Harry Potter and the Promiscuous Reader

At first the Promiscuous Reader found the Harry Potter phenomenon pretty refreshing. It was good to know that millions of kids were discovering the pleasures of that solitary vice that had given him so much pleasure for over four decades -- namely, reading. \nTeachers, librarians, parents and pundits were milling around nervously, trying to find ways to harness Harrymania for their own ends, but the great thing about reading is that it isn't a social activity -- readers can't be herded. It's low-tech, requiring no expensive equipment, no organization and no supervision. \nYes, it would be nice if kids who read Harry Potter realized other books were interesting, too. Certainly the Promiscuous Reader's own roving eye had never been satisfied to settle down with only one author, let alone one book. It seemed some kids were doing just that, having read all four of the series and facing a long wait before volume five appears. \nOn the other hand, there was a newsgroup, alt.fan.harry-potter, whose regulars seemed determined to spend the next year speculating feverishly about 1) the title of volume five, 2) the contents of volume five and 3) whether author J. K. Rowling would continue the series past volume seven, its intended end. Never before had the Promiscuous Reader felt the urge to yell, "Get a life!"\nAnother hot topic on alt.fan.harry-potter was the upcoming Harry Potter movie, which the Promiscuous Reader hoped would fail dismally, along with its Harry Potter collectibles, Burger King tie-ins and other merchandising sludge. \nAlthough it would be fun to see some aspects of the book realized on film, such as Quidditch, the hypercharged version of lacrosse played by Wizards on broomsticks, filming Harry Potter seemed beside the point at best, and more attempt by corporations to exploit and control a popular phenomenon at worst.\nNone of this had much effect on the readers. More disturbing, many people were missing Rowling's satire and social criticism. \nWhen the Monroe County Public Library had its first Harry Potter party, the sign which announced it had a small banner reading, "No Muggles Allowed!" Muggles, for the Potter-challenged, are non-Wizards, ordinary people. \nOn the most literal level, if no Muggles had been allowed to attend that library gathering, no one could have been there at all. (The Promiscuous Reader had wanted to show up wearing a "Muggle Pride" T-shirt.) The library party came only two months after the racist shootings of July 1999, when Bloomington had been asking itself how such things could happen here. The "No Muggles Allowed" sign was a partial answer.\nWithin the world of the Harry Potter books, malignant anti-Muggle racism is the domain of the villains, not of Harry and other sympathetic characters. Rowling has a lot of fun with the theme, depicting some Wizards as well-meaning liberals who are fascinated by Muggle culture and folkways but just don't get it. \nThe books have as much broad comedy about Wizards, who can't figure out how to use a telephone or postage stamps, as stories about Harry's obnoxious Muggle relatives. On the other hand, the wizards who hate Muggles (or "mudbloods" as they call us) are depicted unambiguously, without any sympathy, as bad guys.\nMany people will no doubt object that the Harry Potter books are just kids' entertainment, and one shouldn't read deep meaning, let alone political meaning, into them -- not likely -- the latest book adds a subplot about slavery, in the house of elves.\nHarry's friend Hermione campaigns for their emancipation, while other young wizards see house-elf servitude as part of the natural order. Rowling almost certainly has more politics up her sleeve. \nWill the adults who want to guide kids into the (supposedly) broader rewards of reading address this theme? They'll be accused of political correctness, but it could be worse: They could be called Muggles.