A……………………………………………………………………….. 132

Appendix B………………………………………………………………………...136

Chapter I

Introduction

In 1997, with no fanfare, an unknown author from the United Kingdom published

a book about a boarding school and a young wizard. Later the same year the book won

the British Book Awards Children’s Book of the Year. It also won the 1998 New York

Public Library Best Book of the Year, and the 1998 Parenting magazine Book of the

Year Award. The book was named “one of the best books of 1998” by Publishers

Weekly, School Library Journal, and Booklist in the United States. The book was Harry

Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (Sorcerer’s Stone in the United States). The author,

no longer unknown, was Joanne Kathleen (J.K.) Rowling.

Since 1997, an additional five books have been published chronicling the fictional

life of Harry Potter. The books are entitled Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

(1999), Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (1999), Harry Potter and the Goblet of

Fire (2000), Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2003), and Harry Potter and the

Half-Blood Prince (2005). In total, over 325 million copies have been sold and the series

has been translated into 64 languages in 130 nations. Just as the fourth book was

published in 2000, The New York Times created the Children’s Bestseller List. The Potter

series captured the first four places on the new list. Rowling, once a single mother living

with her sister, was the highest earning author in 2000.

What makes the Harry Potter series so enjoyable for both children and adults?

There is no question Harry is a protagonist to which most children and adults can relate.

Harry lives with his aunt, uncle, and cousin. They treat Harry as a servant and force him

to clean up after them. They also make him sleep in a closet under the stairs. After a

magical turn of events, Harry finds out he is more than he ever thought he could be. His

world opens up to include things he could have only imagined. There is, however, a

catch. Evil is growing stronger and seems to be lurking around every corner. In Harry’s

new, magical world, lines of good and evil are clearly defined. With the help of loyal

friends and a wise mentor, Harry realizes he is destined to battle the evil threatening his

new world and his life. Do any of these circumstances sound familiar? If they do, it is

because one or combinations of these motifs are found throughout the world in fairy

tales. Zipes (2001) in the book Sticks and Stones states:

the plots of the first four novels thus far resemble the structure of a conventional

fairy tale: a modest little protagonist, typically male, who does not at first realize

how talented he is and who departs from his home on a mission or is banished

until he fulfills three tasks… Sometimes he meets an old sage or wise woman,

who will provide him with support and aid. At one point he encounters a tyrant,

ogre, or competitor, whom he must overcome to succeed in his mission (p. 177).

Although the Harry Potter series might not yet be classified as a fairy tale, (the last

volume will be released July, 21 2007), it is safe to say the series contains many fairy tale

motifs commonly found in traditional fairy tales such as Cinderella, Snow White, and

Beauty and the Beast. If traditional fairy tales structure and motifs are found in the Harry

Potter series, are traditional gender roles also evident in the books?

This section will discuss the background of the study and definitions pertaining to

the study. The value of the study and research questions will be addressed. Finally,

limitations of this study will be identified. However, before the above can be explored,

the problem this study addresses needs to be stated.

Statement of the Problem

Fairy tales are an important part of life. Julius Heuscher (1963) led the studies in

the importance and influence of fairy tales. His book entitled, A Psychiatric Study of

Myths and Fairy Tales: Their Origins, Meanings, and Usefulness explores and discusses

the meanings of several popular fairy tales. He analyzes how the tales relate to the

problems children face while growing up, and how the tales help children understand the

world. Heuscher (1963) emphasizes the duality of fairy tales by suggesting fairy tales are

used to entertain children. Yet, deeper messages are embedded in the tales. The messages

resonate with children and help them understand the world.

Further research into this field reveals how the fairy tale messages affect women.

In 1972, Marcia Lieberman published an article in College English entitled,

“‘Some Day My Prince Will Come’: Female Acculturation through the Fairy Tale”. She

analyzes fairy tales such as Sleeping Beauty and discovers, “the heroines were passive,

helpless, and submissive” (p. 387). In addition, the heroines of these stories were thought

a prize for a daring and handsome prince. Three years later, Kay Stone (1975) discussed

the same issues in an article published in Women in Folklore entitled, “Things Walt

Disney Never Told Us”. She compares original fairy tales with their Disney counterparts.

She concludes women could only be the heroines of a tale if they are patient, industrious,

calm, beautiful, and passive. She suggests fairy tales have changed from their original

oral forms in order to accommodate the conservative norms of the dominant male classes.

Andrea Dworkin (1974) in her book Woman Hating adds to this analysis. She believes

the negative portrayal of women in fairy tales affects women’s lives. She states:

The point is that we have not formed that ancient world- it has formed us. We

ingested it as children whole, had its values and consciousness imprinted on our

minds as cultural absolutes long before were in fact men and women (p. 32).

Jack Zipes (1987) came to the same conclusions regarding the portrayal of women in

fairy tales in his book, Don’t Bet on the Prince: Contemporary Feminist Fairy Tales in

North America and England. He believes fairy tales reaffirm the roles society has placed

on women.

The negative image of women in traditional fairy tales led some authors to write

their own tales or rewrite traditional tales. Turin, Cantarelli, and Bosnia’s (1977) book

entitled The Five Wives of Silverbeard and Jay Williams’ book entitled The Practical

Princess and Other Liberating Tales (1979) are just two examples of new fairy tales.

Ethel Johnstone Phelps’ book Tatterhood and Other Tales (1978), Joanna Russ’s (1978)

book Kittatinny, and Emma Donoghue’s (1997) Kissing the Witch are a few examples of

rewritten fairy tales. Zipes (1987) believes the retelling of old tales in new, contemporary

ways encourages readers to re-examine women’s roles in the tales. However, not

everyone agrees with Zipes (1987). Ruth MacDonald (1982) expresses concern regarding

rewritten fairy tales. She asserts, “to subvert the ending [of a tale] by altering the reward

structure or to deemphasize the essential values of goodness in a fairy tale- beauty,

wealth, potency of evil, or even marriage- is inherently unsatisfying” (p. 20).

Although the artifact in this study is not specifically a rewritten tale or a feminist tale, the

traditional fairy tale elements found in the Harry Potter series justify this study. Millions

of children and adults are exposed to the gender roles portrayed in Rowling’s books.

Analyzing the gender roles Rowling’s creates in this modern tale can contribute to the

breadth of knowledge in this field.

Background of the Problem

The purpose of this study is to analyze the gender roles in the fifth book in the

Harry Potter series from a feminist point of view. The title of the book is Harry Potter

and the Order of the Phoenix (2003). Employing Foss’ (2004) feminist rhetorical

criticism model, the researcher will determine whether the artifact contradicts or affirms

the gender roles society has placed on women. This study will also attempt to expand the

awareness of women’s voices and will examine the traditional roles of women in fairy

tales.

Definitions

Before attempting this study, key terms need to be defined. In this section, a brief

definition of fairy tales will be provided. Then, the term feminism and terms relating to

feminism will be defined. Finally, a description of the Harry Potter books will be given.

Fairy Tales

Webster’s New World Dictionary (1984) defined fairy tale as “a story about

fairies, or an unbelievable or untrue story” (p. 221). This definition is limited, to say the

least. Zipes (2000) stated, “fairy tales have been defined in so many different ways that it

boggles the mind to think that they can be categorized as a genre” (p. xv). He suggested

the clearest definition is in the form of four principles offered by the German scholar Jens

Tismar (1977). Tismar systematically analyzed literary fairy tales in the contemporary

era. Simply stated his principles include: (a) a fairy tale distinguishes itself from the oral

folk tale because it is written by a single author, (b) a fairy tale is synthetic, artificial, and

elaborate, (c) the differences between the literary fairy tale and the oral folk tale do not

suggest one is better than the other, and (d) the literary fairy tale can only be understood

and defined by its relationship to the oral tales.

Tolkien (1965) in the book Tree and Leaf presented a different view of fairy

tales. He determined the word fairy, or Faërie, represents the realm in which fairies

originate. Tolkien (1965) believed the realm of Faërie was home to not only magical

beings such as dragons, giants, and trolls, but also home to the sun, the moon and all

things in the earth including “mortal men when we are enchanted” (p. 54). Tolkien stated:

the definition of a fairy-story -- what it is, or what it should be -- does not, then,

depend on any definition or historical account of elf or fairy, but upon the nature

of Faërie: the Perilous Realm itself, and the air that blows in that country (p. 3).

Marcia Lane (1993) in the book Picturing the Rose: A Way of Looking at Fairy Tales,

offered her own definition. She stated:

a fairy tale is a story-literary or folk-that has a sense of the numinous, the feeling

or sensation of the supernatural or the mysterious. But, and this is crucial, it is a

story that happens in the past tense, and a story that is not tied to any specifics. If

it happens "at the beginning of the world," then it is a myth. A story that names a

specific "real" person is a legend (even if it contains a magical occurrence). A

story that happens in the future is a fantasy. Fairy tales are sometimes spiritual,

but never religious (p. 2).

As evident by the definitions provided, the term fairy tale encompasses a wide range of

meanings. However, it is clear fairy tales are engrained in oral folk tales and have

become an important part of today’s society.

Feminism and Related Terms

Similarly, the term feminism has a wide array of definitions, and the definitions

vary from person to person. According to Rossi (1973) in the book, The Feminist Papers,

it is thought the word feminism was first used in print in 1895 in a British journal

entitled, The Athenaeum. Before the 1890’s, the word was rarely spoken. The meaning of

the word feminism was just as ambiguous. Rossi (1973) states the word “referred simply

to the ‘qualities of females’” (p. xii). Throughout the years, the definition of feminism

has evolved. Each definition is unique to each individual’s experience. In the book

Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, written by bell hooks (1984) feminism is

defined as “the effort to change existing power relations between women and men”

(p. 26). The definition hooks offered views feminism as a battle to end the domination,

perpetrated by men, found in Western culture. In 1991, Foss, Foss, and Trapp defined

feminism from the standpoint of a rhetorical critic. They suggested feminism is “the

belief that women and men should have equal opportunities for self-expression” (p. 275).

Aldoory and Toth (2001) defined feminism in their article published in Communication

Yearbook entitled, “The Complexities of Feminism in Communication Scholarship

Today”. They approach the definition from a theoretical perspective and offer ways to

end oppression. Aldoory and Toth (2001) suggested feminism is “the theoretical study of

women’s oppression and the strategical and political ways that all of us, building on that

theoretical and historical knowledge, can work to end that oppression” (p. 346). Since

then, Foss, Foss, and Griffin (2004) modified the definition of feminism. In their book

entitled Readings in Feminist Rhetorical Theory, they referred to feminism not as a term,

but as an ideology. They state:

Feminism, then, is a commitment to eliminate relations of oppression and

domination in general, whether of women, African Americans, old people,

lesbians, gay men, family members, friends, acquaintances, or co-workers. What

we and other feminists are trying to do is to transform relationships and the larger

culture so that they reflect more humane and enriching ways to live (p. 3).

Due to the inherent personal nature of the term feminism, the definitions of the term

greatly differ. However, as both Foss, Foss, and Trapp (1991), and Foss, Foss, and

Griffin (2004) explain, at the root of the every definition of the word feminism is the

knowledge that equal opportunities do not exist between women and men in the areas of

politics, society, economics, or self-expression.

Many feminist theorists attribute the inequality between men and women to

gender roles, not sex roles. According to Cooper, Friedley, Stewart, and Stewart (1996),

the term sex refers to the biological physiological characteristics that make a person male

or female. There are many biological differences between women and men including, a

woman’s ability to bear children and greater development of the right hemisphere of the

brain- the center of the relation, intuitive, and artistic capacities (Foss, 1989).

One feminist perspective suggests the biological differences between women and

men create different experiences for women and men. However, Foss and Foss (1991)

hold a different view. They suggested the biological differences are less important. The

psychological identity developed due to the assigned roles society has placed on the sexes

is more important than any biological difference existing between women and men. This

concept is the basis of gender identity. Cooper, et. al., (1996) define gender as “the social

construction of masculinity and femininity within a culture” (p. 4). Foss and Foss (1991)

offer a more specific definition. They explained gender as the psychological construction

that entails designation of culturally appropriate behavior for men and women. Foss

(1989) suggested gender has not been constructed equally for men and women.

Furthermore, the feminine gender tends to be diminished and degraded. As Foss, Foss,

and Trapp (1991) conclude, analyzing the negative effects gender may have on women’s

communication is just one tenet of a feminist perspective. However, true feminist

scholars value women’s communication as much as they value men’s communication.

Although the systems women and men use to communicate are separate, they are equally

effective (Foss, Foss, & Trapp, 1991).

Harry Potter

Harry Potter was born on a train to London. According to J.K. Rowling, “the idea

for Harry just kind of fell into my head. He arrived pretty much fully formed” (Nel, 2002,

p. 18). In his book entitled J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter Novels: A Reader’s Guide, Nel

(2002) explains how Harry Potter was created. In simplified terms, Rowling was on her

way back to London from Manchester, in 1990, when the idea of Harry formed in her

head. She did not have a working pen so she thought about Harry and other characters for

the duration of the train ride. Seven years later, Harry Potter and the

Philosopher’s/Sorcerer’s Stone was published. Six Harry Potter books were published

between 1997 and 2005 with the final installment of the series to be released July 21,

2007 (Rowling, 2007).

Rowling’s series follows the life of an orphaned boy named Harry Potter, who has

a scar in the shape of a lightening bolt on his forehead. He also happens to be a wizard.

Harry lives with his Aunt Petunia, Uncle Vernon, and Cousin Dudley Dursley. They see

Harry as a burden and treat him as such. He sleeps in a closet under the stairs. His

relatives refuse to celebrate his birthday. They force Harry to clean up after them. Harry’s

life mirrors that of Cinderella, until one day Harry discovers he can make things happen

just by thinking about them. He, with the help of a half-giant named Hagrid, discovers he

is a wizard. Harry is whisked away from his terrible life with the Dursleys and begins to

attend Hogwarts, a magic school for witches and wizards.

Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is divided into four residential

houses. They are Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, and Slytherin. It is in the House of

Gryffindor Harry makes his home. The House of Gryffindor is also the place Harry meets

his best friends, and soon to be partners in dangerous adventures, Ronald Weasley and

Hermione Granger. Hogwarts is also where Harry realizes his passion and talent for the

complicated game of Quidditch. Magic school is not all fun and games, though. Along

with meeting his best friends, Harry also meets his rival at Hogwarts. Draco Malfoy lives

in the House of Slytherin and is Harry’s arch-nemesis. Draco and Harry are at odds about

most things, especially Quidditch. Harry soon discovers with the help of his friends and

Hogwart’s headmaster Albus Dumbledore, he has more to worry about than Draco

Malfoy. In the course of learning how he received the unusual scar on his forehead, he

also learns an evil and powerful wizard, Lord Voldemort, is hunting him.

Throughout the course of the six books, Harry discovers his fate is tied to

Voldemort’s. He learns one cannot live while the other survives. Harry also knows he is

not alone in the struggle. With the help of his loyal friends Ron and Hermione, his mentor

Dumbledore, and many other friends and professors, Harry strives to become the wizard

everyone hopes he will be.

Value of the Study

It is a common belief that stories affect children as well as the adults who heard

them as children. The long history of the fairy tale has influenced and shaped society

today. According to Dowling (1981), fairy tales affect the ways children learn and

develop their socially created gender roles. Additionally, along with traditional fairy

tales, many authors are adapting fairy tales to incorporate society’s changing views. For

example in Kissing the Witch: Old Tales in New Skins, Donoghue (1997) portrays Snow

White as a girl, and then a woman, who makes her own choices. The more contemporary

Snow White does not rely on a prince to rescue her. Furthermore, other authors are

writing original fairy tales using traditional fairy tale elements such as kings and queens,

witches and wizards, magic objects, and spells. In 1945 Astrid Lindgren, a Swedish

author, wrote the fairy tale Pippi Längstrump (Pippi Longstocking in the United States).

This well-known story showcases a defiant, independent female child who also happens

to be the strongest girl in the world. Almost 30 years later Lindgren (1973) wrote another

fairy tale entitled The Brothers Lionheart. This tale also incorporated traditional fairy

tale elements such as the evil dragon and long journey both main characters had to take.

In Joan Aiken’s (1969) original fairy tale A Small Pinch of Weather, traditional fairy tales

elements are also used. The main characters are visited by the Furies in the form of three

dog-faced women. They cause everyone who visits the house to reveal their past crimes.

These are only two of the several other authors writing original fairy tales.

The retelling of traditional fairy tales, the reworking of traditional fairy tales, and

the creation of original fairy tales mean children and adults have greater access to fairy

tales than they did in the past. As stated, Rowling’s books have sold over 325 million

copies and can be found worldwide. Zipes (2002) stated, “fairy tales serve to unite the

people of a community and help bridge a gap in the understanding of social problems in a

language and narrative mode familiar to listeners’ experience” (p. 6). The popularity of

the series only emphasizes the value of the study.

In order to analyze gender assignments in Harry Potter and the Order of the

Phoenix a feminist rhetorical assessment will be conducted. The artifacts will be

examined and analyzed for the feminist rhetoric they may contain. The rhetorical

effectiveness of the artifacts will also be explored. This study will contribute to the

understanding of how gender roles are created and portrayed in the Harry Potter series.

Research Questions

1. To what extent, if any, does the book Harry Potter and the Order of the

Phoenix contradict or affirm the gender roles created by society?

2. To what extent, if any, is the role of the leading female character altered in

order to “feminize” the tale?

3. To what extent, if any, is the role of the leading male character altered in order

to “feminize” the tale?

4. What suggestions, if any, need to be made about updating classic fairy tales to

reflect current perceptions of gender in society?

Limitations of the Study

This study examines the fifth book in a series of seven with the seventh due to be

published July 21, 2007 (Rowling, 2007). Although this artifact seems good

representation, the series is not yet complete. Furthermore, many other fairy tales both

contemporary and traditional could be examined. In addition, this fairy tale and the other

fairy tales discussed in this study are from a European background. Fairy tales, or their

equivalents, exist in almost every culture around the world. Most of them are passed on

orally and have not been written down or translated.

There are other limitations to the study. It is important to remember the Harry

Potter books are only examined as rhetorical artifacts. No observations or controlled

study with children or adults will be conducted. In addition, this study will only employ

one feminist critical method. Moreover, the study will only analyze gender roles of

selected characters in the tale, not the narrative structure of themes found in the tale.

Chapter II

Historical Contextual Background

Fairy tales can be found throughout the world. Traditionally, they have been

passed on orally through generations. However, due to technological advancements fairy

tales can be read in print and adaptations of fairy tales are frequently viewed on the small

and large screens. These are two examples of how fairy tales have grown and evolved.

This chapter will focus on past literature pertaining to fairy tales and feminist criticism. It

will review literature in seven areas of study. First folklore, the origin of fairy tales, will

be explained. Second, this chapter will discuss fairy tales and the functions of fairy tales.

In the third section, feminist criticism will be defined and discussed. The fourth section

will outline feminist rhetorical criticism. Fifth, feminist rhetorical criticism of fairy tales

will be reviewed. In the sixth section, feminist views of fairy tales will be explored.

Finally, literature concerning the Harry Potter series will be examined.

Folklore

Folklore is ancient. According to Dorson (1972), the word folklore first appeared

in 1846 in a British magazine entitled, The Athenaeum. Dorson’s 1972 book entitled,

Folklore and Folklife: An Introduction gave a brief history of how the word came into

use. He reported an English collector of antiquities, William John Thoms, requested the

word “Folk-Lore” replace the more cumbersome phrase “popular antiquities”. Dorson

expanded this history in his 1983 book entitled Handbook of American Folklore.

As cited in Dorson (1983), Thoms stated:

“[I] intended the word to be employed as the generic term under which are

included traditional institutions, beliefs, art, customs, stories, songs, sayings, and

the like current among backward peoples or retained by the less cultured classes

of more advanced peoples (p. xi).

Although this was the first time the word was used, Brunvand (1976) suggested folklore

has existed in one form or another as long as language itself. In Folklore: A Study and

Research Guide published in 1976, Brunvand stated, “the written records from ancient

times imply the presence of old and varying ideas and expressions passing from parent to

child, generation to generation” (p. 7). Dorson (1972) also suggested elements of folklore

are passed on from generation to generation. Not only are these elements passed on

through people, but from one part of the world to another.

Due to the passing of folklore from generation to generation and from one part of

the world to another, defining folklore is complicated at best. Folklore encompassed

many areas of study and many areas of the world. Therefore, definitions are varied and

are constantly changing. Dorson (1972) offered an ambiguous definition when he

concluded folklore means a field of study and all of the subject matter in that field. In the

book Handbook of American Folklore published in 1983, Dorson expanded this

definition, although it is no less ambiguous. He stated:

The word folklore is, of course, as abstract a term as are the words love,

liberty, and literature. Its precise meaning lies in the mind of the definer,

not in the thing itself, which is both as real and unreal as any of the concepts

mentioned above (p. 1).

Dorson (1983) suggested the word folklore carries a variety of definitions because the

meaning changes from person to person. Brunvand (1976) offers a different definition.

He defined folklore as a term “referring to cultural survivals found in peasant traditions”

(p. 138). He also suggested in the beginning the term folklore was only applied to oral

narratives, but has expanded to include other areas. Previously, Brunvand (1968) defined

folklore differently. In The Study of American Folklore: An Introduction, he defined

folklore as, “those materials in culture that circulate traditionally among members of any

group in different versions, whether in oral form of by means of customary example” (p.

5). Axel Olrik (1921), a Danish folklorist, paved the way for today’s researchers of

folklore. He defined folklore in terms of a narrative. In his book Principles for Oral

Narrative Research, Olrik (1921) stated, “Narrative…designates a report of an event that

is passed along by word of mouth without the informants’ being able to check its origin

or its previous authority” (p. 1). The definition attempted to illuminate how folklore is

passed from generation to generation, echoing the statements of both Dorson (1972) and

Brunvand (1976). The Great Soviet Encyclopaedia (1978), cited in Newall’s (1978)

Folklore Studies in the 20

Century, limited the definition of folklore, by defining it as

“the artistic activity of the working people” (p. 57). Yet another, perhaps simplistic

definition found in Webster’s New World Dictionary (1984) labeled folklore as the

traditional beliefs and legends of a people. In addition, Funk and Wagnalls (1949)

Standard Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology, and Legend listed 21 different definitions

for the word folklore.

Along with a variety of definitions, the study of folklore is divided into a variety

of areas. According to Dorson (1959), in his book entitled American Folklore, “folklore

may refer to types of barns, bread molds, or quilts; to orally inherited tales, songs, saying,

and beliefs; or to village festivals, household customs, and peasant rituals” (p. 2). Dorson

(1964), collected many folkloric artifacts from various areas of folkloric study, including

proverbs, folk drama, riddles, and folk medicine and compiled them into an anthology

entitled, Buying the Wind: Regional Folklore in the United States.

Ben-Amos (1976) in the book Folklore Genres reported folklore scholars in the

early twentieth century attempted to systematically classify folklore into genres using a

model provided by Swedish botanist, Carolus Linnaeus. Folklore scholars identified

major categories of folklore including, tales, legends, ballads, and riddles. This

classification model did not provide the clarity folklore scholars hoped it would. Ben-

Amos (1976) stated, “whereas Linnaeus discovered the order inherent in nature,

folklorists constructed models of ideal order and imposed them upon the reality of

tradition” (p. xvi). Brunvand (1968) simplified the overwhelming categories the field of

folklore contains. He stated, “folklore is either verbal, partly verbal, or non-verbal” (p.

2). Included in the verbal category are elements of folklore such as folk speech, folk

proverbs and sayings, folk riddles, folk songs, and finally folk narratives. Elements

identified in the partly verbal categories include beliefs, superstitions, folk customs, and

folk festivals. Elements such as architecture, arts, costumes and foods are included in the

non-verbal folklore category. Folktales, or folk narratives as Brunvand (1968) stated, are

included in the verbal folklore category.

Stith Thompson (1946) defined the term folktale as, “all forms of prose narrative,

written or oral, which have come to be handed down through the years” (p. 4). The

Folktale written by Thompson in 1946, examined folktales and the elements they contain.

He reported the category of folktale contains many areas of study. He claimed folktales

include any story handed down, either written or orally. Thompson (1946) gave examples

of areas of study within the folktale category, such as, ballads, epics, poetry, novels, and

short stories. His book focused on the traditional prose tale, or the folktale. He also

outlined two key elements found in folktales. The first element is the ability of the teller

to pass on the tale with pride. The tellers of folktales should desire to impress those

listening to the tales by remembering the tale and by giving it an enthusiastic delivery.

The second key element found in folktales is the disregard of originality.

According to Thompson (1946), the allure of folktales stems from the knowledge the

same story is being told somewhere else by someone else. In the book, One Hundred

Favorite Folktales published in 1968, Thompson amended his view on folktales. He

emphasized the importance of the oral teller of the tale and the audience listening to the

tale. Dorson (1975) in the book Folktales Told Around the World, viewed folktales in

much the same way. He claimed a condition needed to be applied to the definition of the

term folktale. He stated, “the first great correction that needs to be made concerns the

nature of the folktale itself, which should be indicated as a spoken performance, rather

than as a literary text” (p. xviii).

To analyze the folktale and its categories, Thompson (1966) developed a

classification system. Unlike the system mentioned previously, Thompson classified the

tales by the motifs they contained. In The Motif-Index of Folk-Literature, Thompson

(1966) defined the term motif as:

any of the elements going into a traditional tale, it must be remembered that in

order to become a real part of tradition an element must have something about it

that will make people remember and repeat it. It must be more than commonplace

(p. 753).

For example, many folktales contain elements such as stepmothers, princes and princess,

and the number three. Thompson (1966) classified these elements in the index he created.

Brunvand (1976) also offered a definition of motif. He stated, “[a motif] is any striking or

unusual detail of a folk narrative, whether character, object, concept, formula, or other”

(p. 139). Other motif-indicies exist. Antti Aarne indexed over eight hundred folktales

found in European communities (Thompson, 1966). Although this index is substantial,

Thompson (1966) asserted outside of Europe Aarne’s index is not useful.

As mentioned, folktales are also divided into categories. They include hero tales,

explanatory tales, sage tales, and animal tales (Thompson, 1946). Perhaps the most

popular folktale category is the fairy tale. The next section will discuss fairy tales.

Fairy Tales

Fairy tales are almost as ancient as folklore. Zipes (2002) in the book Breaking

the Magic Spell: Radical Theories of Folk and Fairy Tales stated, “fairy tales have been

in existence as oral folk tales for thousands of years and first became literary fairy tales

during the seventeenth century” (p. 2). During the seventeenth century, specifically the

year 1697, is the point of origin for the literary fairy tale (Zipes, 1994). This is when

Perrault (as cited in Zipes, 2004) published a French version of the fairy tale “Cinderella”

entitled “Cendrillon”. It is important to note, according to Zipes (2002) fairy tales were

not considered suitable for children until the seventeenth century when they were

recorded in print. He discovered fairy tales became institutionalized during the eighteenth

century, and “audiences came to expect and demand certain kinds of structures, motifs,

and characters in fairy tales” (p. 4). He went on to say by the nineteenth century writers

of fairy tales were introducing Christian and patriarchal lessons into their tales. Zipes

(2002) concluded these new elements were added to satisfy middle class and aristocratic

adults.

Like folktales, fairy tales are found all around the world. Theorists studying fairy

tales are found all around the world, as well. One highly regarded and recognized fairy

tale theorist is Vladimir Propp. In his book, Morphology of the Folktale, Propp (1968)

used a scientific classification for fairy tale elements. He stated, “classification is one of

the first and most important steps of a study” (p. 11). Propp (1968) used 100 fairy tales to

test his classification system. He decided, “all fairy tales are of one type in regard to their

structure” (p. 23). Propp suggested all fairytales, regardless of subject matter, are

structured or designed in the same way.

Other folklorists cite Propp as having a great impact on the study of fairy tales.

Dorson (1983) stated, “popular literature is often analyzed through structural schemes

borrowed from studies in folk narrative, notably those of Vladamir Propp and Claude

Levi- Strauss” (p. 429). Strauss (1955), a Frenchman, focused his studies on the area of

myth, not fairy tales.

Other researchers studying fairy tales around the world and the contributions they

made into this area of study include, Axel Olrik (1921), Principles for Oral Narrative

Research from The Netherlands, Luthi (1970), Once upon a time: On the Nature of Fairy

Tales from Switzerland, and Alan Dundes (1965), The Study of Folklore from the United

States.

As mentioned, fairy tales are just one type of folktale, but not all folktales are

fairy tales. Most fairy tales are distinguishable from folktales because, “fairy tales depict

magical or marvelous events or phenomena as a valid part of human experience” (Jones,

1995, p. 9). The book The Fairy Tale: The Magic Mirror of Imagination written by

Steven Swann Jones in 1995 provided elements used to distinguish fairy tales from other

types of folklore. He identified elements common to fairy tales, but they are not absolute.

First, he pointed out most fairy tales have many different versions. This is the case with

“Cinderella”. As mentioned, Perrault published a French version of the story and, Jacob

and Wilhelm Grimm published a German version of Cinderella in 1812 entitled “Kinder

und Hausmärchen”. An English version of the story, translated by Edgar Taylor, was

published in 1823 (Zipes, 2004). A second element Jones (1995) highlighted is the

incorporation of fantasy as a central feature of fairy tales. The “happily ever after” is

another common element he pointed out. A final element Jones identified is the fact the

audience is supposed to identify with the protagonist.

The protagonist of the fairy tales is usually known as the heroine or hero. For the

purpose of this study, the term heroine will be replaced with the phrase leading female

character and the term hero will be replaced with the phrase leading male character. In

the book The Fairytale as Art Form and Portrait of Man, Luthi (1984) explained the

leading male character and the leading female character are the central figures in every

fairy tale. Jones (1995), like Luthi, believed the audience relates to the protagonist. Every

protagonist possesses basic elements. First, the leading male character or the leading

female character is an only child, the youngest child, or a stepchild. Second, the leading

male or female characters fall on either economic extreme. Third, the protagonist leaves

home as part of the plot (Luthi, 1984). According to Luthi, the attributes of the

protagonist create “a true portrait of a man” (p. 150).

Kay Stone (1975) in an article entitled “Things Walt Disney Never Told Us”

viewed the function of the protagonists in fairy tales differently. She objected to Luthi’s

(1984) basic structure of the protagonist because it negates the inequalities of the leading

female and male characters. She stated:

Heroes succeed because they act, not because they are. They are judged not by

their appearance or inherent sweet nature but by their ability to overcome

obstacles, even if those obstacles are defects in their own characters. Heroines are

not allowed any defects, nor are they required to develop, since they are already

perfect. The only tests of most heroines require nothing beyond what they are

born with: a beautiful face, tiny feet, or a pleasing temperament. At least this is

what we learn from the translations of the Grimm tales, and especially from Walt

Disney (p. 45).

Stone’s (1975) feminist view of the function of fairy tales leads into the next section of

the paper, feminist criticism.

Feminist Criticism

Rhetoric can be dated back to the time of Aristotle. According to Foss (1989),

Aristotle defined rhetoric as “the faculty [power] of discovering in the particular case

what are the available means of persuasion” (p. 4). The definition Aristotle offered

portrays men as the significant communicators (Foss, 1989). In Aristotle’s time, women

did not speak in a persuasive manner. Therefore, Aristotle’s definition does not take into

consideration women’s values or experiences. Foss, Foss and Trapp (1991) suggested a

different, more inclusive definition. They explained rhetoric as a perspective people

perceive and the use of symbols for the purpose of communicating. With this in mind, the

focus of criticism is enlightenment. Campbell (1989) defined enlightenment as “an

understanding of the ways symbols can be used by analyzing the ways they were used in

a particular time and place and the ways such usage appealed or might have appealed to

other human beings” (p. 2).

Feminist criticism, although not labeled with that term, has roots in America

dating back to the Revolutionary War (Rossi, 1973). The book The Feminist Papers:

From Adams to de Beauvior, chronicled some of the earliest forms of feminist criticism

on record. The book is divided into sections according to topics such as feminism and the

enlightened perspective and feminism and status politics, and spanned the years 1751 to

1966 (Rossi, 1973).

The more contemporary feminist critical approaches are derived from the feminist

movement and the efforts of researchers to combine feminism with the communication

field (Foss, 2004). According to Foss (1999), identifying the exact time feminist

viewpoints began to enter the communication field is difficult, but there are a few texts

that seem to have initiated this contemporary approach including “The Rhetoric of

Women’s Liberation”, written in 1973 by Karlyn Kohrs Campbell, and Kramerae’s

(formerly Kramer) 1974 article “Women’s Speech: Separate but Unequal”. These articles

and feminist criticism will be further discussed in the next chapter.

Foss (2004) believed women’s communication has an impact of its own.

“Feminist criticism is engaged in not only to re-examine rhetorical concepts and to

develop new ones that incorporate women’s experiences but also to achieve a particular

social purpose” (Foss, 1989, p. 154). Women communicate in interpersonal contexts and

they also communicate with different processes and actions.

Just as there are different ideas concerning rhetoric, there are many different ideas

concerning feminist rhetorical criticism. The next section in this chapter will briefly

discuss feminist rhetorical criticism.

Feminist Rhetorical Criticism

Feminism has many different definitions. Similar to the definition of folklore,

feminism is often defined differently by different people. Foss (2004) defined feminism

in very simple terms. She explained feminism means men and women should have equal

opportunities for self expression.

According to Campbell (1989) women, as rhetoricians, have adopted a feminine

style due to their different communication and life experiences. Campbell and Burkholder

(1997) defined feminine style as a woman’s capacity to rely on personal experience for

reasoning and for participatory interaction. They suggested feminine style is highly

personal and self-disclosing. The audience can identify with the rhetor. This is one way

feminine style achieves persuasion. Campbell and Burkholder (1997) stated, “The

audience members who have been similarly acculturated are invited to identify with the

personal experiences of the rhetor and are empowered to make their own decisions based

on that identification” (p. 145).

When feminists analyze fairy tales, they are engaged in the use of their own

feminine communication style. The next section will review feminist rhetorical criticism

of fairy tales.

Feminist Rhetorical Criticism of Fairy Tales

Zipes (1987) explained feminist scholars, when dealing with fairy tales, are

attempting to persuade people to amend their views about society. He continued to

explain one area feminist criticism of fairy tales centers on is gender and the gender roles

society has prescribed. According to Zipes (1987), another area feminist criticism of fairy

tales focused on is how to modify or counter the destructive male values found in the

tales. Stone (1986) addressed this in the article entitled “Feminist Approaches to the

Interpretations in Fairy Tales”. In her analysis she claimed women were negatively

affected by the portrayals of leading female characters in fairy tales. She stated, “feminist

writings discussed thus far have been concerned with the effects of gender stereotyping

and have justifiably aimed their criticism at popularly known tales” (p. 230). However,

she did not agree with the current feminist articles identifying these stereotypes. She

added to the previous quote by stating, “In doing so they tend to attack the same

heroines- notably Cinderella, Snow White, and Sleeping Beauty- again and again, until

the feminist view of such heroines has itself become a stereotype” (p. 230).

How do feminists view fairy tales? The next section will explore feminist views

of fairy tales.

Feminist Views of Fairy Tales

Women throughout history have been characterized as the “other”. Simone de

Beauvoir (1953) wrote about this fact in her book entitled The Second Sex. As cited in

Rossi (1973), Beauvior addressed the concept of the “other”. She stated, “she is defined

and differentiated with reference to man and not he with reference to her; she is the

incidental , the inessential as opposed to the essential. He is the Subject, he is the

Absolute- she is the Other” (p. 676). Farrer (1975) suggested the process of

objectification was created by men. Although, this process was created by men, women

accept it as true. Many feminists feel this objectification is disseminated by fairy tales.

Rohrich (1986) suggested in Bottigheimer’s book Fairy Tales and Society:

Illusion, Allusion, and Paradigm feminists are focused on the subordination of leading

female characters in fairy tales. Leading male characters are active, while leading female

characters are passive. For example, although Cinderella actively works by doing

household chores, she remains passive by waiting for someone to rescue her from her

situation. Since the beginning, classic fairy tales were constructed from a male viewpoint

(Zipes, 1987). The women of classic fairy tales were restricted to chores, charms, cures,

and quaint beliefs (Farrer, 1975). However, with the growth of the feminist movement,

“feminist folklore may reflect the ideals of female independence and strength” (Lundell,

1986, p. 149).

Stone (1975) provided an example of the negative view of women found in fairy

tales. She explained one feature of fairy tales is the restriction of leading female

characters at puberty. She suggested men’s fear of female sexuality is the reason behind

this feature in fairy tales. Stone (1975) used the tales of Rapunzel, who is locked in a

tower, Snow White, who is sent to the forest to be killed, and Sleeping Beauty, who is put

to sleep, to illustrate the negative view of women. Conversely, Jones (1986) adopted a

different attitude regarding Snow White’s dilemma. He suggested this fairy tale

accurately depicts two important stages of the growth of a child into a woman. He viewed

Snow White’s circumstance as a rite of passage.

In the last two decades, the woman’s movement brought new perspectives of

woman’s roles to fairy tales by creating feminist fairy tales (Rohrich, 1986). Feminist

tales serve three main purposes. The first purpose, suggested Rohrich (1986), is to

critique the patriarchal status quo. The second purpose, according to Zipes (1987), is to

change the socialization process. The third purpose of feminist fairy tales is to speak not

only for women, but also for other oppressed groups (Zipes, 1987). He stated, “by re-

constructing fairy-tale worlds along non-sexist lines, the writers of feminist fairy tales

address society at large, question recurrent patterns of values and the stable expectations

about roles and relations” (p. xii). Feminist fairy tales are not only meant for women and

children; men can also enjoy them.

The final section in this chapter will examine the critical literature pertaining to

the Harry Potter series.

Harry Potter

This section will review several anthologies analyzing the Harry Potter series.

First, each anthology, containing several articles, will be examined. Second, a chapter in

Zipes (2001) book will be reviewed. Finally, several articles pertaining to gender and

feminism in the Harry Potter series will be explored.

Since 1998 there has been a seemingly permanent fixture on bestseller lists.

After Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone was published, J.K. Rowling has enjoyed

incredible success as an author. The popularity of the next five books in the series

catapulted Rowling into a category consisting of prestigious and highly recognizable

authors including Roald Dahl, A.A. Milne, and E.B. White. In Reading Harry Potter:

Critical Essays, Giselle Liza Anatol (2003) suggested Rowling had surpassed the authors

previously mentioned in popularity and in sales. Anatol stated, “it is exactly because the

series has become so widely popular that it is both critically significant and should be

taken quite seriously” (p. xiv). It is evident from the abundance of critical literature

focused on the Harry Potter series that many agree with Anatol. A quick search on

www.Amazon.com listed almost 45 books concerning the series. Topics vary greatly and

range from Harry Potter and religion to Harry Potter and science to Harry Potter and

moral choices. The remainder of the chapter will examine several critical pieces of

literature concerning the Harry Potter series.

Anatol, (2003) edited a book entitled Reading Harry Potter: Critical Essays. She

divided the book into three sections. The first section of the book was devoted to reading

Harry Potter through theories of child development. Included in this section is an article

written by Lisa Damour (2003) entitled, “Harry Potter and the Magical Looking Glass:

Reading the Secret Life of the Preadolescent”. In this article, Damour (2003) analyzed

the first four Harry Potter books “through a psychoanalytic lens” (p. 16). She focused on

the developmental stages of preadolescence. She asserted that unlike Cinderella and

Snow White which are tales of early childhood, adults, as well as young adults, enjoy the

Harry Potter books because they depict a time adults remember and they illustrate

preadolescents’ present day troubles. Damour (2003) stated, “they do remember what it

was like to be eleven, twelve, thirteen, and fourteen and take pleasure in recognizing and

reliving a time when they were preparing to leave childhood” (p. 16). Damour used

Sigmund Freud’s research in developmental stages of children to trace the development

of characters in the books as well as the books as a series. She concluded, “Rowling has

artfully created a textual looking-glass where young readers can observe their own

unconscious conflicts in a displaced and imaginary form, indulge their fantasy lives, and

find magical solutions to otherwise hopeless troubles” (p. 23).

Another article included in the first section of Anatol’s (2003) collection is

entitled, “Harry and Hierarchy: Book Banning as a Reaction to the Subversion of

Authority” written by Rebecca Stephens (2003). She addressed repeated attempts to ban

the Harry Potter books in America. She determined the most frequent reason given to ban

the series is because of the depiction of witches and wizards. She stated, “many of the

books’ detractors believe the depiction of witches and wizards is likely to desensitize

children to the dangers of the dark supernatural world” (p. 52). After Stephens (2003)

compared the Rowling’s unfinished series to C. S. Lewis’s completed Narnia books, she

discovered an underlying reason for all the attempts to ban the Harry Potter series. She

concluded the books opponents are troubled by “the lack of a single, controlling authority

in the books” (p. 56). Unlike the authority figure Aslan in the Narnia series, Dumbledore,

Harry’s mentor and headmaster at Hogwarts, is far from all-knowing. In addition,

Stephens (2003) suggested the only absolute authority figure found in the Potter series so

far is the evil Lord Voldemort. She stated, “fears of an order deposed certainly seem to

echo in the cries against ‘moral relativism’ in the Harry Potter books, which also turn on

the sense that absolutes and a fixed ordering of power have been lost” (p. 58). Examples

of other articles focused on theories and child development are “Archetypes and the

Unconscious in Harry Potter and Diana Wynne Jones’s Fire and Hemlock and

Dogsbody” by Mills (2003), “Harry Potter and the Acquisition of Knowledge” by

Hopkins (2003), and “Safe as Houses: Sorting and School House at Hogwarts”, by

Lavoie (2003).

In the second section of Anatol’s (2003) works, articles concerning the series

literary influence and historical context are discussed. Karen Manners Smith (2003)

wrote an article entitled “Harry Potter’s Schooldays: J. K. Rowling and the British

Boarding School Novel”. She discovered the Potter series fits nicely into the school story

tradition that reaches back to the tales of Thomas Hughes (1857) in Tom Brown’s

Schooldays. In another article entitled “Accepting Mudbloods: The Ambivalent Social

Vision of J.K. Rowling’s Fairy Tales” Elaine Ostry (2003) claimed fairy tales are filled

with “ideological doubleness” (p. 90). This doubleness is found in fairy tales in the form

of radical ideas versus traditional beliefs. Ostry (2003) suggested doubleness is also

found in the Harry Potter series. She stated:

just as the fairy tale’s radical qualities and matched by traditional inflexibility, so

is Rowling’s antimaterialism matched by an awe of wealth, her antiracism foiled

both by a reliance on “color blindness” and stock types, and her hero

simultaneously ordinary and princely (p. 90).

She explored how children’s literature, such as the fairy tale, is both radical and

traditional. Ostry (2003) suggested this ambivalence creates tension in the genre of

children literature. She stated, “we do not know what we want from children’s literature,

comfort or change” (p. 90). Other articles also discussed literary influences and historical

contexts. Two examples are “Hermione and the House-Elves: The Literary and Historical

Contexts of J. K. Rowling’s Antislavery Campaign”, written by Brycchan Carey (2003),

and “Flying Cars, Floo Powder, and Flaming Torches: The Hi-Tech, Low-Tech World of

Wizardry”, by Margaret J. Oakes (2003).

In the third and final section of Reading Harry Potter: Critical Essays, Anatol

(2003) included articles pertaining to morality and social values concerning the series.

Veronica Schanoes (2003) wrote an article entitled “Cruel Heroes and Treacherous Texts:

Educating the Reader in Moral Complexity and Critical Reading in J.K. Rowling’s Harry

Potter Books”. Schanoes explored how Rowling has constructed the good and evil

counterparts in the series. The author also examined how Rowling’s construction of good

and evil aids her in writing the tales. Schanoes (2003) suggested “the ambiguous status of

good and evil and the untrustworthiness of written narratives” are inextricable

intertwined (p. 131).

In “Cinderfella: J.K. Rowling’s Wily Web of Gender”, written by Ximena

Gallardo-C. and C. Jason Smith (2003), the authors explored the similarities between the

character of Harry Potter and the classic fairy tale princess Cinderella. They suggested

the Rowling’s book follows the same gender stereotyping as the classic fairy tale.

Gallardo-C. and Smith (2003) concluded the article in favor of the series. They stated,

“Rowling’s Potter series, however, engages in self- reflective critique on many levels and

therefore belongs to a “new” type of children’s literature that interrogates and

deconstructs traditional expectations of gender roles” (p. 203). Other articles focused on

morality and social values included in this collection are “Harry Potter and the Rule of

Law: The Central Weakness of Legal Concepts in the Wizard World”, by Susan Hall

(2003), and “Class and Socioeconomic Identity in Harry Potter’s England”, written by

Julia Park (2003).

Elizabeth Heilman (2003) edited another collection of articles focused on the

Rowling’s Potter books. Like Anatol’s (2003) collection, Harry Potter’s World:

Multidisciplinary Critical Perspectives explored literary perspectives of the series with

articles entitled “Harry Potter- The Return of the Romantic Hero”, written by Maria

Nikolajeva (2003) and “Generic Fusion and the Mosaic of Harry Potter”, by Anee

Heibert Alton (2003). Deborah De Rosa (2003) published another article entitled

“Wizardly Challenges to and Affirmation of the Initiation Paradigm in Harry Potter”.

This article examined how Rowling keeps her Potter tales from getting boring. She used

Joseph Campbell’s (1949) book The Hero with a Thousand Faces as a framework for

analysis. Rosa stated:

according to his [Campbell’s] analysis of universal myths, the hero typically goes

on a quest during which he encounters a mentor who assists him with a series of

trials. The hero usually survives the arduous trials and returns home with an

awareness of a new world order and a book that he shares with his community (p.

163).

Campbell (1949) labeled the recurrent pattern, highlighted in the above quote, as literary

initiations. Rosa (2003) suggested Rowling averts boredom in the Potter books by

twisting expected elements in the literary initiations. For example, Rowling opens each

novel with Harry living his less that ideal life with the Dursleys. He very quickly departs

for Hogwarts. Rosa (2003) asserted this sequence of events “emphasizes that Harry’s

experiences at Hogwarts…represent a return to a safer environment in which Harry can

experience…a state of carefree childhood” (p. 163).

Heilman (2003) also included articles about cultural studies perspectives in her

collection. One article entitled, “Controversial Content in Children’s Literature: Is Harry

Potter Harmful to Children?” written by Taub and Servaty (2003), explored what some

parents and Christian censors have called the violent and overly frightening content in the

series. The authors explained children’s responses to literature vary according to their

own development.

In an article written by Tammy Turner-Vorbeck (2003) entitled “Pottermania:

Good, Clean Fun or Cultural Hegemony?” the marketing efforts related to the Harry

Potter books and spin-off products are critically examined. The author of the article

discussed how the genre of children’s literature is transforming into an opportunity for

consumerism instead of a private pleasure. In a related article by Peter Appelbaum

(2003) entitled “Harry Potter’s World: Magic, Technoculture, and Becoming Human”

Appelbaum disagreed with Turner-Vorbeck’s (2003) assessment. He argued the success

of the Potter books cannot be blamed on corporate marketing alone. He countered

Turner-Vorbecks argument by emphasizing “some potential product hypes don’t make it,

while others do. And few of them start out as a quiet book from an unknown author” (p.

25). In the remainder of the article, Appelbaum (2003) illustrated the connection between

technology and culture and the connection between magic and science found in the Potter

series. He stated, “[the connections] are emblematic of the kinds of cultural practices that

leads to its [the series’] popularity” (p. 26).

Another section of Heilman’s (2003) collection included three articles exploring

the ways in which readers supply important textual content onto the text they are reading.

Readers do this by “projecting their identity, past experiences, preoccupations, and

cultural orientations” onto what they read. Kathleen Malu (2003) explored this in the

article “Ways of Reading Harry Potter: Multiple Stories for Multiple Reader Identities.”

Hollie Anderson (2003) also examined reader response and interpretation in her article

“Reading Harry Potter with Navajo Eyes.” Malu (2003) and Anderson (2003) suggested

even though interpretive theory proposes texts cannot “alter, expand, or enrich readers’

ideas about themselves or the world” (Heilman, 2003, p. 4), this may be possible when

texts are discussed with friends, teachers, or parents.

The third article in this section written by Bond and Michelson (2003) entitled,

“Writing Harry’s World: Children Coauthoring Hogwarts” explored “theoretical

underpinnings for the participatory authoring of literary worlds” (p. 109). The authors

then used the theories as a framework to examine students’ writing pertaining to the

Harry Potter series.

The fourth section in Heilman’s (2003) collection included articles focused on

various themes found in the Rowling’s Harry Potter books. Kornfield and Prothro (2003)

examined the representations of home and family in the Potter series in an article entitled,

“Comedy, Conflict, and Community: Home and Family in Harry Potter.” In the article

“The Seeker of Secrets: Images of Learning, Knowing, and Schooling”, Charles Elster

(2003) explored the “dichotomous view of learning: school learning, which is stodgy and

bookish, and ‘real learning’ which involves solving the big problems of life” (p. 204).

The author discovered the balance between school learning and real learning is not as

equal as it appears to be on the surface. The article “Images of the Privileged Insider and

Outcast Outsider”, written by Heilman and Gregory (2003) addressed the cultural

information Rowling is presenting and representing in the Potter series. Areas the authors

examined include social class, ability/disability, and nationality. Another article included

in this section of Heilman’s (2003) collection explored leadership in the series. Skulnick

and Goodman (2003) examined how J.K. Rowling positions Harry Potter as a civic leader

in the article entitled, “The Civic Leadership of Harry Potter: Agency, Ritual, and

Schooling”. The article included a narrative tale about a fifth grade classroom which

illustrated what happened when censorship and popular culture collide (see Appendix).

Lana Whited (2002) also compiled articles focused on Rowling’s Potter series as

the editor of The Ivory Tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a Literary Phenomenon.

Like the other anthologies mentioned, this collection discussed many of the same themes

and perspectives explored in Antol’s (2003) and Heilman’s (2003) efforts. Whited (2002)

incorporated articles about the connections the series has with other literature. Natov

(2002) compared the Potter series with literary classics such as David Copperfield and

Charlotte’s Web in her article “Harry Potter and the Extraordinariness of the Ordinary”.

Steege (2002) offered more connections between Harry Potter and the Tom Brown books

in his article entitled, “Harry Potter, Tom Brown, and the British School Story: Lost in

Transit?”.

Whited (2002) also included articles regarding the Potter series’ roots in epic,

myth, and folklore. An article entitled, “In Medias Res: Harry Potter as Hero-in-

Progress” by Mary Pharr (2002) highlighted Harry’s journey as that of a hero yet to be.

She compared his journey to other heroes found in numerous narrative structures.

Included on the list are famous figures such as “Gilgamesh (the son of Uruk’s King

Lugalbanda, Arthur (the son of Britian’s King Uther Pendragon), Kal-El (the son of

Krypton’s great scientist Jor-El), and Luke Skywalker (the son of Jedi Knight Anakin

Skywalker)” (p. 55). Jann Lacoss (2002) contributed an article entitled “Of Magicals and

Muggles: Reversals and Revulsions at Hogwarts”. This article examined the folkloric

elements contained throughout the series. Examples the author identified include “folk

groups, rites of passage, reversals, boundary crossing, and taboo themes” (p. 67). Lacoss

(2002) suggested the folkloric elements “play significant roles in helping children deal

with changes in life and prepare them for appropriate social roles” (p. 67). Grimes (2002)

also explored the connections between Harry Potter and folk and fairy tales in her article

“Harry Potter: Fairy Tale Prince, Real Boy, and Archetypal Hero.” She outlined the

appeal the series has for young children, young adolescents, and adults. She stated, “

Harry Potter serves as a fairy tale prince for young children; then, like Pinocchio, he

becomes a real boy for adolescents; and, finally, he serves as an archetypal hero for

adults” (p. 90).

Other articles about Rowling’s series, similar to the articles in other collections,

are included in Whited’s (2002) work. Authority and values in the series are explored in

articles such as Mendelsohn’s (2002) work entitled, “Crowning the King: Harry Potter

and the Construction of Authority”, and in a collaboration between Whited and Grimes

(2002) titled, “What Would Harry Do? J.K. Rowling and Lawrence Kohlberg’s Theories

of Moral Development”. Consumerism, commodity, and culture are also examined in

articles by Westman (2002) entitled, “Specters of Thatcherism: Contemporary British

Culture in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter Series”, by Teare (2002) entitled, “Harry Potter

and the Technology of Magic”, and by Borah (2002) entitled, “Apprentice Wizards

Welcome: Fan Communities and the Culture of Harry Potter”.

Whited (2002) also incorporated articles in The Ivory Tower and Harry Potter:

Perspectives on a Literary Phenomenon not found in other collections. An article

entitled, “You Say ‘Jelly’, I Say ‘Jell-O’? Harry Potter and the Transfiguration of

Language” by Nel (2002) analyzed the reason Arthur A. Levine of Scholastic Publishing

Company translated the series from British English to American English. Nel also

examined what the series loses from being translated. In the article, Nel cited an opinion-

editorial written by Peter Gleick (2000) and published in The New York Times. Cited by

Nel (2002), Gleick commented, “Scholastic’s ‘Americanized’ texts contribute to the

‘dumb[ing] down of U.S. society” (p. 261). Nel included Levine’s response to this

criticism. As cited in Nel’s article Levine stated:

I wasn’t trying to, quote, ‘Americanize’ them. What I was trying to do was

translate, which is something different. I wanted to make sure that an American

kid reading the book would have to same literary experience that a British kid

would have (2002, p. 261).

The remainder of the article listed specific examples of words or phrases throughout the

series Scholastic changed. For example Levine “translated ‘sherbet lemon’ to ‘lemon

drop’, ‘motorbike’ to ‘motorcycle’, ‘chips’ to ‘fries’, ‘jelly’ to ‘Jell-O’, ‘jacket potato’ to

‘baked potato’, ‘jumper’ to ‘sweater’ and ‘mum’ to ‘mom’ (though, at Rowling’s

insistence ‘mum’ was retained in later books)” (p. 262). Nel (2002) suggested translating

British English to American English creates cultural differences and distorts the meaning

in Rowling’s tales.

Another article incorporated in Whited’s (2002) collection focused on the

language of the Potter series. Jentsch (2002) in her article entitled, “Harry Potter and the

Tower of Babel: Translating the Magic” explored the difficulties Rowling’s texts

represent when translating the books into another language. She analyzed the French,

German, and Spanish translations of the first three Harry Potter novels. She discovered

while translators try to capture the magic in Rowling’s text, the translations often fall

short. She stated:

translators of the Harry Potter books are faced with numerous unusual situations,

and must weigh the options carefully, in order not to compromise J.K. Rowling’s

characterizations, her novels’ sense of place, and her careful use of language, be it

in the realm of nomenclature, satire, or playfulness (Jentsch, 2002, p. 301).

The article illustrated the strengths and weaknesses of each translation. Jentsch (2002)

asserted the translations, while needing improvement, are still cherished all over the

world. In some cases, the translated version of the series is the only way to make it

available to a wider audience.

An article entitled “Harry Potter: From Craze to Classic?” by Whited (2002) is

also incorporated into the collection Whited published. This article served as an

introduction to the Harry Potter series and offered details pertaining to the sales figures of

the first four books. Additionally, Whited (2002) included information about the

controversies surrounding the series. She discussed the claims made by conservative

Christians that the books are inappropriate for children. Whited (2002) also explained the

legal battle in which Rowling was engaged in 1999. A woman filed charges against

Rowling for federal trademark and copyright infringement. The woman claimed Rowling

stole her ideas from a book she had published in 1987. In 2002, four years after the

original claim was filed, a judge ruled in Rowlings’ favor. The woman was ordered to

pay Rowling fifty thousand dollars and reimburse her for attorney fees.

Another controversy Whited (2002) cited held more importance for the literary

world. This controversy focused on Rowling’s third book and its literary merit. Harry

Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was nominated for the Whitbred Book of the Year

award in Great Britain. Also nominated that year was Seamus Heany’s new translation of

Beowulf. Heaney won the prize and was awarded £21,000 while Prisoner of Azkaban,

instead, was named Whitbred Children’s Book of the Year. Rowling was awarded

£10,000. The sudden separation of categories for the Whitbred Award mirrored the

decision of The New York Times to create the Children’s Best Sellers list, and it was

equally controversial. Furthermore, both changes were made about the same time.

William Safire, a now retired columnist for The New York Times, actively agreed with the

Whitbred committee decision to create a separate category. In his article appearing in The

New York Times entitled “Besotted with Potter” Safire stated, “[Rowling] deserves the

lesser award she received for best children’s book” (p. A27). He also claimed adults who

read the series were wasting their time. He admitted he had not read Rowling’s book

under consideration for the Whitbred award.

Safire’s comments and the committee’s decision to create another category for

Prisoner of Azkaban fueled two unfortunate stereotypes occurring in the literary

community. Whited (2002) expressed, “the notion that even a highly regarded and

phenomenally successful children’s book could not be measured against critically

acclaimed books for adults” (p. 6). This controversy also fueled the stereotype that

commercially successful books cannot be considered great literary works. For example,

books by Stephen King and John Grisham are very successful and can be found on

bestseller lists, but they are not awarded great literary prizes. An another example of this

stereotype occurred recently. Jonathan Franzen, the author of the book, The Corrections,

refused to let talk show host Oprah Winfrey name his novel as a book club selection.

Whited (2002) suggested, “this refusal probably resulted from the same flawed

assumption” (p. 7). That is, Frazen did not want his book to be a commercial success

because he wanted it to be a critical success.

While the anthologies reviewed above analyzed the Harry Potter books through

the fourth installment of the series (Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire), the articles

found in Lackey’s (2005) collection delve into all six Harry Potter books. Lackey’s

(2005) work entitled Mapping the World of Harry Potter is a critical, yet oftentimes

humorous, anthology of articles focused on Rowling’s Harry Potter series. Unlike the

other anthologies mentioned, the articles in Lackey’s collection are not neatly arranged in

specific categories. However, similar topics are analyzed and discussed. For instance,

power and authority in the Harry Potter series are examined in Moloney’s (2005) article

entitled, “Harry Potter and the Young Man’s Mistake”. The universal hero pattern is

explored in the articles, “Neville Longbottom: The Hero with a Thousand Faces”, written

by Martha Wells (2005) and in the article entitled, “Why Dumbledore Had to Die”

written by Watt-Evans (2005). Krause (2005) discussed the issue of religion in the series

in her article, “Harry Potter and the End of Religion” as did DeVos (2005) in her article

entitled, “It’s All About God”. Both articles examined the religious controversy

surrounding the Potter books and came to similar conclusions regarding the controversy.

The authors suggested the Potter books threaten religion, specifically Christianity,

because the books encourage change. Krause (2005) stated:

in many ways, Harry is a dangerous role model. The lessons he teaches do not fit

comfortably within the existing moral fabric of our society. Embracing them

encourages us to change the way we think about religion, and ethics, and personal

responsibility (p. 67).

DeVos (2005) pointed out the irony of the religious controversy surrounding the series.

She suggested, “Her [Rowling] novels do not undermine or attempt to replace traditional

beliefs, as critics charge. Their immense appeal arises from the fact that they enable

readers to return to the soul of those beliefs” (p. 79). In other words, the series highlights

what religion is based on, and not a specific religion or religious practice.

Other similar articles included in this collection are “The Dursleys as Social

Commentary”, by Gellis (2005), and “Harry Potter as Schooldays Novel”, by Gunn

(2005). Gellis’ (2005) article analyzed the functions of Harry’s wicked step-family, the

Dursleys. She claimed Rowling illustrates characteristics, such as greed and intolerance,

through the family’s behavior. The author suggested the behavior is portrayed so children

would avoid imitating it. The article written by Gunn (2005), examined the connection

between the Potter books and Thomas Hughes’ (1857) series Tom Brown Schooldays and

Farrar’s 1858 novel entitled Eric. This article also chronicled the history of what Gunn

referred to as “the Schooldays genre” (p. 146).

Amidst a few other articles such as Matthews’ (2005) contribution entitled “ Ich

Bin Lin Hufflepuff” and Castro’s (2005) work entitled, “From Azkaban to Abu Ghraib”,

Lackey’s (2005) anthology also contained humorous insights into the Harry Potter series.

An article entitled, “To Sir, With Love”, Millman (2005) explored the expanding realm

of fan fiction on the Internet. Her article focused on the adult fan fiction found on web

sites such as Occlumency.com and AdultFanFiction.net about Rowling’s character

Professor Snape. Millman (2005) also questioned the ethics of fan fiction and suggested it

could change the way traditional publishing companies operate. Another lighthearted

article entitled, “The Proper Wizard’s Guide to Good Manners: A M*ggle Tells All”, by

Conrad (2005) is included in the collection. This article explored inconsistencies in the

fictional Wizard handbook and attempted to correct any errors found. Conrad (2005)

employed Rowling’s magical terminology such as “the ministry of magic” and devices

used in the Potter series, such as owls delivering the mail, to add a touch of humor to the

article.

Jack Zipes, a well known author of scholarly work in children’s literature also

analyzed the popular Potter series. In his book Sticks and Stones, Zipes (2001) devoted a

19-page chapter to the books. He began the chapter with a story that seemed to put him

into the middle of a controversy. In April of 2001, a reporter for the Minneapolis Star

Tribune interviewed Zipes. He was asked his opinion about the Harry Potter series and he

replied he felt “they were formulaic and sexist” (p. 171). After the interview was printed,

Zipes started receiving numerous phone calls from reporters wanting to interview him

about his opinion of the series. He agreed to appear on a local radio show and was

bombarded with angry callers for his demeaning comments about Rowling’s books. This

controversy was the catalyst for the chapter in his book entitled “The Phenomenon of

Harry Potter, or Why All the Talk?”. The phenomenon of Harry Potter is discussed in the

remaining 18 pages of the chapter. Zipes (2001) expressed concern about the success of

the series. He argued the success of the books is due to the market conditions in the

culture industry and not because Rowling had written an extraordinary piece of literature.

He suggested changes in the ways literature is produced and received have affected the

success of the Harry Potter books. According to Zipes (2001), specific changes can be

seen in the areas of education policy, family relations, corporate conglomerates owning

mass media outlets, and marketing demands. In other words, he believed the success of

the Harry Potter books is a phenomenon produced by those in control of mass media.

Zipes stated, “in the case of the Harry Potter books, their phenomenality detracts from

their conventionality, and yet their absolute conformance to popular audience

expectations is what makes for their phenomenality” (p. 176). He also mentioned the

Harry Potter commodities, such as action figures, lunch boxes, clothing lines, and full-

length feature movies as items created by the marketing industry to heighten the

phenomenon. While heightening the phenomenon of Harry Potter might increase sales,

Zipes questioned whether it advances or improves the quality of children’s literature. He

commented, “Books of quality-including those for young adults- are unfortunately not

being read as widely as the ‘phenomenal’ books” (p. 187-188).

Many scholars have also analyzed sexism and gender identity in Rowling’s Harry

Potter novels. The online magazine Salon.com published an article entitled, “Harry

Potter’s Girl Trouble”, by Schoefer (2000). The author suggested the series furthers the

“assumption that men do and should run the world” (Schoefer, 2000, p. 1). She briefly

analyzed a few of the female characters in the books. Schoefer (2000) offered examples

of how women or girls in the books are portrayed with stereotypes. For instance, she

stated Hermione is described as “a bossy know-it-all” (p. 2). The author claimed the girls

in the story are portrayed as “silly or unlikable” (p. 2). She noted the girls do not

participate in the action of the story, but take on roles as helpers and enablers. Schoefer

(2000) also questioned why Hermione’s emotions hinder her intelligence. She

commented:

again and again, her emotions interfere with her intelligence, so that she loses her

head when it comes to applying her knowledge. Although she casts successful

spells for the boys, Hermione messes up her own and as a result, while they go

adventuring, she hides in the bathroom (p. 2).

The author suggested the other female characters in the novels follow the same

stereotypical roles. Ginny Weasley, Ron Weasely’s sister, loses her head whenever Harry

is around. Schoefer noted Professor McGonagall, the deputy headmistress of Hogwart’s,

defers to Dumbledore in every instance. Schoefer highlighted the fact that Dumbledore

can break the rules without penalty while the deputy in charge is strictly bound by the

rules and is content with enforcing them. The author also questioned the language

Rowling used to describle male and female characters. Schoefer (2000) pointed out the

male characters, such as Harry and Ron are described as adventurous and brave, while the

female characters are described as bossy, blushing, stammering, and stupid. The

discrepancy in language can also be found with descriptions of the professors at

Hogwarts. Dumbledore is described as wise and charismatic while his female

counterpart, Professor McGonagall, is described as stern, beady-eyed, and thin lipped.

It is easy to see why boys love Harry’s adventures. And I know that girls’

uncanny ability to imagine themselves in male roles (an empathic skill that boys

seem to lack, honed on virtually all children’s literature as well as Hollywood’s

younger audience films) enables them to dissociate from the limitations of female

characters… do we feel comforted by a world in which conventional roles are

firmly in place (Schoefer, 2000, p. 3).

Schoefer is not the only author to examine stereotypes in the Harry Potter series. Elliott

(2001) wrote an article published on the website www.bitchmagazine.com entitled,

“Stepping on the Harry Potter Buzz”. Elliott agreed with Schoefer’s (2000) analysis of

the series. Additionally, Elliott (2001) examined the lack of female power and authority

in the novels. She cited examples such as Mrs. Weasley and Professor McGonagall.

Elliott (2001) claimed both women are powerful, but their power is associated with

obeying the rules and following the codes of behavior. The author suggested this

connection portrays these women as “unattractive female authorities” (p. 4). Of course,

men in the novels such as Harry and Dumbledore, possess power also. However, this

power is associated with justice and safety. Elliott stated, “the headmaster embodies all of

the protective and enabling qualities of authority and none of the limiting, punitive ones

associated with powerful female characters” (p. 4). Elliott concluded the article by

connecting the series to feminism. She suggested while the final chapters of the books

“valorizes the heroes and punishes the bad guys” (p. 6), the real world of feminism

almost never ends in a similar manner. She stated:

Fighting for equality, even imagining it, is difficult, confusing, and often

unrewarded. [Harry Potter’s] world depends on magical father figures who

recognize the innate virtues and talents in male heroes…that only exist in fantasy.

Feminism challenges the most fundamental tenets of that fantasy (Elliott, 2001,

p.6).

Elliott explained feminism confronts the assumptions that male authority will always be a

safety net and justice will triumph without hard work and awareness. She stated “that

may be why even feminists love the fantasy so much” (p. 6).

Whitton (2003) published an article entitled “ ‘Me! Books! And Cleverness!:’

Stereotypical Portrayals in the Harry Potter Series” on the website

www.womenwriters.net

. The article, originally presented at the Popular Culture

Association/American Culture Association 2003 Conference in New Orleans, LA,

examined the stereotypical male and female characters and the lack of non-stereotypical

female characters in Rowling’s first installment, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone.

Whitton (2003) outlined the major female characters in the first book. She focused on the

language used to describe women. She cited examples including the terms “unattractive,

witchy, fat, nagging, mean, stern, and bookish” (p. 1). Whitton (2003) documented each

instance of obvious stereotypical portrayals, culminating with a scene at the end of the

first book. She cited a passage in the book highlighting Rowling’s reliance on

stereotypical female behavior. Whitton (2003) stated, “I found it hard to swallow this

sudden transformation of a studious, earnest young lady into a simpering sycophant”

(p.8). Whitton (2003) cited another article entitled, “Hermione Granger and the Heritage

of Gender” by Eliza Dresang (2002), to offer an explanation of this behavior. Dresang

(2002) traced the character of Hermione through her name beginning with the female

form, Hermes. The history of the name Hermione begins in Greek mythology. She is the

daughter of the King of Sparta and Helen of Troy. Dresang (2002) stated, “[Hermione] is

a daughter and a wife whose destiny is in the hands of her father and her two husbands”

(p. 8). Dresang (2002) suggested the Potter series could be a successful feminist series if

a distinction can be made between the terms caricature and stereotype.

A caricature is a representation in literature or art that implies somewhat ludicrous

exaggeration of the characteristics of features of a subject… A stereotype is

something conforming to a fixed or general pattern, a mental picture that is held

in common by members of a group and sometime is associated with a negative

prejudiced attitude. A stereotype is based on a group, not an individual ( Dresang,

2002, p. 221).

Whitton (2003) and Dresang (2002) agreed that while Rowling did not write a feminist

novel, the social world in the novels is a closer representation of reality in the late

twentieth and early twenty- first centuries than it is a vision of a better world.

Heilman (2003) is disappointed by the absence of powerful female figures in the

Harry Potter series as well. Her article entitled, “Blue Wizards and Pink Witches:

Representations of Gender Identity and Power”, published in Harry Potter’s World:

Multidisciplinary Critical Perspectives revealed “dominant and hegemonic conventions”

(p. 223) in Rowling’s series. She analyzed female representation in the novels and

discovered there are more male characters than female characters in the books.

Additionally, Heilman (2003) noted the more important characters in the story, such as

Harry, Ron, Dumbledore, and Voldemort, are male. Furthermore, male characters, as

Heilman highlighted, are portrayed as wiser, braver, more fun, and ultimately more

powerful than the female characters. The author suggested the lack of power is most

evident in the leading female character, Hermione. She outlined several scenes from the

first three novels that illustrate this point. For example, in Harry Potter and the Chamber

of Secrets, Hermione made an important potion which works fine for Harry and Ron, but

it goes awry when Hermione used it on herself. Consequently, while the males are

furthering their adventure, Hermione is hospitalized for weeks.

Heilman (2003) also discovered Professor McGonagall is portrayed in the same

light. The author noted Professor McGonagall is described as book smart, but she is never

described as wise, powerful, or brave. Heilman (2003) also determined McGonagall’s

physical description reinforces her lack of power. Heilman (2003) stated, “her hair is

worn in a bun and she had beady eyes and square glasses” (p. 225). Professor

McGonagall is not described as a male deputy headmaster would be described. Instead,

she is described as a bookish librarian. Professor McGonagall is also characterized as a

mother figure. She is concerned about the health and over all well-being of the students.

Heilman (2003) concluded this motherly depiction of women is constantly found in

children’s literature. She cited Barnett’s (1986) article entitled, “Sex Bias in the Helping

Behavior Presented in Children’s Picture Books” found in the Journal of Generic

Psychology, and Tetenbaum and Pearson’s (1989) article entitled, “The Voices in

Children’s Literature: The Impact of Gender on the Moral Decisions of Storybook

Characters”, found in Sex Roles. As cited in Heilman (2003), both articles suggested

females in children’s literature are portrayed as “comforting, consoling, and providing of

emotional support, whereas the males were more likely to be represented obtaining a goal

or overcoming an obstacle” (p. 225).

Heilman suggested while one instance of gender stereotyping is not significant,

repeated characterizations of demeaning stereotypical behavior are significant. She also

claimed gender stereotypes are more problematic in the Harry Potter series because they

are so popular. She asserted the popularity of the books originates because of the familiar

portrayals of gender and power. She stated, “novels that confront readers’ stereotypes

elicit either rejection or unsettling pleasure” (p. 236). She concluded the article by

recommending the books be used as tools in the classroom to highlight the connections

between power and gender. She offered, “these texts are particularly useful starting points

for such curriculum because they embody both enraging and constricting themes and

images” (p. 237).

While many scholars agree the Harry Potter books are full of gender stereotypes

and sexist, there are some scholars in disagreement with that assessment. Zettel (2005) in

the article “Hermione Granger and the Charge of Sexism” found in the anthology

Mapping the World of Harry Potter, disagreed with the claim the Harry Potter series is

sexist. Zettel (2005) refuted the articles written by Schoefer (2000), Elliott (2001), and

Whitton (2003). She suggested the authors did not consider the larger context when

analyzing the books. For example, Whitton (2003) only analyzed the first book when the

other four were also available. Elliott (2001) and Schoefer (2000) took quotes out of

context. Zettel (2005) also argued Elliott (2001) and Schoefer’s (2000) descriptions of

female stereotypes are not complete. For instance, Elliott and Schoefer suggested

Professor McGonagall is portrayed as stern, with limited power only associated with

following the rules. Zettel (2005) contended Professor McGonagall, while stern, is in fact

a much better instructor than her male counterparts. She stated:

she is a better teacher than a number of her male counterparts, and expert at a

more complex magic in addition to being the head of a house esteemed for its

courage and boldness. Transfiguration, her class, is shown to be a difficult and

dangerous subject (p. 87).

The author also determined although Professor McGonagall is hard to like in a friendly

way, she is fair to all students that attend Hogwarts. This behavior is in direct opposition

to the male Professor Snape who favors students from his own house. Zettel (2005) also

pointed out Professor McGonagall, at the beginning of the series, is trusted with the

secret that Harry exists at all.

Zettel (2005) explored other female characterizations, both good and evil, in

Rowling’s series as well. She examined Harry’s deceased mother, Lily Potter, Ron’s

mother, Molly Weasley, Draco’s mother, Narcissa Malfoy, and the evil Lord

Voldemort’s mother, Merope. The author concluded, “what makes women and girls good

or strong is not their association (or lack thereof) with men, but their own choices and

actions” (p. 89).

Zetttel (2005) also analyzed the leading female character, Hermione Granger.

Unlike other scholars, Zettel discovered that while the Harry Potter books are not a

feminist series, Hermione Granger is a feminist. The author offered examples to prove

her theory. For instance, Hermione does not allow the boys or male authority figures to

influence what she knows to be right. She pursues her course of action, and if she fails in

her first attempt, she tries another method to achieve her goals. She is confident in her

ability and will not be ignored. In Harry Potter and the Half- Blood Prince, it is

Hermione that continues to try to figure out the significance of the word “Prince”. Harry

and Ron believe they already know what it means, but this does not stop Hermione from

pursuing what she thinks is correct. In the end, she prevails. Zettel (2005) acknowledged

Rowling did not portray Hermione exactly as she portrayed Harry and Ron. She also

pointed out Rowling did not portray the boys in story the same either. The author stated:

it would be ludicrous to Rowling to write Hermione as if social and peer pressures

neither existed or mattered. They do exist. They do matter, and the girls who are

growing up reading these books deal with them every day, as does Hermione (p.

97).

Zettel (2005) concluded the people in the Harry Potter series come in all shapes, sizes,

and behaviors, just as people in the real world. She discovered what Rowling shows in

the novels is that you can be a worthy person, no matter what gender you are.

Another author explored gender in the Harry Potter series. Garfinkle (2005) in his

article entitled, “Why Killing Harry is the Worst Outcome for Voldemort” in Mapping

the World of Harry Potter, presented a “what if” version of the end of the story. He

questioned what would happen if Voldemort killed Harry. The answers he included in his

article characterized Hermione as a powerful, intelligent, and brave leader for the force of

good. Garfinkle (2005) stated:

For the moment Harry dies is the moment when the most dangerous person in the

Potterverse becomes Voldemort’s true and final enemy. He will face no longer the

power of Harry Potter, but the more terrible force- the brain of Hermione Granger

(p. 180).

The author offered examples, based on Hermione’s actions in the six books in the series,

as to why Hermione would eventually defeat Voldemort. One example Garfinkle (2005)

included occurred in the fifth book, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.

Hermione warned Harry about Voldemort’s power to manipulate Harry’s mind. Harry did

not heed her warning and Sirius Black, Harry’s godfather, paid the price with his life.

Garfinkle (2005) suggested the only reason Hermione has stayed in Harry’s

shadow is because of her “knee-jerk obedience” (p. 181) to those in authority, especially

Harry. The author claimed this reaction to authority is beginning to dissolve in the fifth

and sixth books. He suggested the adherence to authority would disappear as soon as

Harry dies. Hermione, instead of turning toward evil, would break out of her shell and

become a great and terrible witch. Garfinkle stated, “[she would be] great and terrible not

because of her power, which is considerable, but because she thinks, plans, and is

careful” (p. 181). The very characteristics some scholars perceive as negative become

Hermione’s strengths. Hermione would make sure Harry was better equipped to battle

and defeat Voldemort. Though some scholars may think this is another example of a

female character taking second billing to a male character, Garfinkle (2005) suggested

the Hermione’s power, not Harry’s, would ultimately cause the destruction of Lord

Voldemort.

Other articles examine different topics and ideas, including gender and sexism,

found in the Harry Potter series. The articles reviewed in this section highlight the

diversity of the topics concerning the Rowling’s series, from schooldays novels to fan

fiction on the Internet. The articles pertaining to gender in the series show the lack of a

universal scholarly attitude toward gender representations in the Harry Potter books.

Summary

This chapter focused on folklore, folktales, and fairy tales. Definitions of key

terms were provided and analyzed. For the purpose of this study, Brunvand’s (1976)

definition of folklore and Swann’s (1995) elements that distinguish folktales from fairy

tales will be used. Also offered in this chapter were preliminary overviews of rhetorical

criticism, feminist rhetorical criticism, and specifically, feminist rhetorical criticism of

fairy tales. Feminist views of fairy tales were also explored. The genesis of the Harry

Potter series was examined in this chapter. Finally, literature analyzing many aspects of

the series was discussed.

The next chapter will examine the methodology used in this study. Historical and

theoretical underpinnings of the method will be given. Details about the specific

procedures for a feminist rhetorical criticism will be outlined and justification of the

artifact will be discussed. Finally, details about how the procedures will be used will be

presented.

Chapter III

Methodology

This chapter focuses on feminist rhetorical criticism methods. First, an

explanation of this method’s historical and theoretical underpinnings will be given.

Second, details about the specific procedures for a feminist rhetorical criticism will be

outlined. Then, justifications for selecting the artifact will be discussed. Finally, details

about how the procedures will be used will be presented.

Historical and Theoretical Foundations of Feminist Rhetorical Criticism

“Rhetoric is one of the oldest disciplines in the Western tradition” (Campbell,

1989, p. 2). Smith (2003) acknowledged the term rhetoric did not exist until fourth

century BCE, but rhetorical communication was previously used in people’s lives.

Rhetoric took the form of myths. Since the fourth century BCE, rhetoric and rhetorical

criticism has undergone many changes. Smith (2003) noted the definition of rhetoric

shifted according to how people of the time determined truth. He explained the Socratics

diminished rhetoric while the mystics and the Sophists embraced it.

Currently, there are many definitions of rhetoric and approaches to rhetorical

criticism. Presently, rhetoric has come to mean empty, flowery language that has no

substance (Foss, 2004). The negative connotation attached to the word has not always

existed, although the term still seems hard to define. Campbell (1972) stated the term

rhetoric was ambiguous and difficult to define because it is used in three ways: (a) it is

employed to refer to public statements that are abstract, (b) it is used to refer to written or

oral discourses that alter attitudes and suggest action, and (c) it is used to refer to

academic disciplines. Campbell (1972) gave a broad definition of the term. She defined

rhetoric as “referring to persuasive discourse, written and oral, that alter attitudes and

actions” (p. 2) Campbell (1989) further broadened the previous definition and defined

rhetoric as the study of symbols as persuasive devices. Later, Campbell and Burkholder

(1997) expanded the definition again. They suggested symbols used as interpersonal

identification, confrontation, self-identification, alienation, and negotiation can be

thought of as rhetoric. Smith (2003) defined rhetoric in much the same way. He stated,

“rhetorical communication attempts to persuade ourselves and others to change actions,

beliefs, attitudes, and opinions” (p. 2). Foss (1989) also formulated a broad definition of

rhetoric. She defined rhetoric as the use of symbols to influence thought and action. She

stated rhetoric is an old term for what is now commonly called communication. She also

expanded her previous definition of rhetoric. Foss (2004) stated, “rhetoric is the human

use of symbols to communicate” (p. 4). She explained the definition included three

primary dimensions: (a) humans as the creators of rhetoric, (b) symbols as the medium

for rhetoric, and (c) communication as the purpose for rhetoric.

The definitions of rhetorical criticism have also gone through many changes.

Campbell (1972) defined rhetorical criticism as “the description, analysis, interpretation,

and evaluation of persuasive uses of language” (p. 12). She stated criticisms that follow

this definition improve the quality of rhetoric. Then Campbell and Burkholder (1997)

added a warning to the definition. They explained rhetorical criticism should not be

thought of as attacking the rhetor or the rhetoric, but should emphasize interpretation and

evaluation. Foss (1989) defined rhetorical criticism as the analysis of rhetorical acts and

artifacts in order to understand the rhetorical process. She suggested rhetorical acts and

artifacts and the purpose for engaging in criticism warranted further explanation. She

explained, “a rhetorical act is executed in the presence of the rhetor’s intended audience”

(Foss, 1989, p. 5). She then explained, “a rhetorical artifact is the trace or tangible

evidence of a rhetorical act” (Foss, 1989, p. 5). She outlined the two primary reasons to

engage in rhetorical criticism. The first reason to engage in rhetorical criticism is to

comprehend symbols and understand how they operate. The second reason to engage in

rhetorical criticism is more theoretical. The second, and more important, reason to engage

in rhetorical criticism is “…to make a contribution to rhetorical theory or to explain how

some aspect of rhetoric operates” (Foss, 1989, p. 6). In 2004, Foss adjusted her definition

to include another dimension. She explained this addition as the manner in which humans

should engage in natural processes, such as communication, in a more conscious,

systematic and focused way. She also expanded the second reason to engage in rhetorical

criticism. She explained rhetorical criticism does not end with a contribution to theory.

The outcome of rhetorical criticism is a contribution, not to theory, but to the

improvement of our abilities as communicators. The reasons for engaging in a rhetorical

criticism lie at the center of feminist rhetorical criticism (Foss, 1989, 2004).

Just as there are many definitions of rhetorical criticism, there are also many

approaches to rhetorical criticism. Foss (2004) discussed several of these approaches.

Kenneth Burke (1941, 1945) developed the cluster and the pentadic approaches to

criticism. Ernest Bormann (1972) created the fantasy-theme approach to rhetorical

criticism. Many theorists contributed to the development of ideological criticism. Janice

Hocker Rushing wrote an article in 1993 entitled “Power, Other, and Spirit in Cultural

Texts”. It was published in Western Journal of Communication. Celeste M. Condit

(formerly Condit Railsback) (1994) published an article in Critical Studies in Mass

Communication entitled “Hegemony in a Mass-Mediated Society: Concordance about

Reproductive Technologies”. Michael Calvin McGee (1980) contributed to ideological

criticism with an article published in Quarterly Journal of Speech entitled, “The

‘Ideograph’: A Link Between Rhetoric and Ideology”. Yet another contribution to

ideological criticism was made through the collaboration between Thomas S. Frentz

(1975) and Thomas B. Farrell. They published an article in Quarterly Journal of Speech

entitled “Conversion of America’s Consciousness: The Rhetoric of ‘The Exorcist’”. As

outlined by Foss (2004), there are other approaches to criticism. A few of these include

narrative criticism, metaphor criticism, and neo-Aristotelian criticism. This list is by no

means exhaustive. As illustrated previously, feminist rhetorical criticism is just one of

many approaches of rhetorical analysis.

Feminist rhetorical criticism is derived from the feminist movement and the

efforts of researchers to combine feminism with the communication field (Foss, 2004).

According to Foss (1999), identifying the exact time feminist viewpoints began to enter

the communication field is difficult, but there are a few texts that seem to have initiated

this approach. In 1973, Karlyn Kohrs Campbell wrote “The Rhetoric of Women’s

Liberation.” In this article, she explored inconsistencies in the rhetoric of the

contemporary women’s movement. She stated, “[The rhetoric] wavers between the

rhetorical and the non-rhetorical, the persuasive and the non-persuasive” (p. 84). She

further discussed women’s rhetoric of the time, suggesting it contained elements so

unique it formed its own genre. Kramerae’s (1974) article “Women’s Speech: Separate

but Unequal” is also considered to be among the first to explore feminist perspectives.

Kramerae (1974) examined the differences in linguistic signals between women and men.

She also discussed the importance of not grouping all women together just because they

share the same gender. Foss (1999) wrote of Kramerae’s article, “this article

foreshadowed the development of an emphasis on differences among women in the

feminist movement and the development of standpoint theory, a recognition of the

various positions from which individuals perceive the world” (p. 15-16). Lakoff (1975)

wrote a book emphasizing the linguistic differences Kramerae’s (1974) article

illuminated. The book entitled, Language and Woman’s Place (1975) examined the

powerlessness of women’s language. She asserted even when women shift to a more

masculine linguistic mode they are still denied access to power because they have

stepped out of the boundaries society imposes on them. This book laid the groundwork

for the current discussion of power and powerlessness in language. These seminal studies

are important because they foreshadow the different branches of feminist rhetorical

criticism.

Burgchardt (1995) also outlined the many different directions of feminist

rhetorical criticism. He stated:

Some feminist scholars focus on how language itself oppresses or marginalizes

women. Others argue that women have distinctive methods of channels of

communication that are no less sophisticated or meaningful than those recognized

in conventional, male dominated, political rhetoric. Still others use the critical act

to advance feminist theory (p. 479).

As discussed, there are many approaches to feminist rhetorical criticism. Although the

methods branch in different directions, the feminist viewpoint suggests women’s forms

and uses of symbols are relevant and applicable for rhetorical criticism.

According to Foss (1989), feminist rhetorical criticism is a tool to analyze and

review the rhetoric men and women engage in to define and maintain gender. She

asserted gender is the fundamental focus of human life and therefore, central to rhetoric.

She continued to explain men and women experience the world differently because of the

difference in gender, culture, and the worlds in which men and women are socialized.

She offered examples of these differences such as, parents talk more to girls than to boys,

parents assign household chores according to gender, and parents allow girls to express a

wider range of emotions. Other gender differences include the language women and men

use and the portrayal of women and men in mass media. Until recently, women’s rhetoric

was analyzed through the male perspective. Because of this, gender and gender

differences were not recognized or valued (Foss, Foss, & Trapp, 1991). Foss (1989)

stated the analysis of gender and gender differences is the basis for feminist rhetorical

criticism.

“Feminist criticism is engaged in not only to re-examine rhetorical concepts and

to develop new ones that incorporate women’s experiences but also to achieve a

particular social purpose” (Foss, 1989, p. 154). Foss, Foss, and Trapp (1991) also stated

the ultimate consequence of feminist criticism is social change. Foss (1989) explained

feminist critics explore the creation of masculinity and femininity and seek to change

these fundamental constructions of gender. She stated seeking to change traditional

gender constructs is an active choice. Thus, feminist rhetorical criticism is activist. It is

employed not just about women, but also for women. She stated, “it is designed to

improve women’s lives” (Foss, 1989, p. 155).

The improvement of women’s lives is accomplished in two ways. First, feminist

scholars theorized the voices of women to include them into the discipline. This effort of

inclusion contains three areas of study, (a) women orators, (b) social movements about or

of concern to women, and (c) subject matters that affect or are particularly significant to

women (Foss, Foss, & Griffin, 1999).

The study of women orators was an early effort to include women in the area of

rhetorical criticism. Early on, only the women orators from the United States and the

United Kingdom were studied. A few of them include, Anita Bryant, The Grimké Sisters,

Lucretia Coffin Mott , and Mary Wollstonecraft. Examples of the studies include, Ronald

Fischli’s 1979 article published in Central States Speech Journal entitled, “Anita

Bryant’s Stand against ‘Militant Homosexuality’: Religious Fundamentalism and the

Democratic Process”. Ellen Reid Gold (1981) published an article in Southern Speech

Communication Journal entitled, “The Grimké Sisters and the Emergence of the

Women’s Rights Movement.” Another example of the inclusion of women orators in the

discipline include A. Cheree Carlson’s 1994 article published in Western Journal of

Communication entitled, “Defining Womanhood: Lucretia Coffin Mott and the

Transformation of Femininity”. A final example of the study of women orators is the

article written by Charlotte L. Stuart (1978) published in Western Journal of Speech

Communication entitled, “Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Man: A

Rhetoric Reassessment”.

As outlined by Foss (1999), the second type of method used to bring women into

the discipline was the study of the social movements about or of concern to women.

Brenda Robinson Hancock (1972) conducted one of the earliest studies of this kind. In

her article, “Affirmation by Negation in the Women’s Liberation Movement”, Hancock

examined how women negate the identities of men to attain positive self-images and

affirm their own identities. Other social movements included in this method of inclusion

are highlighted in Solomon’s (1979) and Foss’s (1979) articles examining the Equal

Rights Amendment, and Zaeske’s (1995) article exploring the origins of the women’s

rights movement.

The third way women were included in the discipline was through the study of

subject matters that affect or are particularly significant to women. Traditionally, topics

such as abortion, motherhood, sexual harassment, and feminine style were not the focus

of scholarly inquiry. In 1990, Condit examined the abortion controversy in the United

States and discussed the implications of the controversy in her book Decoding Abortion

Rhetoric. The rhetoric of motherhood and midwifery was explored in a 1996 Quarterly

Journal of Speech article entitled “The Rhetoric of Midwifery: Conflicts and

Conversations in the Minnesota Home Birth Community in the 1990s” written by Lay,

Wahlstrom, and Brown. Other theorists studied sexual harassment. Shereen Bingham

(1994) edited a volume of Conceptualizing Sexual Harassment as Discursive Practice.

This book provided alternate frameworks for analyzing sexual harassment. Another

subject matter theorists studied was the notion of feminine style. In 1972, Campbell

referred to feminine style as “emerging out of their experiences as women and was

adapted to the attitudes and experiences of female audiences” (p. 12). Although feminine

style emerged out of women’s experiences, Campbell stated this style is not limited to

women as speakers or as audiences. Blankenship and Robson (1995) explored feminine

style through analysis of the political discourse of contemporary women politicians. Their

1995 article, entitled “A ‘Feminine Style’ in Women’s Political Discourse: An

Exploratory Essay”, discussed feminine style characterized by lived experiences,

inclusivity, and the view of public office as a forum to accomplish goals. They also

asserted, as did Campbell (1972), both women and men use feminine style. According to

Foss (1999),“Making topics of special concern to women the subject of scholarship also

suggested an expansion of interests on the part of rhetorical scholars as well as a

legitimation of women that had not been seen earlier” ( p. 20).

The second improvement in women’s lives focused on reconceptualizing

theoretical constructs using the information obtained by studying women’s rhetoric (Foss

& Foss, 1991). Foss (1999) further explained this concept by stating the foundation of

reconceptualization lies in the other dimensions that contributed to the beginnings of

feminist rhetorical criticism including the seminal works, the inclusion of women in the

communication discipline, and the refinement of feminist perspectives.

Along with Burgchardt (1995), Foss (1999) also outlined varying approaches to

feminist rhetorical criticism. She stated:

They [feminist theorists] represent different perspectives and positions on

feminism that derive from standpoints that vary across race, ethnicity, and class,

as well as sexual, spiritual, and political orientations. The result of these

differences is a multiplicity and expansion of perspectives on rhetoric (Foss,

1999, p. 10).

Some of the theorists she referred to are Sally Miller Gearhart, Cheris Kramarae, and bell

hooks. Their separate approaches to feminist rhetorical criticism will be briefly discussed.

Sally Miller Gearhart began her distinguished career in 1956 teaching theater at a

college in Nacogdoches, Texas (Foss, Foss, & Griffin, 1999). She taught for 14 years at

various universities until the late 1960’s. According to Foss (1999), a series of dramatic

changes in Gearhart’s life, led her to begin writing about feminism and gender identities.

Between 1974 and 1976 she published several works, including, Loving Women/Loving

Men: Gay Liberation and the Church (1974), “The Lesbian and God-the-Father” (1975),

and A Feminist Tarot first published in 1976. These publications explored connections

between feminism, gender identities, and religion. In 1979, she wrote “The

Womanization of Rhetoric” an article she adapted from a speech she gave in 1975. This

article suggested rhetoric, or any attempt to persuade, is an act of violence. In this article,

Gearhart (1979) also explored the general question of how change happens. Her life work

and the basis of her rhetorical theory is motivated by that question (Foss, Foss, & Griffin,

2004). Initially, as Foss (1999) explained, Gearhart proposed four rhetorical options

available for changing society. They are: a) revolutionary action against the system, b)

participation in alternative organizations, c) reform within the system, and d)

resourcement. In a 1995 article entitled, “Notes from a Recovering Activist”, Gearhart

discussed how she modified her rhetorical theory. She decided not to focus on how

change happens, but rather how her contributions to the world can help the problems

facing women and the world. She is focused on the common ground found between all

people. Gearhart (1995) stated:

If I can still hold strong to my standard of what is just and decent and appropriate

behavior for human beings and yet go about my life with a new awareness, with

joy in the process instead of my former debilitating pain, and I can do all this

without creating and maintaining “enemies”, then I have to try it (p. 270).

Although, she did not give this option a label, Foss (1999) described this option as

enfoldment. This option differed from Gearhart’s previous options by advocating

understanding others’ perspectives instead of changing those perspectives.

Cheris Kramerae (1980) developed another approach to feminist criticism and

theory. Kramarae’s approach to rhetorical theory focused on creating and using language.

In the 1980 article entitled, “Proprietors of Language”, Kramerae explored and discussed

the different relationships men and women have with language. She suggested women

are not, and have never been, equal participants in the creation of language. As cited in

Foss (1999), Kramerae offered three rhetorical options for changing the language used in

everyday life. The first option involved the status quo and examined linguistic

organization to “discover whether they contribute to the domination of women” (Foss,

1999, p. 55). The second option focused on the study of women’s communication in

hopes of developing new models for communicating. The third option Kramerae

discussed is enactment. This option entailed analyzing the information obtained through

the first two options and then putting the knowledge to use in new linguistic modes.

Gloria Jean Watkins, who writes under the name bell hooks, developed another

approach to feminist theory and criticism. According to Foss (2004), hooks’s theories are

focused on intervening in the practice of domination. Hooks defined domination as the

process of decolonization. Her 1989 book entitled, Talking Back: Thinking Feminist,

Thinking Black contained the article “Feminist Politicization”. In the article, hooks

discussed confession as a strategy to eliminate domination. She also examined the use of

visual representation to interfere and cope with continuing domination.

As stated, there are many definitions and approaches to feminist rhetorical

criticism. The next section focuses on the specific procedure this study will employ.

Procedures

The procedures used to conduct a feminist rhetorical criticism of J.K. Rowling’s

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix will be the focus of this section. First, the

specific method will be identified. Then, each step in the method will be explained.

Finally, analysis and justification of the artifact will be discussed.

To complete a feminist rhetorical criticism of the fifth book in Rowling’s series,

this study will follow Foss’ (1989) four-step feminist criticism method. The researcher

selected this method because it is the most appropriate method to utilize when analyzing

gender in a rhetorical artifact. The four steps in this method are: “(1) analysis of the

conception of gender presented in the rhetorical artifact; (2) discovery of the effects of

the artifact’s conception of gender on the audience; (3) discussion of how the artifact may

be used to improve women’s lives; and (4) explanation of the artifact’s impact on

rhetorical theory” (Foss, 1989, p. 155).

Analysis of Gender in the Rhetorical Artifact

When completing the first step of the method, the critic analyzed the conception

of gender in the rhetorical artifact. Foss (1989) recommended asking three questions. The

first question focused on how the artifact describes the world from a man’s perspective, a

woman’s perspective, a neutral perspective, or multiple (men and women’s) perspective.

The second question centered on femininity and masculinity and how each is portrayed in

the rhetorical artifact. This question also focused on the portrayals themselves, and

examined whether the portrayals violate or conform to society’s images of the ideal

woman or man. The final question asked, “what does the rhetorical artifact suggest are

the behaviors, concerns, issues, values, qualities, and communication patterns of women

and men apart from the society’s definition of gender?” (p. 155). These questions allow

the researcher to explore the gender presentation in the artifact. Through examination of

character interactions, descriptions, and communication patterns, this step allowed the

researcher to determine whether gender roles conform or deviate from society’s

definition of gender.

Discovery of Effects on the Audience

The second step in this method focused on two elements. First, the critic defined

gender in the context of the artifact. Second, the critic identified how gender affects the

audience. This step analyzed the artifact to determine whether men’s perspectives are

presented as the standard or women’s perspectives are presented as the standard. Foss

(1989) states, “the task at this stage is to discover how the artifact is likely to affect a

woman and a man and to influence their views of themselves and the opposite sex” (p.

157). Negative gender roles for males and females in fairy tales are used to illustrate this

point. In many fairy tales, women are characterized and perceived as passive and

subordinate, while men are characterized and perceived as risk-takers and leaders. This

could have a negative effect on the audience. An analysis of several examples from the

artifact will be conducted to discover the effects this artifact may have on the audience.

Discussion of Use of Artifact to Improve Women’s Lives

Attempting to determine how the analysis of the artifact can be used to change the

demeaning gender role assigned to women in the artifact is the third step in this method.

Along with changing the denigrating gender roles, this step also attempted to help women

live in new and healthier ways. Foss (1989) suggested the researcher might also offer

strategies women can apply to succeed in their male-dominated worlds. Foss (1989)

illustrated this point with an example of a woman politician. The researcher can improve

women’s lives in two ways. First, the researcher can suggest it is appropriate for a

woman to be in politics. Second, the researcher can offer techniques to resist society’s

norm that women should not participate in the political arena. Through analysis of

character interactions, conversations, and descriptions, the researcher will discuss how

this artifact could improve women’s lives.

Explanation of Artifact’s Impact on Rhetorical Theory

In this final step, the researcher is concerned with whether the artifact appears to

conform to traditional understandings of the nature and function of rhetoric, or if the

artifact suggests a new explanation of or knowledge about some aspect of rhetoric (Foss,

1989, p. 157). This step allowed the researcher to identify and explain the artifact’s

impact on rhetorical theory. There are many areas of rhetorical theory that could be

impacted through analysis of an artifact. Analysis and explanation could lead to changing

some definitions used in rhetorical theory. The concept of power in men’s and women’s

rhetoric is another area of rhetorical theory that could benefit from analysis and

explanation of the artifact. Yet another area that could be impacted by this step is the area

of rhetorical criticism itself. Foss (1989) explained how the male tradition has dominated

the assumptions and methods of rhetorical criticism. She suggested the point of this step

is to determine how the construction and presentation of gender in the artifact can

contribute to rhetorical theory. This step attempted to make rhetorical theory more

consistent with women’s perspectives (p. 158).

Analysis and Artifact Justification

This section will focus on the artifacts used in the study. First, background and

analysis of the artifact will be given. Then, justifications for selecting the artifact will be

discussed.

Artifact Analysis

The artifact chosen for this study were J. K. Rowling’s (2003) fifth book entitled

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. In Order of the Phoenix, Harry is living with

the Dursleys during summer break. The past year at Hogwarts culminated with the arrival

of Voldemort in full form. Harry informed Dumbledore and the Ministry of Magic of this

news, but nothing has been done. It seems no one believed Harry. Throughout the course

of this installment, Harry encountered a new Defense Against the Dark Arts professor

and a foreshadowed sense of the evil that was still hunting him. Order of the Phoenix

concluded with the tragic death of someone Harry cares about and respects. Harry also

discovered the nature of the evil he will eventually have to face.

In Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Rowling introduced new female

characters and expanded the role of returning female characters. One of the new

characters Rowling (2003) introduced is Delores Umbridge. Umbridge holds the position

of Undersecretary to the Minister of Magic and is now the new Defense Against the Dark

Arts professor at Hogwarts. While her outward appearance is described as “little girlish”

(Rowling, 2003, p. 212), it does not reflect her true nature. Animosity quickly develops

between Umbridge and Professor Minerva McGonagall.

Rowling (2003) expanded the role of Molly Weasley, Ron’s mother, and Luna

Lovegood, a student at Hogwarts. In Order of the Phoenix, we learn Molly is also a

member of the Order in addition to being a stay at home mother. Luna Lovegood, breifly

introduced in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2000), becomes integral in the

development of a secret Defense Against the Dark Arts class. These characters, and

others including Ginny Weasley, Hermione Granger, and Cho Chang will be the focus of

the study in this artifact.

Artifact Justification

According to CBS News online, J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series of six books

sold 325 million copies. The books have been translated into 64 languages, including

Farsi. Four feature length films have been released and two more are scheduled for

release in 2007 and 2008. According to Anatol (2003), new editions of the novels are

being published with black and white jackets so adults can read the books, without the

embarrassment of being seen with a children’s book in the open. Anatol (2003) suggested

the Harry Potter series is the highest selling series of all time, surpassing classic novels

such as A.A. Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh and E. B. White’s Charlotte’s Web. Millions of

children and adults have read Rowling’s series. The popularity of the series along with

the addition and expansion of female characters provides justification for the study.

Summary

This study will utilize Foss’ (2004) four-step model to conduct a feminist

rhetorical criticism. In order to analyze how gender roles are portrayed in the artifact, this

study will examine the fictional world J.K. Rowling created. The study will also

determine if a man’s perspective of the world, a woman’s perspective of the world, a

neutral perspective of the world, or multiple perspective’s of the world are portrayed. In

addition, this study will determine if the artifact conforms to or deviates from society’s

view of gender roles.

The second step in the model will identify the effects the artifact has on the

audience. The analysis will determine if the artifact affirms the experiences, values, and

power of men, or if it celebrates and affirms the woman’s perspective (Foss, 1989,

p. 156-157). The study will also provide insight into the gender roles evident in the novel.

In the third step of this model, the study will compare the negative, positive, and possible

effects traditional fairy tales, and Rowlings’ contemporary tales, might have on women

(Foss, 2004). This comparison and analysis will establish how the book could improve

women’s lives.

Finally, the fourth step this study will employ will be the analysis of how specific

character interactions in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix contribute to the

existing body of knowledge pertaining to rhetorical theory. The analysis will determine

whether or not a feminist rhetorical criticism will provide a new explanation of or

knowledge about aspects of rhetoric (Foss, 1989, p. 157).

This section examined the definition of rhetoric, rhetorical criticism, and feminist

rhetorical criticism. The section also outlined and justified the method this study will

employ. Finally, an analysis and justification for the selection of the artifact was

included.

Chapter IV

Analysis

This chapter provides an analysis of J.K. Rowling’s (2003) novel Harry Potter

and the Order of the Phoenix using Foss’ (2004) four-step model. First, how the world is

presented in the story will be addressed. Then, the effects the artifact has on the audience

will be identified. Next, how the novels could improve women’s lives will be explained.

In addition, this step will explore how the books change or affirm common gender roles.

Finally, how the artifacts contribute to the existing body of knowledge pertaining to

rhetorical theory will be discussed. The analysis will begin with Harry Potter and the

Order of the Phoenix.

Analysis of Gender in the Artifact

This section will address the questions Foss (2004) suggested when analyzing

gender in an artifact. To begin, the first question will be examined. Then, the second

question will be explored. Finally, the third question Foss posed will be explained.

Step One: Question One

The first step employed in the four-step method is an analysis of gender

presentation. To complete the first step Foss (2004) suggested asking three questions. The

first question is, “Does the artifact describe how the world looks and feels to women or

men or both”? (p. 155). Although Rowling does not draw distinct lines between the

worlds of men and women, many subtle inferences suggested the world in the story is

created from a man’s perspective. This is accomplished in several ways. First, female

characters do not hold any positions of power. Second, women’s descriptions focus on

physical appearance while men’s descriptions do not. Finally, the story is told in third

person with Harry being the center of the tale.

In Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix men hold the most powerful

positions or offices. Albus Dumbledore is the headmaster of Hogwarts. Professor

Minerva McGonagall is deputy headmistress. In addition, Delores Umbridge is the

Undersecretary to the Minister of Magic. The Minister of Magic in Order of the Phoenix

is a wizard named Cornelius Fudge. Even when Umbridge becomes headmistress of

Hogwarts for a short time, she still has no authority of her own. She has to report to and

consult with the Minister of Magic before she makes a decision.

Other women in the story depend on men for some or all of their livelihood.

Molly Weasley, while a member of the Order, is a stay at home mother of seven. She

depends on her husband, Arthur, for the family’s financial well-being. Luna Lovegood’s

father is the editor of a well-known magazine. Luna’s mother is mentioned much later in

the story. Luna explained her mother died when “one of her spells went rather badly

wrong one day” (Rowling, 2003, p. 863). Luna depended on her father for most of her

life.

Another example of the story being from a man’s perspective can be found in the

words Rowling (2003) used to describe men and women in the story. Throughout the

novel, Rowling used words such as powerful, brave, towering, and intelligent to describe

the men. Frightened, simpering, stern, and dotty are words Rowling (2003) chose to

describe the women in the story. Furthermore, Rowling focused on the physical

characteristics of the women for description. Men are described by the deeds they have

done. An example can be found in the description of Luna Lovegood. “She had straggly,

waist-length, dirty-blond hair, very pale eyebrows, and protuberant eyes that gave her a

permanently surprised look… The girl gave off an aura of distinct dottiness” (Rowling,

2003, p.185). These descriptions are used for many of the female characters. Another

example can be found in the description of Delores Umbridge.

She looked like somebody’s maiden aunt: squat, with short, curly, mouse-brown

hair in which she had placed a horrible pink Alice band that matched the fluffy

pink cardigan she wore over her robes. Then she turned her face slightly to take a

sip from her goblet and he saw, a pallid, toad-like face and a pair of prominent,

pouchy eyes (Rowling, 2003, p. 203).

Other female characters are described by their physical appearance as well. Rowling

(2003) described Hermione with “bushy hair” (p. 62). The first description of Professor

McGonagall stated, “her dark eyebrows had contracted so that she looked positively

hawklike” (Rowling, 2003, p. 212-213).

Finally, the tale is told in third person, but focuses on the experiences of Harry

Potter. He is the protagonist in the story and the world is seen through his eyes. The

action in the story does not focus on the female characters. The female characters help

Harry in his experiences, but they play secondary roles in carrying out the action of the

story. For example, Harry comes up with the idea to go to the Ministry of Magic to

rescue his uncle, Sirius. Hermione, Ginny, and Luna want to help, but wait until Harry

gives his approval. While at the Ministry, Harry’s plan is thwarted by Voldemort’s

followers. The female characters still wait for Harry to issue instructions before they act.

Step One: Question Two

The second question Foss (2004) asked when analyzing gender in an artifact is,

“how are femininity and masculinity depicted in the rhetorical artifact? (p. 155-156). In

Order of the Phoenix, Rowling (2003) portrayed femininity inconsistently. As stated

earlier, Zipes (1987) suggested traditional fairy tale women are portrayed as weak,

passive, and subordinate. Rowling (2003) adhered to this traditional portrayal in certain

situations, but not in every situation. For example, Molly Weasley breaks down in tears

because, after several attempts, she is unable to expel an evil spirit from a writing desk.

Remus Lupin, a male member of the Order, came to Molly’s rescue by eliminating the

spirit. After the problem is taken care of, Molly continued to show her weakness.

“D-d-don’t tell Arthur,” Mrs.Weasley was gulping now, mopping her eyes

frantically with her cuffs. “I d-d-don’t want him to know… Being silly…”

Lupin handed her a handkerchief and she blew her nose.

“Harry, I’m so sorry, what must you think of me?” she said shakily. “Not even

able to get rid of a boggart…” (Rowling, 2003, p. 176-177).

Molly’s actions in this scene support the traditional portrayal of women in fairy tales. She

needed help from a man to achieve her goal. After the goal was achieved, she expressed

herself by apologizing for her inability to destroy the boggart. She also begged Lupin not

to tell her husband about this situation. This example also depicted a traditional portrayal

of masculinity in fairy tales. As Stone (1975) suggested, “heroes succeed because they

act” (p. 45). Lupin acted by eliminating the boggart. He was successful where Molly was

not.

Another example of how femininity in this story follows traditional portrayals

focuses on Hermione. A conversation between Harry, Hermione, and Ron illuminated

this traditional stereotype. Harry was upset because he did not know about The Order or

about what the members of The Order were doing. Harry found out Dumbledore asked

Ron and Hermione not to tell him. After trying to explain to Harry the secrecy was for his

own protection, Hermione reversed her position. “‘Harry, we’re really sorry!’ said

Hermione desperately, her eyes now sparkling with tears. ‘You’re absolutely right, Harry

– I’d be furious if it was me!’” (Rowling, 2003, p. 66). Instead of standing her ground,

she changed her view of the situation, proclaimed Harry was entitled to be upset, and

almost started to cry.

In addition, Harry’s Aunt Petunia provided another example of a weak, passive,

and subordinate female character. At the beginning of Order of the Phoenix, Harry

performed magic outside of Hogwarts. This action violated the rules underage wizards

need to follow. Harry’s Uncle Vernon is adamant about throwing him out of the house for

the infraction. Aunt Petunia knew throwing Harry out would break the promise she made

to Dumbledore years ago, but she did not attempt to stop her husband from throwing

Harry out. This illustrated Aunt Petunia’s subordination to her husband. Even though she

promised to allow Harry to live in her house, Petunia obeyed the will of her husband.

This subordination is illustrated again when Petunia receives a letter from Dumbledore

reminding her of the promise she made. Instead of being strong and supporting her

husband’s demands, she became subordinate to Dumbledore’s request. She insisted Harry

must stay.

Cho Chang provided yet another example of traditional female character

portrayals. Stone (1975) stated, “Heroines are not allowed any defects, nor are they

required to develop, since they are already perfect” (p. 45). While Cho Chang may not be

the heroine of this story, she exhibited the traditional female characteristics. Harry

believed Cho was perfect. Rowling (2003) named Cho as the most beautiful girl attending

Hogwarts. She is described as “a very pretty girl with long, shiny black hair” (p. 187).

For a year, Harry has been trying to talk to her, but has always lost his nerve at the last

minute. When the students are on the train back to Hogwarts, Cho approached Harry only

to find him covered in Stinksap. Harry is discouraged by this encounter, but eventually

Cho and Harry develop the beginnings of a relationship. During what was supposed to be

a romantic moment under some mistletoe, Cho started to cry about the death of her

previous boyfriend, Cedric Diggory. She tried to explain why she was crying, but noticed

Harry heading for the nearest exit. Quickly, she changed her behavior. Instead of

continuing to explain her feelings, she began to compliment Harry on his teaching ability.

However, the damage had already been done. Harry saw Cho’s outburst as a defect that

tarnished his perfect vision of her. This view is evident in the conversation Harry has

with Ron and Hermione after the incident occurred.

“She was the one who started it,” said Harry. “I wouldn’t’ve – she just sort of

came at me – and next thing she’s crying all over me - I didn’t know what to

do…”

“Don’t blame you, mate,” said Ron, looking alarmed at the very thought.

“You just had to be nice to her,” said Hermione, looking up anxiously. “You

were, weren’t you?”

“Well,” said Harry, an unpleasant heat creeping up his face, “I sort of—patted her

on the back a bit.” (Rowling, 2003, p. 459-460).

Despite this incident, Harry and Cho go out on a date on Valentine’s Day. However,

Harry wondered when Cho would start crying next. Unfortunately, Cho started crying

about Cedric in the middle of their date. Cho ended up storming out of the restaurant.

Consequently, Harry and Cho’s budding romance died.

Minerva McGonagall provided the final example of how Rowling (2003)

employed traditional female characteristics in the characters. During the course of the

story, Dumbledore, McGonagall, Harry, the Minister of Magic, and several other people

are gathered in Dumbledore’s office. The Minister of Magic is forcing Dumbledore to

give up his position at Hogwarts. Dumbledore challenged Fudge to remove him from the

school.

“So,” sneered Fudge, recovering himself, “you intend to take on Dawlish,

Shacklebolt, Dolores, and myself single-handed, do you, Dumbledore?”

“Merlin’s beard, no,” said Dumbledore, smiling. “Not unless you are foolish

enough to force me to.”

“He will not be single handed!” said Professor McGonagall loudly plunging her

hand inside her robes.

“Oh yes he will, Minerva!” said Dumbledore sharply. “Hogwarts needs you!”

(Rowling, 2003, p. 620).

McGonagall obeyed Dumbledore and did not assist him. This scene illustrated

McGonagall’s subordination to Dumbledore. McGonagall felt the need to help and

defend her friend, but she was not allowed to act because Dumbledore said she should

not.

As illustrated, many female characters possess the characteristics found in

traditional female roles. However, the female characters are not consistent in that

stereotype. Hermione is not always subordinate. Molly Weasley is not always weak.

Minerva McGonagall is not always passive. Some of the same female portrayals that

depicted traditional female characteristics, mentioned above, also possess non-traditional

female characteristics.

Hermione Granger provided the first example. Through many twists and turns, it

becomes necessary for the students at Hogwarts to teach themselves practical jinxes and

curses they could use to defend themselves against Voldemort and his followers.

Hermione takes the initiative to begin forming a secret club later named Dumbledore’s

Army. She set up the first meeting time, and then convinced Harry to be the instructor of

the group. Hermione saw a problem, decided on a solution, and acted upon that solution.

She did not ask anyone’s permission and she used her intellect and natural persuasiveness

to achieve the desired outcome. She did not wait for Harry, Dumbledore, or anyone else

to come up with a solution. She acted with strength, power, and authority.

In addition, Hermione provided another example of non-traditional female

portrayals. Later in the story, a series of unfortunate events led Umbridge, who is now

Headmistress of Hogwarts, and her task force, made up of students, to capture Harry,

Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Luna, and Neville. Umbridge desperately wanted to know where

Dumbledore had been hiding. She believed Harry and his friends were in contact with

him. When questioned by Umbridge, Harry refused to tell her anything. Desperate for

answers, Umbridge considered using one of the Unforgivable curses to make Harry talk.

As Umbridge is about to cause Harry unimaginable pain, Hermione stepped in. She

proceeded to tell Umbridge a fabricated story about what the group was doing for

Dumbledore. She led Umbridge to believe some of the students were making a weapon in

the Forbidden Forest. Umbridge demanded Hermione and Harry take her to the weapon.

With no assistance from anyone, Hermione concocted a story to save Harry from

excruciating pain. Ultimately, this story culminated with Umbridge’s demise at the

hooves of the centaurs that live in the forest. Hermione not only saved Harry, she almost

single-handedly removed Delores Umbridge from Hogwarts.

Earlier in the same scene, Delores Umbridge offered another example of non-

traditional female portrayals. As Umbridge is deciding how she will make Harry talk, she

explained how she had previously tried to silence Harry. At the beginning of the novel,

Harry and his cousin Dudley are attacked by dementors. No one knew who sent them.

“Somebody had to act,” breathed Umbridge, as her wand came to rest pointing

directly at Harry’s forehead. “They were all bleating about silencing you

somehow—discrediting you—but I was the one who actually did something about

it….Only you wriggled out of that one, didn’t you Potter?” (p. 747).

The information Umbridge provided in this scene illustrated her ability to act. She did not

rely on Cornelius Fudge, the Minster of Magic, to tell her what to do. She acted on her

own. Even though her actions were sinister in nature, she still acted.

Molly Wesley provided another example of non-traditional female roles. During

the course of the story Molly’s husband, Arthur, is badly injured while working for the

Order. He is taken to St. Mungo’s Hospital for Magical Maladies and Injuries. The

Healers are unsure whether Arthur will live or die. Eventually Arthur recovered enough

to be sent home, but he was unable to fulfill his duties for the Order. Instead of staying at

home to care for her husband, Molly took over Arthur’s assignments for the Order. She

decided to act, even though the duties were potentially life threatening.

In addition, Molly provided another example of strength. At the beginning of the

story, members of the Order took Harry to their secret location. Other members of the

Order live there, including Molly and Arthur Weasley and their children, and Harry’s

godfather, Sirius Black. One night after dinner, Sirius asked Harry if he wanted to know

what was happening with Voldemort. Molly disagreed with Sirius’ plan to tell Harry

what the Order was doing, so she stood up to him. She explained to Sirius, and the other

men in the room, the children were too young to know the details of the Order’s plans.

An argument developed between Molly, Sirius, Arthur, and Lupin. Molly fiercely

defended her position against three men. In the end, Molly lost the battle and all but

Ginny were allowed to stay and listen to the plans. However, Molly showed strength by

standing up to the other men in the house. She believed what she was saying was the best

thing for the children and she was not afraid to let the others know how she felt.

Minerva McGonagall and Delores Umbridge provided yet another example of

non-traditional female roles. Due to Dumbledore’s abrupt departure from Hogwarts,

Delores Umbridge became Headmistress for a short time. During this time, she attempted

to fire Hagrid, a professor at Hogwarts who happened to be a half-giant. Umbridge led a

gang of five men to Hagrid’s hut. When Hagrid refused to leave, the group began to cast

spells so he would be stunned. A small battle ensued. Of all the professors at Hogwarts,

only one came to Hagrid’s aid. Minerva McGonagall sprinted to Hagrid’s cabin.

“Leave him alone! Alone, I say!” said Professor McGonagall’s voice through the

darkness. “On what grounds are you attacking him? He has done nothing, nothing

to warrant such…”

Hermione, Parvati, and Lavender all screamed. No fewer that four Stunners had

shot from the figures around the cabin toward Professor McGonagall. Halfway

between cabin and castle the red beams collided with her. For a moment she

looked luminous, illuminated by an eerie red glow, then was lifted right off her

feet, landed hard on her back, and moved no more (Rowling, 2003, p. 721).

McGonagall was not passive, weak, or subordinate in this encounter. She took action, she

defended her friend and fellow professor. Hagrid got away from his attackers because

McGonagall diverted their attention. McGonagall did not fare as well. She ended up in

St. Mungo’s Hospital for nearly the rest of the novel. Furthermore, Umbridge was not

weak, passive, or subordinate in the encounter either. She commanded a group of five

men to Hagrid’s hut and led the charge to defeat him. Even though her actions were

wrong and misinformed, she still acted with authority and power not seen in traditional

female characters.

Finally, Ginny Weasley and Luna Lovegood demonstrated another example of

non-traditional female characteristics. Circumstances have led Harry to believe Sirius is

being held by Voldemort in the Ministry of Magic. Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Luna,

and Neville gathered in the forest, trying to figure out how to get to the Ministry. Luna

and Ginny assumed the group would go, but Harry had different ideas. Harry scolded

Luna and Ginny for thinking they were going. Ginny reminded Harry that she cared

about his godfather and that she is three years older than Harry was when he first fought

Voldemort. While Harry and Ginny argued, Luna figured out how they could travel to the

Ministry. Everyone in the group ended up flying to the Ministry of Magic to rescue

Sirius. Ginny and Luna were not subordinate to Harry’s demands. Ginny stood her

ground and explained to Harry why she should accompany the group. In addition, Luna

acted in the situation instead of being passive. She uncovered the method of travel the

group could use to complete their journey.

While Rowling (2003) does not stay consistent portraying traditional female roles,

she portrays masculinity in a more consistent manner. The men and boys in this novel act

to solve problems.

At the very beginning of the novel, Harry fought two dementors in front of his

cousin, Dudley. Harry knew this was wrong. He is not supposed to perform magic

outside of the school grounds. Harry knew he would be punished, but he acted anyway.

Sirius Black provided another example of how masculinity is portrayed in this

novel. Sirius Black is an Animagus, which means he can change into a specific animal.

Because of security risks to Harry and The Order, Dumbledore ordered Sirius to stay at

the secret location. However, Sirius wanted to accompany Harry to the train that leaves

for Hogwarts. Mrs. Weasley, who was traveling with the students, tried to discourage

also. “‘Oh, for heaven’s sake, Sirius, Dumbledore said no!’ A bearlike black dog had

appeared at Harry’s side as Harry clambered over the various trunks cluttering the hall to

get to Mrs. Weasley” (p. 180-181). Sirius changed into his Animagus form to travel with

Harry to the train. Despite Dumbledore’s and Mrs. Weasley’s objections to this, Sirius

acted anyway. He ignored the rules to accomplish what he wanted.

Dumbledore’s character provided more examples of how masculinity is portrayed

in the novel. Dumbledore is described as the most powerful wizard in the magical

community. Rowling (2003) mentioned in the beginning of the novel that, “Dumbledore

was the only one You-Know-Who [Voldemort] was ever scared of” (p. 92). Voldemort is

the most feared wizard in the novel, but even he is frightened of all-powerful

Dumbledore. Dumbledore is respected, well known for his magical prowess, and strong.

He did not stand by when the Minister of Magic planned to arrest him. He acted by

creating a diversion so he could escape. When Harry was being tried by the Wizengamot

(the magical court), Dumbledore came to Harry’s rescue and saved Harry from being

expelled from Hogwarts. The examples provided illustrate how Dumbledore’s character

portrays action-based masculinity in the novel.

Other male characters portray masculinity in the same way. Ron Weasley is

always ready to act alongside Harry. Whether trying out for the Quidditch team or flying

on invisible winged horses to the Ministry of Magic, Ron is ready to take action.

Mad-Eye Moody is also consistent with Rowling’s (2003) portrayal of

masculinity. Mad-Eye Moody is an Auror for the Ministry of Magic. He is in charge of

getting Harry safely to and from school. At the end of the novel he, along with several

others, arranged an impromptu meeting with Harry’s Aunt and Uncle. In the meeting,

Moody instructed the Dursley’s to be kind to Harry over summer break. He is quick to

threaten action. “ ‘If we get any hint that Potter’s been mistreated in any way, you’ll have

us to answer to’”, said Moody (Rowling, 2003, p. 869). This example is consistent with

how masculinity is portrayed in the novel.

Professor Snape also demonstrated traditional portrayals of masculinity. In the

middle of the novel it became necessary for Professor Snape to teach Harry Occlumency.

Rowling (2003) described Occlumency as, “the magical defense of the mind against

external penetration. An obscure branch of magic, but a highly useful one” (p. 519).

When Snape told Harry and Sirius he would be the professor giving the lessons, Sirius

questioned Snape’s ability to teach the subject. Insults flew back and forth between the

two men until finally they both acted.

Sirius pushed his chair roughly aside and strode around the table toward Snape,

pulling out his wand as he went; Snape whipped out his own. They were squaring

up to each other, Sirius looking livid, Snape calculating, his eyes darting from

Sirius’s wand tip to his face (p. 520).

The two men would have fought if Harry had not gotten between them and the entire

Weasley family had not burst in at that exact moment. In this example, Sirius and Snape

began their confrontation verbally, but it quickly escalated into masculine threat displays

which are precursors to action.

Hagrid provided the final example of how Rowling (2003) portrayed masculinity

in this novel. When Hagrid returned from his mission for the Order, Harry, Ron, and

Hermione tried to warn him about Delores Umbridge. She, along with the Minister of

Magic, created a new position for herself at Hogwarts, that of High Inquisitor. This new

post allowed her to evaluate other professors at Hogwarts. Based on those evaluations,

she gave herself the power to fire those professors she deemed inadequate. When Harry,

Ron, and Hermione explained this to Hagrid he dismissed the notion without

consideration.

“Hagrid, you’ve got to pass Umbridge’s inspection, and to do that it would really

be better if she saw you teaching us how to look after porlocks, how to tell the

difference between knarls and hedgehogs, stuff like that!” said Hermione

earnestly….

But Hagrid merely yawned widely and cast a one-eyed look of longing toward the

vast bed in the corner…. “Look, don’ you go worryin’ abou’ me, I promise yeh

I’ve got really good stuff planned fer yer lessons now I’m back…” (p. 439).

Although Hagrid did not take any physical action, other than hinting he wanted to go to

bed, he provided an example of traditional masculinity. He ignored and dismissed

Hermione’s suggestions to change the class to something Umbridge would approve. Even

though Hermione had more knowledge about Umbridge, he still believed he knew better.

Very few male characters contradicted Rowling’s (2003) portrayal of masculinity.

However, Ron Weasley and Neville Longbottom provided two examples of a non-

traditional portrayal of masculinity.

Due to the previous year’s graduation, the Gryffindor Quidditch team held tryouts

for the position of Keeper. After weeks of practicing secretly, Ron attended try-outs and

ultimately won the position of Keeper. The captain of the team commented to Harry,

“‘Look, I know he’s your best mate, but he’s not fabulous. I think with a bit of training

he’ll be all right, though’” (p. 276). On the day of the first match, Ron agreed with the

captains comments. He openly questioned his ability in front of Harry. “‘I’m rubbish’,

croaked Ron. ‘I’m lousy. I can’t play to save my life. What was I thinking?’” (p. 402).

Ron’s insecurities about his ability were not incorrect, as he let four Quaffles (balls) get

by him. Ron’s inability to perform in an athletic task is inconsistent with traditional

masculine character portrayals. Traditionally, male characters are strong, powerful, and

able to complete the tasks before them. Gryffindor won the match, due to Harry capturing

the Snitch, not because of Ron’s keeping ability. While this example portrayed Ron as a

non-traditional masculine character, it allowed Harry to demonstrate his masculinity by

winning the match and saving Gryffindor from disappointment.

Neville Longbottom provided the other example of inconsistent masculine

portrayals. Near the end of the story Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Luna, and Neville

encountered several Death-Eaters in a secret room in the Ministry of Magic. The room

they are in holds many dusty, glass orbs that contain audible prophecies. The Death-

Eaters wanted to locate and listen to a prophecy that foretold Harry’s and Voldemort’s

fate. Harry and his friends managed to find the prophecy before the Death-Eaters.

Consequently, the Death-Eaters engaged the young students in a battle. In the midst of

the battle, Harry rolled the prophecy to Neville. As the fighting continued, it became

necessary for Harry to assist Neville because he had been hit by a curse. Neville still

possessed the prophecy. As Harry was helping Neville up the stone stairs, Neville tore the

pocket that contained the prophecy. As the fragile prophecy fell to the floor, Neville

accidentally kicked it. Rowling (2003) wrote, “it flew some ten feet to their right and

smashed on the step beneath them” (p. 804). Due to his action or lack of action, Neville

destroyed the only written record of the fate of both Harry and Voldemort. Neville would

have been a hero if could have preserved the prophecy, but instead he is the one who

caused its destruction.

Step One: Question Three

The final question Foss (2004) asked when analyzing gender in an artifact is,

“what does the rhetorical artifact suggest are the behaviors, concerns, issues, values,

qualities, and communication patterns of women and men apart from the society’s

definitions of gender” (p.156). The following is focused on how the characters in Harry

Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (Rowling, 2003) contradict society’s gender roles.

While Rowling (2003) included situations in which female characters did not

adhere to traditional female roles, there are several examples that depicted women

submitting to society’s definition of gender. In the novel, women are portrayed as

caretakers. Molly Weasely was a stay at home mother who cared for her family and

Harry. Hermione Granger assisted Harry and aided him in his many adventures. She

provided answers Harry needed to complete his homework, and even offered to complete

a difficult assignment for him. Aunt Petunia is portrayed as a caretaker, although her

methods may be questionable. Furthermore, Minerva McGonagall functioned as a

caretaker in the story. Minerva McGonagall is the head of Gryffindor, or the housemother

of the house Harry and many of his friends live in while staying at Hogwarts. While her

caretaker skills may have been less than motherly, she still cared for her students

academically. She made sure her students were prepared for their studies.

In addition to their roles as caretakers, the female characters are depicted as

passive and subordinate. In many cases, the women of the story needed a man’s

permission before they acted. In other instances, women did not act at all and relied on

the male characters to come up with a solution. As stated, the passivity and subordination

did not occur in every instance, but it occurred frequently.

Communication patterns employed by female characters in the story also conform

to society’s gender roles. Wood (1997) stated, “Also important in women’s speech is

showing support for others. To demonstrate support women often express understanding

and sympathy with a friend’s situation or feelings” (p. 171). This statement is supported

by several examples from Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (Rowling, 2003).

As stated, Hermione showed verbal support for Harry when he was angry about being

kept in the dark about Voldemort. In another scene, Hermione used supportive

communication when Harry was sharing his confusing experience with Cho Chang.

Other female characters employed supportive communication patterns. Molly

demonstrated supportive communication when she listened to Tonks describe her night

duties for The Order. Molly also exhibited supportive communication the morning of

Harry’s hearing in front of the Wizengamot. Among her supportive displays, such as

preparing breakfast and trying to make Harry’s hair lie flat, Molly also told Harry

everyone in the house had their fingers crossed for him. While this type of supportive

communication may seem elementary to some, to a teenage boy it would be recognizable

and appropriate. Cho Chang provided another example of female characters using

supportive communication. She used supportive communication when she explained why

Marietta Edgecomb betrayed Dumbledore’s Army. Finally, Tonks employed supportive

communication when she was speaking with Harry about hiding his scar. In addition and

similar to Molly Weasley, Tonks engaged in supportive communication the morning of

Harry’s hearing.

The majority of male characters also conform to British society’s definitions of

gender. The male characters are portrayed as strong, intelligent, knowledgeable, and

powerful. Dumbledore is described as the most powerful wizard in the magical

community. As stated, Dumbledore is the only one Voldemort feared. Near the end of the

book, Dumbledore and Voldemort confront each other in a climactic scene. Earlier Harry

witnessed the death of his godfather, Sirius, at the hands of a Death- Eater named

Bellatrix LaStrange. Enraged, Harry recklessly followed Bellatrix into the lobby of the

Ministry of Magic. As Harry and LaStrange battle, Voldemort appeared. Voldemort

would have killed Harry, but Dumbledore entered the room and blocked his spell. In the

chaos that ensued, Dumbledore made sure Harry and Bellatrix stayed away from the fight

by charming the statues in the lobby. The statues would not let either Harry or Bellatrix

participate in the struggle. Now, Dumbledore and Voldemort are poised for battle. The

exchange that followed illustrated Dumbledore’s intelligence, power, knowledge, and

strength. “‘It was foolish to come here tonight, Tom’, said Dumbledore calmly. ‘The

Aurors are on their way…’ ‘By which time I shall be gone and you shall be dead!’”, spat

Voldemort (p. 813). This brief interaction illustrated Dumbledore’s knowledge. He knew

Voldemort made a mistake in appearing at the Ministry of Magic. As the conversation

progressed, Dumbledore’s power and strength are demonstrated. Voldemort questioned

why Dumbledore did not use his strength to destroy him. Dumbledore assured Voldemort

that killing was not the only way to destroy a man.

“There is nothing worse than death, Dumbledore!” snarled Voldemort.

“You are quite wrong”, said Dumbledore, still closing in upon Voldemort and

speaking as lightly as though they were discussing the matter over drinks….

[Dumbledore continued] “Indeed, your failure to understand that there are things

much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness” (p. 814).

The conversation between Dumbledore and Voldemort illustrated the manner in which

the characters conform to and contradict society’s definition of gender. Rowling (2003)

portrayed Dumbledore’s demeanor in this scene as calm and in control. She used the

phrase “speaking lightly as though they were discussing the matter over drinks” to

illustrate Dumbledore’s control (p. 814). Conversely, Rowling (2003) used emotional

words when portraying Voldemort. For example, the words “snarled” and “spat” are used

to characterize Voldemort’s replies. In addition, Rowling (2003) used this interaction to

demonstrate Dumbledore’s intelligence to the reader while Voldemort’s intelligence is

not mentioned or displayed. Therefore, in this scene, Dumbledore is portrayed as

intelligent, knowledgeable, strong, and powerful which conforms to society’s definition

of gender. However, Voldemort is portrayed as emotional and not in control of the

situation, which contradicts society’s definition of gender.

Another male character is portrayed according to society’s definition of gender.

While Hagrid’s intelligence may be subtly portrayed, his strength and power are obvious.

When he is attacked by a group of six witches and wizards he defeated them quite easily.

The action Hagrid took could serve as the entire example, but the number of individuals

needed to battle him is also an indication of his strength.

Finally, Harry is an example of society’s definition of gender. When he was just

a year old, he almost killed Voldemort. His scar is a constant reminder of that battle. In

the Order of the Phoenix, Harry is lauded as the only one who has faced Voldemort three

times and is still alive. These are examples of Harry’s strength and power. Harry also

became the instructor of Dumbledore’s Army. He is the only student with enough

practical knowledge in defensive spells to teach other students. This is illustrated in a

conversation between Harry, Ron, and Hermione. Hermione exclaimed:

“You beat me in our third year—the only year we both sat the test and had a

teacher who actually knew the subject. But I’m not talking about test results,

Harry. Look what you’ve done!”

“How d’you mean?” [asked Harry]

“Uh…first year—you save the stone from You-Know-Who.” [said Ron]

“But that was luck”, said Harry. “That wasn’t skill—“

“Second year”, Ron interrupted, “you killed the basilisk and destroyed Riddle.”

“Yeah, but if Fawkes hadn’t turned up I—“

“Third year”, said Ron, louder still, “you fought off about a hundred dementors at

once—“

“You know that was a fluke, if the Time-Turner hadn’t—“

“Last year”, Ron said, almost shouting now, “you fought off You-Know-Who

again --” (p. 326-327).

This example depicted how other characters in the story view Harry. Ron and Hermione’s

confidence in Harry’s ability and intelligence conform to society’s definitions of gender

roles.

Similarly, communication patterns employed by male characters in the story

conform to society’s gender roles. Wood (1997) stated, “to establish their status and

value, men often speak to exhibit knowledge, skill, or ability” (p. 173). This is evident in

several conversations in the novel including the previously mentioned confrontation

between Dumbledore and Voldemort. Another example occurred when Harry, Ron, and

Hermione discussed Hagrid’s absence from Hogwarts. Ron and Hermione wondered why

Hagrid was missing. In the conversation, Harry provided the answer. He explained to

Ron and Hermione that Hagrid was still working on the task Dumbledore assigned him.

Instead of wondering about Hagrid’s absence along with Ron and Hermione, Harry

offered an answer to their question.

A conversation between Sirius and Fred and George Weasley provided another

example of male characters conforming to society’s definition of gender roles through

communication patterns. Fred and George Weasley were informed that their father,

Arthur, was attacked in the Ministry of Magic. Arthur’s injuries are severe and it is

unclear whether he will live or die. Dumbledore transported the Weasley children and

Harry to the Order’s secret location where Sirius was waiting for them. Instead of waiting

for information about their father, Ginny suggested going to St. Mungo’s Hospital. Fred

and George agreed with her and started to leave. Sirius stopped them. “‘Hang on, you

can’t go tearing off to St. Mungo’s!’ said Sirius. ‘Course we can go to St. Mungo’s if we

want,’ said Fred, with a mulish expression, ‘he’s our dad!’” (p. 476). Fred and George

spoke of taking action to fix the situation. Later in the conversation, Sirius offered

another plan. He suggested everyone stay calm and stay in the secret location. He

explained how his suggestion would be better than the action Fred and George wanted to

take. There may be two reasons Sirius suggested this passive course of action. The first

reason could be to prove his status in the Order. Sirius’ missions for the Order were

severely limited because many wizards from the Ministry and many Death-Eaters wanted

to capture him. Another reason Sirius may have suggested to wait was to prove his value

to Molly and others in the Order. Molly was upset with Sirius because of the cavalier way

he treated Harry. Keeping Molly’s children safe would be a good way to restore his

image. In the end, Sirius’ suggestion was followed much to the chagrin of Fred and

George.

Finally, a conversation between Harry and Snape provided an example of male

characters conforming to society’s definition of gender roles through communication

patterns. During Harry’s first Occlumency lesson Harry asked Professor Snape if

Voldemort could read minds. Snape wasted no time in showing his intelligence.

“Only Muggles talk of ‘mind reading.’ The mind is not a book, to be opened at

will and examined at leisure. Thoughts are not etched on the inside of skulls, to be

perused by any invader. The mind is a complex and many-layered thing,

Potter…or at least, most minds are.” (p. 530).

In this example, Professor Snape demonstrated his knowledge about Occlumency through

his conversation with Harry. Snape did not need to demonstrate this knowledge to Harry;

His position as a Professor inherently suggested his intelligence. However, Snape felt it

necessary to display his knowledge in front of Harry. This conversation supported what

Wood suggested were the reasons men speak.

Discovery of the Effects on the Audience

This section will discuss what effects the artifact may have on the audience. As

stated, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, along with all the Harry Potter novels,

enjoyed tremendous commercial success. While effects of this artifact may be different

for each individual, there are commonalities that may be recognized by the majority.

As established, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is written from a

masculine perspective. Harry is the protagonist in the story. In many situations in the

novel, Harry is portrayed as the hero. Rowling (2003) addressed this through a

conversation between Harry and Hermione. Due to a dream Harry had, he believed

Voldemort captured Sirius and took him to the Ministry of Magic. Afraid for his

godfather, Harry approached Ron and Hermione for assistance in rescuing Sirius. In the

scene that followed, Hermione questioned Harry’s motives.

“You… This isn’t a criticism, Harry! But you do…sort of…I mean—don’t you

think you’ve got a bit of a—a—saving-people-thing?” she said.

He glared at her. “And what’s that supposed to mean, a ‘saving-people-thing’?”

“Well… you…” She looked more apprehensive than ever. “I mean… last year,

for instance…in the lake…during the Tournament…you shouldn’t have…I mean,

you didn’t need to save that little Delacour girl… You got a bit…carried away…”

“… I mean, it was really great of you and everything,” said Hermione quickly,

looking positively petrified at the look on Harry’s face. “Everyone thought it was

a wonderful thing to do--”

“That’s funny,” said Harry through gritted teeth, “because I definitely remember

Ron saying I’d wasted time acting the hero…. is that what you think this is? You

reckon I want to act the hero again?” (p. 733-734).

This conversation addressed Harry’s heroic nature. Rowling (2003) not only

demonstrated this through Harry’s actions, but also through the views of other characters

in the story. While a novel written with a male protagonist and a male perspective is not

unique, it could still have profound effects on how women and men view themselves and

each other in terms of gender.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2003) could, potentially, affect

women more than men. Zipes (2001) explained an encounter he had with fifth and sixth

graders in a Minneapolis school. At the end of a storytelling session with the children,

Zipes discussed the Harry Potter books with them. Out of twenty-two youngsters, half of

them had read the first novel and most of them were girls. If a majority of the novels are

being read by girls or women, then a large number of women could be affected by the

portrayal of female characters.

This novel contained a mixture of traditional and non-traditional female

portrayals. Sometimes women are portrayed as strong and independent as the examples

of Professor McGonagall and Delores Umbridge illustrated. Other female characters in

the story are portrayed as weak, passive, and subordinate as the examples provided of

Molly Weasely, Cho Chang, and Hermione. However, the portrayals are inconsistent.

Molly Weasley is not always weak and Hermione is not always subordinate. Similarly,

Professor McGonagall and Delores Umbridge are not always strong. This contrasting

view very closely resembled everyday life. Many women in society are not always

subordinate to each other or to men. They are not consistently weak or consistently

strong. Rowling (2003) depicted the female characters according to how a majority of

women perceive their social roles. This more accurate portrayal of female characters

could be beneficial for female readers. Not only could these portrayals positively affect

women’s views of themselves, but also they could affect how men view women.

Conversely, male character portrayals are not as true to real life as female

character portrayals. Most of the male characters are portrayed as strong, intelligent, and

powerful. While these are considered positive characteristics, they do not accurately

reflect human nature. There are few examples in the novel that portrayed male characters

100

as unsure or not confident. The lack of contrasting portrayals could potentially affect

boys and men in a negative manner.

Discussion of Use of the Artifact to Improve Women’s Lives

There are many dynamic, powerful, intelligent women in Harry Potter and the

Order of the Phoenix. Rowling (2003) presented well-rounded female characters. Female

characters in the novel were portrayed as weak and passive, but they were also shown as

powerful and intelligent. As Zettle (2005) stated,

People in Rowling’s books come in all shapes, sizes and modes of behavior, just

like people in the real world…. I reject the notion that we must tell girls that the

only way to be valid human beings is to turn themselves into boys. I also reject

the notion that authors must portray them that way (p. 98).

Rowling (2003) depicted female characters both traditionally and non-traditionally. The

author’s female characters illustrated women as strong, intelligent, and powerful even in

a male-dominated world. Minerva McGonagall is deputy Headmistress at Hogwarts

under Albus Dumbledore. Even though she was second in command, Professor

McGonagall was still well respected among her colleagues and students. As illustrated in

this study, she demonstrated her power and her courage on several occasions. Other

female characters, including Hermione, Ginny, and Tonks were portrayed as strong and

intelligent. However, the female characters also demonstrated negative characteristics

such as, weakness, passivity, and lack of power. As Zettle (2005) explained, “what

Rowling ultimately shows in these books is that no matter who you are, you can be

101

yourself and still be a worthy person” (p. 99). The well-rounded female characters could

serve as role models for young girls and women who read the story.

This novel is not focused on women’s issues or problems. However, Rowling

(2003) depicted challenges men and women face. Not only was Harry, as the protagonist

of the story, challenged with many difficult tasks, but Hermione and other female

characters were also challenged. Due to the nature of the story, the women’s problems

were not as fully addressed as Harry’s problems. Nevertheless, the challenges women

faced are evident in the novel. For instance, when Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Luna,

and Neville are looking for the prophecy room Hermione figured out how to mark the

doors so the group knew what doors they had previously opened.

Explanation of the Artifact’s Impact on Rhetorical Theory

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix did not break from traditional

structures of rhetoric. Traditionally, rhetoric is viewed as a male-dominated field (Foss &

Foss, 1991). Rowling’s (2003) novel solidifies this position. The protagonist in this story

is a young male. His mentors and one of his closest friends are male. The story focused

on his problems and his ability, or power, to solve them. However, the female characters

in this story, while seeming secondary, are powerful in the same way as the protagonist.

The female characters in the novel chose to act according to the circumstances of

the situation. Male characters did not always dictate female characters’ actions.

Furthermore, female characters in the novel are more accurately portrayed. They are

well-rounded and displayed polarities of character. They are portrayed as powerful,

passive, weak, strong, intelligent, and subordinate. The male characters in the story are

102

not afforded this three dimensional portrayal. Most of the male characters are less fully

drawn. They are strong, powerful, and intelligent. Very few male characters are portrayed

as vulnerable or weak.

Perhaps the greatest impact Rowling’s (2003) novel had on rhetorical theory is

demonstrated by the true to life portrayals of the female characters. Zettle (2005) stated,

Some real live girls do giggle and shriek. Some are quiet and serious. Some like

pink and ruffles. Some like athletics and blue jeans. We see them all at

Hogwarts….There are girls at Hogwarts who are vain and ridiculous. There are

girls who are bookish and studious, or shy and uncertain. There are girls who are

geeks. In Rowling’s world, they are all okay, no matter what their peers think of

them. They can, and do, choose to stand up for what’s right and lay their own

lives on the line if need be (p. 98-99).

In a discipline dominated by male viewpoints, stereotypes, and traditional portrayals

Rowling (2003) created female characters that accurately mirror girls and women in

today’s society.

Summary

This chapter applied Foss’ four-step model to Rowling’s (2003) novel Harry

Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Upon completion of this analysis, the research

questions may be addressed.

The first research question, to what extent, if any, does the book Harry Potter and

the Order of the Phoenix contradict or affirm the gender roles created by society, is

addressed in the first step of Foss’ model. The three questions Foss suggested asking in

103

the first step of the model examined various aspects of gender roles in the novel. It was

found that female characters were portrayed traditionally and non-traditionally, while

most of the male characters were portrayed traditionally.

The second research question, to what extent, if any, is the role of the leading

female character altered in order to “feminize” the tale, is also examined in the first step

of Foss’ model. The leading female characters in this artifact were not altered to feminize

the tale. Rowling (2003) portrayed the female characters as well rounded and three-

dimensional. They exhibited traditional characteristics and non-traditional characteristics.

The third question, to what extent, if any, is the role of the leading male character

altered in order to “feminize” the tale, is also addressed in the first part of Foss’ model.

The male characters are portrayed as strong, intelligent, and powerful. This is consistent

with traditional male portrayals in fairy tales. Therefore, the leading male character was

not altered to “feminize” the tale.

Finally, the last question addressing updating classic fairy tales to reflect current

perceptions of gender will be discussed in Chapter Five. Rowling’s (2003) male

characters did not exhibit many weaknesses or vulnerabilities. While this is consistent

with traditional male portrayal in fairy tales, it reduced the scope of the male characters.

104

Chapter V

Discussion and Conclusions

The following chapter will offer a discussion of Harry Potter and the Order of the

Phoenix and the application of Foss’ model. Implications of the study and suggestions for

additional study will also be discussed.

Discussion

Foss’ four-step model was used to analyze Rowling’s (2003) Harry Potter and the

Order of the Phoenix. Using Foss’ model was deemed the best choice for analyzing

gender in this artifact. The model illuminated the portrayal of female and male characters

in the story by analyzing individual aspects of the characters. Not only were the character

portrayals analyzed, but Foss’ model also considered the effects the portrayals would

have on the audience, women’s lives, and rhetorical theory.

Analysis of Gender in the Artifact

The first step of Foss’ model addressed how gender is portrayed in the artifact. To

address this, Foss (2004) suggested asking three questions. The first question examined

whether the story was written to depict a woman’s world or a man’s world. As illustrated,

Rowling (2003) wrote this story from a man’s perspective. The story is written in third

person, but is focused on Harry and his experiences. He is the protagonist. The other

characters, including the women, in the novel contribute to Harry’s experiences, but are

never the focus of the story. Rowling (2003) also used language to suggest this story

depicts a man’s world. Men are described by their actions while women are described by

their physical appearance. Finally, Rowling (2003) depicted a man’s world by creating

105

inequality in positions of power. The male characters in the story hold the powerful

offices. As illustrated, Albus Dumbledore is the Headmaster of Hogwarts. Minerva

McGonagall is his second in command. Cornelius Fudge is the Minister of Magic.

Delores Umbridge is his Undersecretary. Arthur Weasley is employed by the Ministry of

Magic. Molly Weasley, his wife, is a stay-at-home mother. Stone (1986) and Zipes

(1987) agreed fairy tales are used to make sense of the world. Zipes (1987) stated, “we

know that children are socialized or culturally conditioned by movies, television

programs, and the stories they read or hear” (p. 186). In Harry Potter and the Order of

the Phoenix, Rowling (2003) created the world in the story to mirror the real world. The

use of unequal power and language aided this creation.

The second question Foss (2004) suggested in her model explored how femininity

and masculinity were portrayed in the artifact. As the examples indicated, femininity is

portrayed inconsistently with traditional female roles. Sometimes the women fulfilled the

traditional roles Zipes (1987) outlined. At other times, women were portrayed non-

traditionally. The inconsistency in female character portrayals found in Rowling’s (2003)

novel also mirrored the real world. While in some situations the female characters in the

story were subordinate, in other situations the female characters acted. These instances

contradicted Stone’s (1975) claim that female characters never have to act.

While female characters are portrayed inconsistently, Rowling (2003) stayed

more consistent in the portrayal of male characters. Most of the male characters in the

story are powerful, brave, intelligent, and strong. There are very few instances in which

male characters demonstrated weakness or lack of confidence. As the examples

106

illustrated, the male characters did not wait for anyone to assist them. They took action.

Unlike her portrayal of female characters, Rowling’s (2003) portrayal of male characters

does not mirror the real world. This less than accurate depiction of male characters could

potentially negatively affect the novels’ younger readers.

Foss’ final question in the model addressed how the character portrayals

contradict society’s gender roles. As exemplified, Rowling (2003) portrayed female

characters that were both consistent with and contradictory of society’s definition of

gender roles. However, the male characters were not portrayed in the same manner. There

were few instances, in the novel, in which male character portrayals contradicted

society’s definition of gender roles.

Discovery of the Effects on the Audience

The second step of Foss’ model determined the possible effects the artifact had on

the audience. If Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix can be considered a fairy tale,

then this step in the model is extremely important. Zipes (1987) suggested children use

fairy tales to socialize to the world around them. While Rowling’s (2003) novel is not a

feminist fairy tale by definition, (it does not have a female protagonist and it is not

focused on issues unique to girls and women) the story exhibited some aspects of

feminism. The examples offered in the previous chapter highlighted those aspects of

feminism found in the story.

Rowling’s (2003) inconsistent gender portrayal of female characters could have

positive effects on readers of any age. Rowling depicted a world that is recognizable to

women young and old. Furthermore, Rowling depicted a myriad of female characters

107

with strengths and weaknesses. This depiction is consistent with what Zettle (2005)

claimed. She suggested in the world of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix girls

and women are allowed to be themselves.

However, Rowling’s (2003) male characters are not afforded the same balance.

Most of the male characters are portrayed as strong, intelligent, and powerful. As the

examples suggested, there are very few exceptions. While these portrayals adhere to

traditional fairy tale characters, they could have a negative effect on the novel’s many

readers. It has been determined that children use fairy tales to make sense of the world

around them. Rowling’s (2003) depiction of male characters may skew a child’s view of

masculinity. Men are not always powerful, intelligent, confident, or brave. To create

characters that only offer the traditional portrayal of masculinity may cause the readers of

this novel to believe it is an accurate depiction. Stone (1986) offered an observation by

Weigle. She suggested new perceptions of men and women would need to be created in

order to destroy gender stereotyping. Rowling (2003) accomplished this with the

portrayal of female characters. However, the male characters lacked balance between

traditional and non-traditional portrayals.

Discussion of Use of the Artifact to Improve Women’s Lives

While Rowling (2003) provided examples of inequality for women in her novel, it

still could have a profound effect on and improve women’s lives. The female characters

Rowling (2003) created portray women’s roles as they occur in today’s society. Many

female characters are powerful, such as Professor McGonagall and Delores Umbridge.

Other female characters are presented as more traditional. Rowling described some

108

female characters less positively than she did others. As Zettle (2005) stated, “the people

in Rowling’s books come in all shapes, sizes, and modes of behavior, just like people in

the real world” (p. 98). In a genre that traditionally portrayed women as stagnate

stereotypes, Rowling’s (2003) female characters are refreshing. They are recognizable

and identifiable. They are well-rounded and nuanced. Rowling (2003) accurately

reflected women in the real world in this tale.

Explanation of the Artifact’s Impact on Rhetorical Theory

As stated, rhetoric is a male-dominated field. However, with the assistance of

contributions from women, such as Campbell (1989), Gearhart (1995), and Foss (2004)

the field of rhetoric is changing. Rowling’s (2003) novel Harry Potter and the Order of

the Phoenix contributed to achieving a balance between men and women in the field of

rhetoric. Instead of conforming to traditional female portrayals in fairy tales, Rowling

(2003) portrayed female characters traditionally and non-traditionally. Her decision

created characters women could recognize, identify with, and admire.

Campbell (1989) suggested the purpose of rhetorical criticism is enlightenment.

She defined enlightenment as “an understanding of the ways symbols can be used by

analyzing the ways they were used in a particular time and place and the ways such usage

appealed or might have appealed to other human beings” (p. 2). On the day the novel was

published, it sold over 7 million copies in the United States and the United Kingdom

combined. Employing Foss’s model allowed the critic to examine why this novel

appealed to so many. Even though this novel cannot be classified as a feminist work, the

author created female characters that display feminist characteristics. Rowling’s (2003)

109

ability to portray female characters as they appear in today’s society contributed not only

to rhetorical theory, but also to the improvement of our abilities as communicators. As

Foss (2004) suggested the improvement of our abilities as communicators is the most

important reason to engage in rhetorical criticism.

Implications

Even though Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (Rowling, 2003) does not

present a woman’s view of the world, it does challenge traditional portrayals of female

characters. Female characters in this novel have the same power the male protagonist

possesses. The female characters were not afraid to use that power when the situation

warranted. At the same time, the female characters displayed traditional characteristics.

However, Rowling (2003) created a balance between traditional and non-traditional

portrayals.

Foss’ (2004) first step in feminist criticism explored femininity and masculinity.

The critic concluded Rowling (2003) portrayed femininity in a well-rounded manner. The

female characters were strong and weak, powerful and lacking in power, authoritative

and subordinate. In most instances, the male characters were not afforded such in-depth

portrayals. When portraying the male characters, Rowling (2003) adhered to traditional

masculine characteristics. This inconsistency in female character portrayals contradicted

traditional gender roles in fairy tales.

The second step in Foss’ model addressed the effects the artifact may have on the

audience. While there is evidence suggesting this novel could affect women more than

men due to the number of girls reading the story versus the number of boys reading the

110

story, the critic determined the artifact could affect women and men both positively and

negatively. Women could be positively affected by Rowling’s (2003) accurate portrayal

of female characters. However, women could be negatively affected by Rowling’s (2003)

inaccurate portrayal of male characters. Men’s views of women could change after

reading this novel, which could have a positive impact on how men view women in

today’s society. However, Rowling’s portrayal of male characters could have a negative

impact on how men view their roles in society.

Foss’s third step in the model examined the impact the artifact could have on

women’s lives. As stated, fairy tales can be socializing agents. Rowling’s (2003) tale

depicted a more accurate view of women’s roles in society, which challenges traditional

portrayals of women in fairy tales. This more accurate portrayal of women could

profoundly and positively influence women’s lives.

Finally, the criticism of this artifact could influence rhetorical theory. Rowling

(2003) created female characters that, at times, shy away from the traditional female

portrayals found in fairy tales. In a discipline dominated by male perspectives and

stereotypical female roles, Rowling’s (2003) female character portrayals challenge those

male viewpoints.

Conclusions

Using Foss’ model, the critic determined Harry Potter and the Order of the

Phoenix (Rowling, 2003) could positively affect women. As exemplified with

overwhelming evidence, stereotypical female character portrayals are found in

combination with non-traditional female character portrayals. Through careful

111

examination of the examples provided, the critic found male and female character

portrayals both affirmed and contradicted gender roles created by society. However,

Rowling (2003) created a balance between traditional and non-traditional female

portrayals. This is a more accurate reflection of women in today’s society. These

observations provided an answer to the first research question posed.

Other examples provided evidence to answer the second research question posed.

Even though the author does not alter the female characters in order to “feminize” the

story, Rowling (2003) does not adhere to traditional female gender portrayals. The female

characters in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (Rowling, 2003) could positively

affect women because they depict strength, power and intelligence, as well as weakness,

passivity, and subordination. They are complex characters, not stereotypical caricatures.

However, Rowling’s (2003) portrayal of male characters may negatively affect

male readers. The third research question addressed the alteration of the male characters

to “feminize” the tale. As explained, male characters in Harry Potter and the Order of the

Phoenix (Rowling, 2003) are portrayed traditionally. The author does not attempt to alter

the male characters to “feminize” this tale. Consequently, the stereotypical male gender

portrayals do not afford the male characters much complexity or depth. The traditional

male character portrayals could lead younger male readers to believe their worth should

be demonstrated by displays of strength, power, and intelligence. While those

characteristics are admirable, they are not the only characteristics men display in the real

world.

112

While male readers may be affected negatively by male character portrayals, they

may be positively affected by Rowling’s (2003) female character portrayals. Rowling

presented female characters that, in most instances, did not wait for a male character to

save them. The female characters acted for themselves and for the well-being of others.

Furthermore, in some instances the female characters saved or rescued a male character

from harm. This type of female character portrayal is not typically found in traditional

fairy tales. However, Rowling’s (2003) female gender portrayals allowed boys to see a

more accurate depiction of women. As stated, in a genre filled with stagnant,

stereotypical female characters, Rowling’s (2003) female character portrayals were

welcomed.

The final research question addressed the need to update classic fairy tales to

reflect current perceptions of gender in society. Traditional fairy tales have a place in

history. For many years, children and adults have treasured them. Updating those tales

would not only change the story but would also rewrite history. However, creating new

tales such as Rowling (2003) did may be the answer for a genre that has been stuck with

stereotypical portrayals for too long. As the evidence suggested, Rowling (2003)

demonstrated, with Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, female characters could

reflect current perceptions of gender in society while including elements of fairy tales in

the story.

113

Suggestions for Future Study

Many aspects of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix could warrant future

studies. A feminist rhetorical criticism of the other novels in the series could provide

insight into how the author developed the characters to reflect today’s society.

A second area of study might compare Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

to fairy tales from different cultures. A study of this nature could provide information

about how other cultures view gender roles in their society.

A third area of study could determine the number of girls who read the Harry

Potter series compared to the number of boys who read the series. This study could

determine the effects of the books on readers.

Another study could focus on other types of inequalities found in fairy tales. This

study could examine how race, age, or economic status are portrayed in fairy tales. Future

research in this area could provide insight into how equality on all levels could be

achieved in the genre.

Yet another study could compare other fairy tales that portray female characters

that reflect today’s society. This comparison could examine the techniques each author

uses to create accurate depictions of women instead of reverting to portraying women in a

traditional manner. If fairy tales are seen as a tool used to make sense of the real world,

then the techniques the authors employ become important.

Similarly, a future study in this area could examine other authors writing similar

tales. This study could determine the authors’ influences and if they employ comparable

approaches when writing the tales.

114

Still another area of future study could compare the film versions of the books to

the texts. This study could focus on many areas including, character portrayal, content, or

popularity. This study could also compare the number of people who only read the books

to the number of people who only view the films.

Finally, a future study could explore how many adults read the Harry Potter

series. This study could determine whether the novels affect adults and children in the

same way. This study could also examine whether fairy tales are able to affect or change

any formed opinions the reader may have about gender and gender roles.

115

References

Aldoory, L., & Toth, E. (2001). The complexities of feminism in communication

scholarship today. Communication Yearbook, 24, 346.

Anatol, G. (2003). Introduction. In Reading Harry Potter: Critical Essays. Westport, CT:

Praeger.

Anderson, H. (2003). Reading Harry Potter with Navajo eyes. In Heilman, E. (Ed.),

Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical perspectives. New York, NY and

London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Appelbaum, P. (2003). Harry Potter’s world: Magic, technoculture, and becoming

human. In Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical

perspectives. New York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Barnett, M. (1986). Sex bias in the helping behavior presented in children’s picture

books. Journal of Generic Psychology, 147, 343-351.

Ben-Amos, D. (1976). Folklore genres. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Bingham, S. (1994). Conceptualizing sexual harassment as discursive practice. Westport,

CT: Praeger.

Blankenship, J., & Robson, D. (1995). A ‘feminine style’ in women’s political discourse:

An exploratory essay. Communication Quarterly, 43, 353.

Bond, E. & Michelson, N. (2003). Writing Harry’s world: Children coauthoring

Hogwarts. In Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical

perspectives. New York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

116

Bottingheimer, R.B. (1986). Silenced women in the Grimms’ tales: The “fit” between

fairy tales and society and their historical context. In Bottigheimer, R.B. (Ed.),

Fairy tales and society: Illusion, allusion, and paradigm. Philadelphia, PA:

University of Pennsylvania Press.

Brunvand, J.H. (1968). The study of American folklore: An introduction. New York, NY:

W.W. Norton & Company Inc.

Brunvand, J. H. (1976). Folklore: A study and research guide. New York, NY: St.

Martin’s Press.

Burgchardt, C.R. (ed.). (1995). Readings in rhetorical criticism. State College, PA: Strata

Publishing Company.

Campbell, K.K. (1972). Critiques of contemporary rhetoric. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth

Publishing Company.

Campbell, K.K. (1973). The rhetoric of women’s liberation: An oxymoron. Quarterly

Journal of Speech, 59, 74-86.

Campbell, K.K. (1989). Man cannot speak for her: A critical study of early feminist

rhetoric. vol. 1. Westport, CT: Greenwood

Campbell, K.K. & Burkholder, T.R. (1997). Critiques of contemporary rhetoric (2

Ed.).

New York: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Carey, B. (2003). Hermione and the house-elves: The literary and historical contexts of

J.K. Rowling’s antislavery campaign. In Anatol, G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter:

Critical essays. Westport, CT: Praeger.

117

Carlson, A.C. (1994). Defining womanhood: Lucretia Coffin Mott and the transformation

of femininity. Western Journal of Communication, 58, 85-97.

Castro, A. (2005). From Azkaban to Abu Ghraib. In Lackey, M. (Ed.), Mapping the

world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

CBS News: Sales of ‘Potter’ books tops 300M. (2005, October 4). Retrieved August 22,

2006 from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/04/print/main907188.shtml

Condit, C. M. (1990). Decoding abortion rhetoric: Communicating social change.

Urbana: University of Illinois.

Condit, C. M. (1994). Hegemony in a mass-mediated society: Concordance about

reproductive technologies. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 11, 205-230.

Conrad, R. (2005). The proper wizard’s guide to good manners: A m*ggle tells all. In

Lackey, M. (Ed.), Mapping the world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella

Books, Inc.

Cooper, P. J., Friedley, S. A., Stewart, A. D., Stewart, L. P. (1996). Communication and

Gender. Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.

Damour, L. (2003). Harry Potter and the magical looking glass: Reading the secret life of

the preadolescent. In Anatol, G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays.

Westport, CT: Praeger.

de Beauvoir, S. (1973). The second sex. In Rossi, A. (Ed.), The feminist papers: From

Adams to de Beauvoir (pp. 674-705). New York, NY and London, UK: Colombia

University Press.

118

de Rosa, D. (2003). Wizardly challenges to and affirmation of the initiation paradigm in

Harry Potter. In Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary

critical perspectives. New York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

DeVos, E. (2005). It’s all about god. In Lackey, M. (Ed.), Mapping the world of Harry

Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Donoghue, E. (1997). Kissing the witch: Old tales in new skins. New York, NY: Joanna

Cotler Books.

Dorson, R.M. (1959). American folklore. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Dorson, R.M. (1964). Buying the wind: Regional folklore in the United States. Chicago,

IL and London, UK: The University of Chicago Press.

Dorson, R. M. (Ed.). (1972). Folklore and folklife: An introduction. Chicago, IL and

London, UK: The University of Chicago Press.

Dorson, R.M. (1975). Folktales told around the world. Chicago, IL: The University of

Chicago Press.

Dorson, R.M. (Ed.). (1983). Handbook of American folklore. Bloomington, IN: Indiana

University Press.

Doughty, T. (2002). Locating Harry Potter in the “boy’s book” market. In Whited, L.

(Ed.), The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a literary phenomenon.

Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Dowling, C. (1981). The Cinderella complex: Women’s hidden fear of independence.

New York, NY: Summit Books.

119

Dresang, E. (2002). Hermione Granger and the heritage of gender. In Whited, L. (Ed.),

The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a literary phenomenon.

Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Dundes, A. (1965). The study of folklore. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Dworkin, A. (1974). Women hating. New York, NY: Dutton.

Elliot, J. (2001). Stepping on the Harry Potter buzz. Retrieved August 3, 2006, from

http://www.bitchmagazine.com/archives/3_01potter/potter.shtml.

Elster, C. (2003). The seeker of secrets: Images of learning, knowing, and schooling. In

Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical perspectives.

New York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Farrer, C.R. (1975). Introduction: Women and folklore: Images and genres. In Women in

Folklore. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Fischli, R. (1979). Anita Bryant’s stand against ‘militant homosexuality’: Religious

fundamentalism and the democratic process. Central States Speech Journal, 30,

262-271.

Foss, S.K. (1979). The equal rights amendment controversy: Two worlds in conflict.

Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 275-288.

Foss, S.K. (1989). Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and practice. Prospect Heights, IL:

Waveland.

Foss, K.A. & Foss, S.K. (1991). Women speak: The eloquence of women’s rhetoric.

Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.

120

Foss, K.A., Foss, S.K., & Trapp, R. (1991). Contemporary perspectives on rhetoric. (2

Ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.

Foss, K.A., Foss, S.K., & Griffin, C.L. (1999). Feminist rhetorical theories. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Foss, S.K. (2004). Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and practice (3

Ed.). Long Grove,

IL: Waveland.

Foss, K.A., Foss, S.K. & Griffin, C.L. (Eds.). (2004). Readings in feminist rhetorical

theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Frentz, T.S., & Farrell, T.B. (1975). Conversion of America’s consciousness: The

rhetoric of the exorcist. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 61, 40-47.

Funk & Wagnalls. (Eds.). (1949). The standard dictionary of folklore, mythology, and

legend. (Vol. 1). New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company.

Gallardo-C., X. & Smith, C. (2003). Cinderfella: J.K. Rowling’s wily web of gender. In

Anatol, G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Garfinkle, R. (2005). Why killing Harry is the worst outcome for Voldemort. In Lackey,

M. (Ed.), Mapping the world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Gearhart, S.M., & Johnson, W.R. (Eds.). (1974). Loving women/loving men: Gay

liberation and the church. San Fransico, CA: Glide.

Gearhart, S. M. (1976). The lesbian and God-the-father. In H.W. Simons (Ed.),

Persuasion: Understanding, practice and analysis (pp. 338-342). Menlo Park,CA:

Longman Higher Education.

121

Gearhart, S.M. (1979). The womanization of rhetoric. Women’s Studies International

Quarterly, 2, 195-201.

Gearhart, S.M. (1995). Notes from a recovering activist. Sojourner: The Women’s

Forum, 2, 8-11.

Gearhart, S.M. (1997). A feminist tarot (Rev.ed.). Boston, MA: Alyson. (Originally

published 1976).

Gellis, R. (2005). The Dursleys as social commentary. In Lackey, M. (Ed.), Mapping the

world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Gold, E. (1981). The Grimké sisters and the emergence of the women’s rights movement.

Southern Speech Communication Journal, 46, 341-360.

Grimes, K. (2002). Harry Potter: Fairy tale prince, real boy, and archetypal hero. In

Whited, L. (Ed.), The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a literary

phenomenon. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Gunn, J. (2005). Harry Potter as schooldays novel. In Lackey, M. (Ed.), Mapping the

world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Guralnik, D. (Ed.). (1984). Webster’s new world dictionary (6

ed.). New York, NY:

Warner Books.

Hall, S. (2003). Harry Potter and the rule of law: The central weakness of legal concepts

in the wizard world. In Anatol, G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays.

Westport, CT: Praeger.

Hancock, B. (1972). Affirmation by negation in the women’s liberation movement.

Quarterly Journal of Speech, 58, 262-274.

122

Heilman, E. (2003). Blue wizards and pink witches: Representations of gender identity

and power. In Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical perspectives. New

York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Heilman, E. & Gregory, A. (2003). Images of the privileged insider and outcast outsider.

In Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical

perspectives. New York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Heuscher, J. E. (1963). A psychiatric study of fairy tales: Their origins, meanings, and

usefulness. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Hiebert-Alton, A. (2003). Generic fusion and the mosaic of Harry Potter. In Heilman, E.

(Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical perspectives. New York,

NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

hooks, b. (1984). Feminist theory: From margin to center. Boston, MA: South End.

hooks, b. (1989). Feminist politicization: A comment. In hooks, b., & Watkins, G. (Eds.),

Talking back: Thinking feminist, thinking black. Boston, MA: South End Press.

Hopkins, L. (2003). Harry Potter and the acquisition of knowledge. In Anatol, G. (Ed.),

Reading Harry Potter: Critical Essays. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Jentsch, N. (2002). Harry Potter and the tower of babel: Translating the magic. In

Whited, L. (Ed.), The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a literary

phenomenon. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Jones, S.S. (1986). The structure of “Snow White”. In Bottigheimer, R.B. (Ed.). Fairy

tale and society: Illusion, allusion, and paradigm. Philadelphia, PA: University of

Pennsylvania Press.

123

Jones, S.S. (1995). The fairy tale: The magic mirror of imagination. New York, NY:

Twayne Publishers.

Kornfield, J. & Prothro, L. (2003). Comedy, conflict, and community: Home and family

in Harry Potter. In Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary

critical perspectives. New York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Kramer, C. (1974). Women’s speech: Separate but unequal. Quarterly Journal of

Speech, 60, 14-24.

Kramerae, C. (1980). Proprietors of language. In S. McConnell-Ginet, R. Borker, & N.

Furman (Eds.), Women & Language in Literature and Society (pp. 58-68). New

York, NY: Praeger.

Krause, M. (2005). Harry Potter and the end of religion. In Lackey, M. (Ed.), Mapping

the world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Lackey, M. (2005). Introduction. In Mapping the world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX:

BenBella Books, Inc.

Lacoss, J. (2002). Of magicals and muggles: Reversals and revulsions at Hogwarts. In

Whited, L. (Ed.), The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a literary

phenomenon. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New York: Harper Colophon.

Lavoie, C. (2003). Safe as houses: Sorting and school houses at Hogwarts. In Anatol, G.

(Ed.), Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays. Westport, CT: Praeger.

124

Lay, M., Wahlstrom, B., & Brown, C. (1996). The rhetoric of midwifery: Conflicts and

conversations in the Minnesota home birth community in the 1990s. Quarterly

Journal of Speech, 82, 383-401.

Lieberman, M. (1972). Some day my prince will come: Female acculturation through the

fairy tale. College English, 34, 383-395.

Lundell, T. (1986). Gender-related biases in the type and motif indexes of Aarne and

Thompson. In Bottigheimer, R.B. (Ed.). Fairy tales and society: Illusion, allusion,

and paradigm. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Luthi, M. (1970). Once upon a time: On the nature of fairy tales. New York, NY:

Frederick Ungar Publishing Co.

Luthi, M. (1984). The fairytale as art form and portrait of man (J. Erickson, trans.).

Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. (Original work published 1975).

MacDonald, R. (1982). The tale retold: Feminist fairy tales. Children’s Literature

Association Quarterly, 7, 18-20.

Malu, K. (2003). Ways of reading Harry Potter: Multiple stories for multiple reader

identities. In Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical

perspectives. New York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Matthews, S. (2005). Ich bin lin hufflepuff. In Lackey, M. (Ed.), Mapping the world of

Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

McGee, M.C. (1980). The ‘ideograph’: A link between rhetoric and ideology. Quarterly

Journal of Speech, 66, 1-16.

125

Mendlesohn, F. (2002). Crowning the king: Harry Potter and the construction of

authority. In Whited, L. (Ed.), The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on

a literary phenomenon. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Millman, J. (2005). To sir, with love. In Lackey, M. (Ed.), Mapping the world of Harry

Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Mills, A. (2003). Archetypes and the unconscious in Harry Potter and Diana Wynne

Jones’s fire and hemlock and dogsbody. In Anatol, G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter:

Critical essays. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Moloney, D. (2005). Harry Potter and the young man’s mistake. In Lackey, M. (Ed.),

Mapping the world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Natov, R. (2002). Harry Potter and extraordinariness of the ordinary. In Whited, L. (Ed.),

The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a literary phenomenon.

Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Nel, P. (2002). J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter novels: A readers guide. New York , NY &

London, UK: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Nel, P. (2002). You say “jelly”, I say “jell-o”? Harry Potter and the transfiguration of

language. In Whited, L. (Ed.), The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on

a literary phenomenon. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Newall, V.J. (1978). Introduction. In Newall, V.J. (Ed.), Folklore studies in the 20

century (pp. xv-xxxvi).Great Britian, UK: St. Edmundsbury Press.

126

Nikolajeva, M. (2003). Harry Potter- a return to the romantic hero. In Heilman, E. (Ed.),

Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical perspectives. New York, NY and

London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Oakes, M. (2003). Flying cars, floo powder, and flaming torches: The hi-tech, low-tech

world of wizardry. In Anatol, G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays.

Westport, CT: Praeger.

Olrik, A. (1921). Principles for oral narrative research (Wolf, K. & Jensen, J. trans.).

Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Ostry, E. (2003). Accepting mudbloods: The ambivalent social vision of J.K. Rowling’s

fairy tales. In Anatol, G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays. Westport,

CT: Praeger.

Park, J. (2003). Class and socioeconomic identity in Harry Potter. In Anatol, G. (Ed.),

Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Pharr, M. (2002). In medias res: Harry Potter as hero-in-progress. In Whited, L. (Ed.),

The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a literary phenomenon.

Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Phelps, E. (Ed.). (1978). Tatterhood and other tales. Old Westbury, NY: Feminist Press.

Prokhorov, A.M. (Ed.). (1978). Great Soviet encyclopaedia (Vol. 27). (Bronstein, M.

trans.). New York, NY.

Propp, V. (1968). Morphology of the folktale. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

Rohrich, K.E. (1986). Introduction. In Bottigheimer, R.B. (Ed.). Fairy tales and society:

Illusion, allusion, and paradigm. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.

127

Rossi, A. (1973). The feminist papers: From Adams to de Beauvior. New York, NY and

London, UK: Columbia University Press.

Rowling, J.K. (1997). Harry Potter and the sorcerer’s stone. New York, NY: Scholastic

Press Inc.

Rowling, J.K. (1999). Harry Potter and the chamber of secrets. New York, NY:

Scholastic Press Inc.

Rowling, J.K. (1999). Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban. New York, NY:

Scholastic Press Inc.

Rowling, J.K. (2000). Harry Potter and the goblet of fire. New York, NY: Scholastic

Press Inc.

Rowling, J. K. (2003). Harry Potter and the order of the phoenix. New York, NY:

Scholastic Press Inc.

Rowling, J.K. (2005). Harry Potter and the half-blood prince. New York, NY: Scholastic

Press Inc.

Rowling, J.K. (2007). Publication date for Harry Potter and the deathly hallows.

Retrieved April 9, 2007 from http://www.jkrowling.com.

Rushing, J. (1993). Power, other, and spirit in cultural texts. Western Journal of

Communication, 57, 159-168.

Russ, J. (1978). Kittatinny. New York, NY: Daughters.

Schanoes, V. (2003). Cruel heroes and treacherous texts: Educating the reader in moral

complexity and critical reading in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books. In Anatol,

G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays. Westport, CT: Praeger.

128

Schoefer, C. (2000). Harry Potter’s girl trouble. Retrieved August 3,2006 from

http://archive.salon.com/books/feature/2000/01/13/potter/indexl.html.

Skulnick, R. & Goodman, J. (2003). The civic leadership of Harry Potter: Agency, ritual,

and schooling. In Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary

critical perspectives. New York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Smith, C.R. (2003). Rhetoric and human consciousness: A history. Prospect Heights, IL:

Waveland.

Smith, K. (2003). Harry Potter’s schooldays: J.K. Rowling and the British boarding

school novel. In Anatol, G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays.

Westport, CT: Praeger.

Solomon, M. (1979). The ‘positives woman’s’ journey: A mythic analysis of the rhetoric

of stop ERA. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 262-274.

Steege, D. (2002). Harry Potter, Tom Brown, and the British school story: Lost in transit.

In Whited, L. (Ed.), The ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a literary

phenomenon. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

Stephens, R. (2003). Harry and hierarchy: Book banning as a reaction to the subversion

of authority. In Anatol, G. (Ed.), Reading Harry Potter: Critical essays. Westport,

CT: Praeger.

Stuart, C. (1978). Mary Wollstonecraft’s a vindication of the rights of man: A rhetoric

reassessment. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 42, 83-92.

Stone, K. (1975). Things Walt Disney never told us. In C.R. Farrer (Ed.), Women and

Folklore. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

129

Stone, K. (1986). Feminist approaches to the interpretation of fairy tales. In Bottigheimer,

R.B.(Ed.). Fairy tales and society: Illusion, allusion, and paradigm. Philadelphia,

PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Sutherland Borah, R. (2002). Apprentice wizards welcome: Fan communities and the

culture of Harry Potter. In Whited, L. (Ed.), The ivory tower and Harry Potter:

Perspectives on a literary phenomenon. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri

Press.

Taub, D. & Servaty, H. (2003). Controversial content in children’s literature: Is Harry

Potter harmful to children?. In Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world:

Multidisciplinary critical perspectives. New York, NY and London, UK:

RoutledgeFalmer.

Teare, E. (2002). Harry Potter and the technology of magic. In Whited, L. (Ed.), The

ivory tower and Harry Potter: Perspectives on a literary phenomenon. Columbia,

MO: University of Missouri Press.

Tetenbaum, T. & Pearson, J. (1989). The voices in children’s literature: The impact of

gender on the moral decisions of storybook characters. Sex Roles, 20, 381-395.

Thompson, S. (1946). The folktale. New York, NY: The Dryden Press.

Thompson, S. (1966). Motif index of folk-literature (Rev. ed.). Bloomington, IN: Indiana

University Press.

Thompson, S. (1968). One hundred favorite folktales. Bloomington, IN: Indiana

University Press.

Tolkein, J. (1965). Tree and leaf. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

130

Turin, A., Cantarelli, F., & Bosnia, W. (1977). The five wives of Silverbeard. London:

Writers & Readers Publishing Cooperative.

Turner-Vorbeck, T. (2003). Pottermania: Good, clean fun or cultural hegemony?. In

Heilman, E. (Ed.), Harry Potter’s world: Multidisciplinary critical perspectives.

New York, NY and London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.

Watt-Evans, L. (2005). Why Dumbledore had to die. In Lackey, M. (Ed.), Mapping the

world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Wells, M. (2005). Neville Longbottom: The hero with a thousand faces. In Lackey, M.

(Ed.), Mapping the world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Westman, K. (2002). Specters of thatcherism: Contemporary British culture in J.K.

Rowling’s Harry Potter. In Whited, L. (Ed.), The ivory tower and Harry Potter:

Perspectives on a literary phenomenon. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri

Press.

Whitton, N. (2003). Me! books! and cleverness! : Stereotypical portrayals in the Harry

Potter series. Retrieved August 3, 2006 from

http://www.womenwriters.net/summer04/reviews/Harry

Potter.htm.

Williams, J. (1979). The practical princess and other liberating fairy tales. New York,

NY: Parents Magazine Press.

Wood, J.T. (1997). Gendered lives: Communication, gender, and culture. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Zaeske, S. (1995). The ‘promiscuous audience’ controversy and the emergence of the

early woman’s rights movement. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 81, 191-207.

131

Zettel, S. (2005). Hermione Granger and the charge of sexism. In Lackey, M. (Ed.),

Mapping the world of Harry Potter. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

Zipes, J. (1987). Don’t bet on the prince: Contemporary feminist fairy tales in North

America and England. New York, NY: Routledge.

Zipes, J. (1994). Fairy tale as myth. Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky.

Zipes, J. (2001). Sticks and stones: The troublesome success of children’s literature from

slovenly Peter to Harry Potter. New York, NY and London, UK : Routledge.

Zipes, J. (2002). Breaking the magic spell: Radical theories of folk & fairy tales

(Rev.ed.). Lexington, KY: The University of Kentucky Press.

132

Appendix A

Harry Potter and a Fifth-Grade Classroom: A Contemporary Folktale

Written by: Rebecca Skulnick and Jesse Goodman

From Harry Potter World: Multidisciplinary Critical Perspectives

133

Once upon a time, in a small town located between Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids

in western Michigan, a young teacher wanted to read Harry Potter aloud to her fifth

grade classroom. She knew that reading this contested novel might present a controversy

and so she asked all the parents at the annual Open House if they would object to their

children reading the series in class. No parents objected, the teacher read, and the

children were enamored with our civic leader, Harry Potter. The teacher was thrilled, the

children wanted to read along with the teacher, everyone looked forward to silent reading

time, and the parents seemed happy.

However, after two weeks, one mother, whom the teacher calls, “the smother

mother,” decided that her religious beliefs oppose the messages conveyed in Harry

Potter, even though she had not yet read the books. This mother was very powerful in the

community. She was the wife of a government official and a member of one of the only

upper-middle-class families in the district. The teacher spoke to the mother at length and

gave the parent an article that explains how Harry Potter upholds traditional Judeo-

Christian values. Even so, the parent preferred to read the book to her child at home so

that she could augment the reading with lessons on religious morality.

Not wanting to cause too much of a stir, the teacher asked the parent if it would be

okay for the child to go to the library during reading time since she already was almost

half-way through Sorcerer’s Stone. The parent was happy, the teacher was happy, and the

students were happy. After speaking with the smother mother’s child about the situation

while leading her to the library, the teacher felt certain that this situation was best for

everyone and that this child was happy to have reading time separate from the class. She

134

was always eager to go to the library and offered reading suggestions to the teacher upon

her return to the classroom.

Two weeks later, the parent decided that taking the child out of the class was

humiliating. Rather than speak to the teacher about this humiliation, the parent went to

the first-year principal and asked him to take the book out of all classrooms. That week,

the principal held a meeting with all of the teachers and told them that they must ask him

for permission to read any books aloud in their classrooms. The teachers were aware that

this declaration was related to the Sorcerer’s Stone scenario. In addition, none of the

fifth-grade teachers, all of whom were reading the Harry Potter series to their classes,

had tenure and none wanted the new principal to think they were unresponsive to his

situation.

When the teacher returned to her classroom, she told her students that the

principal didn’t want them to read Harry Potter. The class had a one-hour discussion

about how they felt; most children told this teacher that they felt mad or sad and didn’t

understand why they couldn’t read this story. The teacher told her students that she too

felt sad and mad and she told the children that they could bring in their own copies of

Harry Potter and read them during silent sustained reading. And so they did. Harry

Potter became the most popular book of the class. Children read during lunch, they read

during the playtime, and they happily read during silent sustained reading. All children,

that is, except Henry.

Like the other children in the class, Henry turned the pages of Sorcerer’s Stone

with ferocity. But not because he was reading. He couldn’t read. Henry had severe

135

learning difficulties, he was emotionally impaired, and he could not read the Harry Potter

series. Instead, he pretended to read until it all became too much for him to handle. After

two weeks of silent sustained reading, Henry took his book to the bathroom, tore apart all

of the pages, and cried until the teacher found him and held him and told him that

everything would be okay- that she could get him Sorcerer’s Stone on tape, and he could

listen to the stories while he read.

136

Appendix B

Glossary of Characters and Terms from

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

137

Animagus (Animagi) - Wizards who can transform at will into animals. Sirius Black

escaped from Azkaban by transforming into a black dog (book 3, p. 356). Professor

McGonagall is also an Animagus.

Aurors - Dark wizard catchers.

Azkaban – A Wizard prison. Wizards who violate the laws of the wizarding world are

sent there.

Basilisk - A fearsome and deadly monster also known as King of the Serpents. Possesses

a murderous stare which kills from a beam of light from its eyes; speaks Parselmouth;

lives in the Chamber of Secrets and uses the plumbing to get around (book 2, p. 290).

Black, Sirius - A feared and believed-to-be-malevolent character who Harry thinks is

responsible for the death of his parents, but who is later revealed to be Harry's godfather

and protector; served 12 years in Azkaban (book 5, p. 9).

Boggart - A shape-shifter; is able to take the shape of whatever we most fear. It is

repelled by laughter (book 3, p. 133, book 5, p. 176).

Bowtruckles - Small twig-like creatures who guard trees of high quality used to make

wands; eat wood lice or fairy eggs; if angered by humans they will gouge out their eyes.

Centaur - A Centaur is a half man half horse creature that lives in the Forbidden Forest.

They read the stars and predict the future and are very serious in nature.

Chang, Cho - She is a Seeker on the Ravenclaw Quidditch team, on whom Harry gets a

crush in book 4.

Chaser - A chaser is a position on the Quidditch team. Chasers try to score points with

the quaffle.

138

Dawlish - An Auror; tries to overpower Dumbledore (vol. 5, p. 620).

Death-Eaters - followers of Voldemort who cause death and mayhem. They call

Voldemort the Dark Lord and do much of his dirty work.

Delacour, Fleur - A competitor in the Triwizard Tournament from Beauxbaton School;

part veela (vol. 4, p. 349 & p. 399). Became engaged to Bill Weasley with plans to marry

the summer before Harry's seventh term.

Dementors - Dementors are hooded dark arts creatures who used to follow Voldemort.

They currently are the guards for Azkaban. They have the ability to suck all good

thoughts out of those around them. Their kiss is a fate worse than death as it will steal

your soul.

Dumbledore, Albus Percival Wilfric Brian - Headmaster at Hogwarts; widely regarded

as the finest wizard of his generation and the only wizard feared by Lord Voldemort. Blue

eyes; tall, thin body; several feet of long silver hair; crooked nose; he wears half-moon

spectacles and a long purple cloak. Also known as Supreme Mugwump of the

International Confederation of Wizards & Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot (book 5, p.

139, 308).

Dumbledore’s Army - Dumbledore's Army is a secret club to practice defense against

the dark arts. It is started by Hermione and Harry. When they are caught, Dumbledore

takes the fall and claims he started it.

Dursley, Mr. Vernon - Harry's uncle; married to Petunia; father of Dudley.

Dursley, Dudley - Harry's cousin; son of Vernon & Petunia. Also known as "Dud," "Big

D," and "Popkin." (book 5, p. 12).

139

Dursley, Petunia Evans - Harry's aunt; sister of his mother, Lily; wife of Vernon;

mother of Dudley.

Edgecombe, Marietta - Cho's friend who spills the beans about Dumbledore's Army;

daughter of Madame Edgecomb (book 5, p. 612).

Fudge, Cornelius - Minister of Magic. Wants to take Hagrid to Azkaban, after a fourth

muggle is attacked (vol. 2, p. 261). Later he casts aspersions on Hagrid's Giant ancestry.

Forbidden Forest - The Forbidden Forest surrounds Hogwarts Academy of Witchcraft

and Wizardry. It is the home of many mythical and dangerous creatures. Students are

warned not to go in, although some find that they may have to serve detention there.

Centaurs, thestrals, and unicorns live in the Forbidden Forest.

Granger, Hermione - Smart, know-it-all at Hogwarts; classmate and good friend of

Harry; bushy brown hair, large front teeth and a loud, rather bossy voice. Her parents are

muggle dentists.

Gryffindor House - One of the four houses at Hogwarts. It was founded by Godric

Gryffindor. The house symbol is a lion. The resident ghost is Sir Nicolas de Mimsy-

Popington, also known as Nearly Headless Nick. Professor McGonagall is head of

Gryffindor and Dumbledore was in Gryffindor in his youth. Harry, Hermione, and the

Weasleys are in Gryffindor House.

Hagrid, Rubeus - Half-giant, "twice as tall, five times as wide as a normal man; long,

bushy black hair; hands the size of garbage can lids; feet like baby dolphins." After being

falsely accused of opening the Chamber of Secrets, as a student, Hagrid was expelled

from the school. Dumbledore hires him as Keeper of the Keys and Grounds at Hogwarts

140

(book 2, p. 247). Rescued Harry from his home and delivered him to the Dursleys, after

Harry's parents were killed (book 3, p. 206) (book 4, p. 429).

Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry - Hogwarts Academy of Witchcraft and

Wizardry is where witches and wizards go when the reach the age of 11 years old to learn

how to become witches and wizards. It was created by four founders and each founder

had a house: Gryffindor, Slytherin, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw.

Johnson, Angelina - Gryffindor chaser; becomes Gryffindor's Quidditch Captain (book

5, p. 224).

Keeper - Quidditch player who guards the goalposts.

Knarl- A magical creature observed and cared for in Hagrid’s Care of Magical Creatures

course.

Lestrange, Bellatrix – She is a Death-Eater who was sent to Azkaban for using an

Unforgivable Curse (the Cruciatus Curse) on Neville Longbottom's parents causing them

to go insane. She is also a cousin of Sirius Black (book 5, p. 505, 544, 545).

Longbottom, Neville - Classmate of Harry. Short, fat and slightly daft. He is of pure

wizard blood, but not a good student. He is almost a Squib. His parents were Aurors

during Voldemort's reign of terror until they were caught by Death Eaters and went

insane. He lives with his grandmother. Works harder than ever to overcome his

shortcomings and makes a lot of progress (book 5, p. 553).

Lovegood, Luna (Loony) - Student at Hogwarts, classmate of Ginny Weasley, in

Ravenclaw House; Harry's friend; her father runs The Quibbler (a magazine) (book 5 p.

179, 186 & 262).

141

Lupin, Professor Remus J. - A young, shabby looking wizard who befriends Harry and

tries to teach him how to repel the dementors. He taught the Dark Arts (book 3, p. 74).

He is also a werewolf (book 3, p. 350) (book 5, p. 46). He is one of the wizards who

escorted Harry to Order of the Phoenix headquarters (book 5, p. 49).

Magical Creatures - Chimera, nifflers, unicorns, porlocks, kneazles, crups, knarls,

hippogriffs, thestrals. (book 5, p. 17, 323).

McGonagall, Minerva - Head of Gryffindor House and a professor of Transfiguration at

Hogwarts. Her hair is worn in a tight bun, and she wears square glasses and an emerald

green cloak.

Metamorphmagus – A person who has the ability to change their appearance at will.

True metamorphmagi are really rare. They are born, not made (book 5, p. 52).

Ministry of Magic - Government agency that tries to keep witches and wizards secret

from non-magical people. The entranceway is an old red telephone box (booth) that is

heavily covered in graffiti and has a broken window (book 5, p. 125).

Moody, Alastor (Mad-Eye) - An Auror, a Dark Wizard catcher, with many enemies. He

was brought out of retirement by Dumbledore to teach Defense of the Dark Arts at

Hogwarts (book 4, p. 162 & 280). He has scarred skin, half of a nose, one small, dark

beady eye. The other eye moves up and down and from side to side, ceaselessly without

blinking, and sometimes rolls over completely, so only the white can be seen; (makes him

capable of seeing what is behind him). The moving eye is electric blue and as large as a

coin. He has one wooden leg that is carved and ends in a clawed foot; he limps and uses a

142

long staff. He has long, grizzled, dark grey hair (book 4, pp. 184-185). He was one of the

wizards who escorted Harry to Order of the Phoenix Headquarters (book 5, p. 49).

Muggles - People without a drop of magical blood in their veins.

Nearly Headless Nick (Sir Nicolas de Mimsy-Popington) – He is a ghost that haunts

the students at Hogwarts. He was hit 45 times in the neck with a blunt axe, but his head is

still attached to his neck by a 1/2 inch of skin and sinew. (book 2, p. 123).

Order of the Phoenix Headquarters - Located at Number 12 Grimmauld Place. This

address houses a secret society, founded by Dumbledore, consisting of those who fought

against Voldemort. (book 5, p. 67).

Parcelmouth - A parcelmouth is a person who can communicate with snakes by

speaking Parceltongue. This is a Slytherin ability both Voldemort and Harry Potter have.

Parceltongue - Parceltongue is snake language. People who have the ability to speak it

are Parcelmouths. Voldemort and Harry Potter both have this ability.

Porlock - A magical creature observed and cared for in Hagrid’s Care of Magical

Creatures course.

Quaffle - A quidditch ball that the Chaser tries to get through the hoops in order to score

one point. There are three to a team in play at all times.

Quidditch - Quidditch is a wizardry game played all over the wizard world. Two teams

of seven players each - two beaters, three chasers, a keeper and a seeker - try to play with

3 different balls - two bludgers, three quaffles and a golden snitch. There is a Quidditch

World Cup for professional players.

143

Riddle, Tom Marvolo - A half-blood, owner of the mysterious diary that Harry found.

He fed on Ginny Weasley's soul to become stronger; learned her deepest fears and

secrets; got Ginny to unwittingly open the Chamber of Secrets. He was the young Lord

Voldemort, Salazar Slytherin's heir (book 2, p. 314).

Seeker - Quidditch player who tries to catch the Golden Snitch.

Shacklebolt, Kingsley - Tall, bald, black wizard; deep slow voice; wears a single gold

hoop earring; an Auror (book 5, p. 47). One of the wizards who escorted Harry to Order

of the Phoenix Headquarters (book 5, p. 49). He works for Dumbledore (book 5, pp. 617,

620). As Secretary to the Prime Minister for Muggles, he is also an undercover wizard

reporting to the Ministry of Magic (book 6, p. 17).

Snitch (Golden Snitch) - The Golden Snitch is a small ball used in playing Quidditch. It

zips around while the seeker tries to catch it. It is worth 150 points and the game can only

end when one team's seeker catches it.

Squib - A squib is a person who is born to magic parents but has no magic ability of their

own. Argus Filch and Mrs. Figg are two of the better-known squibs in the Harry Potter

series.

St. Mungo's Hospital - For magical maladies and injuries. It is located behind Purge &

Dowse, Ltd. (book 5, p. 466).

Tonks, Nymphadora - An Auror who is a metamorphmagus. She prefers to be called

"Tonks." She escorted Harry to Order of the Phoenix Headquarters (book 5, p. 49).

Sirius Black's cousin.

144

Transfiguration – A class that teaches students how to transform objects into different

objects. This can also apply to people. This class is taught by Professor McGongall.

Umbridge, Professor Dolores Jane - Palid toad-like face; pouchy eyes; looks like

someone's maiden aunt; short curly mouse-brown hair; is partial to pink Alice bands and

fluffy cardigans; works as Senior Undersecretary to Minister Cornelius Fudge; appointed

new Defense of the Dark Arts teacher (book 5, p. 203, 211, 434, 624).

Unforgivable Curses - There are three Unforgivable Curses that witches and wizards

must not use. They are the Cruciatus Curse, the Imperius Curse and the Killing Curse.

These curses are punishable with lifetime sentences in Azkaban.

Veela - The most beautiful women in the Harry Potter novels. They are not human; they

have moon-bright skin and white-gold hair that fans out behind them, even when its not

windy. They have the power to hypnotize anyone who looks at them (book 4, p. 103).

Voldemort, Lord - Evil wizard, greatly feared by wizarding folk. His dark reputation is

such that his name is hardly ever spoken aloud. He disappeared after the deaths of Harry's

parents, Lily and James Potter.

Weasley, Arthur - Thin, balding, red hair; Ron Weasley's father. Head of the Misuse of

Muggle Artifacts Office at the Ministry of Magic.

Weasley, Fred and George - Ron's older brothers (twins).

Weasley, Ginny - Ron's younger sister; a friend of Harry's.

Weasley, Molly - Mother of the Weasley family.

Weasley, Ron - Harry's classmate and best friend.

145

Wizengamot – It is the wizard high court of law, presumably the wizarding version of

the Supreme Court. It is headquartered at the Ministry of Magic and at least some of its

trials take place in the dungeons in the lower levels.