You can't always get what you want, but sometimes ... you get what you need: Mirror bookends in Harry Potter

This is just a short one. I was just digging around in my travel bag in terrible need of some dental floss and noticing how much my travel bag (full of bandaids, old shaving, razors, a salve or two) amazingly resembles the state of Harry's trunk at the beginning of Deathly Hallows. I haven't yet found the floss and so am running to the corner drugstore, but I did notice I have a shaving mirror in there, and that reminded me of the two way mirror in DH ... and that started a thought rolling. In book 1 we have the mirror of Erised, which is of course "desire" spelled backwards, and shows the viewer the deepest, most secret and most desparate desires of their heart. In Book 7 we have the broken fragment of the mirror Sirius gave Harry. I would say that this latter could be seen as paired off against the Mirror of Erised as, rather, that which gives you what you need ... in particular in book 7 it is the path by which Harry reaches Aberforth and Aberforth sends rescue. I would even say that the broken mirror is sort of bookended itself in book 7. When Harry first sees the flash of blue in the beginning he thinks about what he desires ... to see and talk to Dumbledore again. and in the end of the book, with the second flash, when he is making no assumptions based in his longings, but simply crying out into the unknown (perhaps a symbol of the transcendant), then something happens. Of course there is also a possible death theme here - Harry is pining for DD, who has died and cannot be brought back, just as he pined for his family in the Erised mirror in book 1 ... and when the second mirror sends Dobby and Dobby saves them, he also dies. I would note two other things about the pairing (and here I am just tossing out associations that I don't necessarily have tied out ... but do seem rather promising to me). 1. The useful mirror is the one that is broken; the one which could trap you into wasting your life pining is the one that is "whole" 2. Communication: The mirror in book 7 is designed for communication whereas the mirror of Erised is not (in fact it implicitly, as told in the story, has anti-communicative qualities - namely that neither Ron nor Harry can see what each other see in the mirror). Here also there is a possible death theme in that in Book 5 Harry looks at the mirror, knowing he will not Sirius in it but still sort of hoping, the same as he does with the blue eye of (a) Dumbledore in book 7. In the end however, it is the blue eye that saves ... maybe there is a theme here of not trying to pin the dead down so that, who knows, they may be something involved when you cry out into unknown/transcendant for help (the shades from Voldy's wand in book 4 would seem to support this type of thinking - and if JKR has in fact done time in the chair and/or on the couch, as it seems from the language and imagery in many of the books, and supported by some information from public record on her life ... getting closure from the dearly departed is a very important theme there ... it is what frees one to really remember departed loved ones, as opposed to just being haunted by them [or rather our conceptions of them, how we perhaps tried to pin "them" down while they lived], and that is important for being able to grieve properly) ... but I think this would all be pretty latent stuf, a lot more of a psycho-analytic subconsicous reading of it. PS The mirror of Erised shares some qualities with the compass of Jack Sparrow as it gets developed in the second PotC movie - it shows you what you desire most in this world (in the first movie it is implied only that it shows the bearings to Ille de Meurta, but the screen writers said they felt they, fortunately, left enough ambiguity in the phrasing to make the transition possible). The settings are different, however. In Dead Man's Chest the problem is a person not knowing what they want ... which is a more "psycho-analytic" problem of things like the ego (in the Freudian system of Id, Ego, Super-ego) sublimated to an unhealthy level (among other things) etc

Hargid as the Rubedo

Here is yet another new random Merlin Post, this time brought to you by the society of "Merlin needs something constructive to do while his scanner takes interminably long to scan selected pages from a Jon Levenson book to put up in PDF format on electronic reserves for the course he is teaching this fall" This post sprung into my mind from something I was saying in the last one, on Gryffindor and Slytherin, and has to do with another John - not Levenson, but Granger - and alchemy in the Harry Potter series. Here particularly I am talking about Granger's notes on the last 3 books as conforming to the 3-stage description of the alchemy process: Black, White, Red. In Book 5 Black dies and in Book 6 Albus (white) dies. He wrote this before book 7 hit the stands and I was terribly afraid Hagrid was going to bite it in the final installment. Fortunately the big guy did not exit stage left in book 7, because I really like him. But then the question comes up: When the first 2 of the 3-stage series had characters with specific names tied to the respective stage and had something decisive happen to them (dying - to be more precise), and there is a character with a taylor-made name for the 3rd alchemy stage (Rubeus Hagrid = Rubedo/Red stage) ... but he does not have as decisive of an event - to the extent that you could say he does not even have an "event" in the same way as the other two - what does that mean for the use of that structure for the last 3 books? Well, I don't think the imbalance among the stages can be totally resolved (although, admittedly, I have not read what John Granger has on the 7th book as the Rubedo stage, and he is usually pretty insightful, so maybe he has), but I think things like that just sort of happen when a series is being composed over that long a span of time. BUT, in writing that last post some things sort of stuck out to me about Hagrid that may make him very siginificant as a characterization and as a symbol in the 7th book and the series. As I sort of connected (more free association than really planned), Hagrid is the one who brings Harry to Hogwarts for the first time in book 1, leading the boats, and Hagrid is the one who brings his body (as he believes it to be only his body) back to the castle in book 7. But the actual physical entrance to the castle is not the only "first time" Hargid represents for Harry. In a sense Hagrid is Harry's whole entrance into the magical world. It all begins with Hagrid knocking the door in at the hut on the rock in the sea (and notice, this is specifically mentioned in book 7 when Harry is talking to the Dursleys to convince them to take the Order's protection: he says something about "and if you remember what happened the last time you tried to outrun wizards, I think you'll agree you need help" - and then JKR specifically notes a silence in which you could almost hear faint echoes of Hagrid pounding on the door). Hagrid is also with Harry the first time he visits Diagon Alley. In fact, Hagrid is the one who gives Hedwig to Harry ... and Hagrid who is there when Hedwig dies in book 7. I believe it is John Granger who noted (in his first book) that St Hedwig is the patron of orphans. There is a sort of "openings and closings" thing with Hagrid in these scenes - an opening and closing of his life at Hogwarts; the orphan years gaurded over by Hedwig; the era of being one of "the abandonded boys" for whom Hogwarts WAS home (cf Deathly Hallows, Harry's thoughts as he leaves the castle for the woods the final time - that he wished he could go home, but this was the first and best home he ever had, him and Voldemort and Snape, the abandoned boys). After this Harry will build a new home with Ginny. But here Hagrid is with Harry at the ending of this stage, carrying his body to the castle, pairing with his stament in the Leaky Cauldron in Book 1: "Everyone starts at the beginning at Hogwarts."

Griffyndor vs Slytherin: Bookends in books 1 and 7

The following is brought to you (whoever is around who still stops by the Muggle Matters ghost-town blog) by the "Merlin needs (or at least wants) to take a break from studying for comps and prepping his syllabus for the fall" foundation. In prepping my syllabus for teaching an intro to Old Testament class this fall, I have decided to use the Harry Potter series in the introduction of the course to help explain some approaches in studying texts by applying them to a text college sophmores will have read (the course is one of several possible for fulfilling a core requirement text course - so I have to cover some of the "basics" of how texts in general are approached). Anyway, this has given rise to many "sideline" considerations of the material as a whole. This one is about the whole Gryffindor vs Slytherin tension, and in particular how it functions in books 1 an 7 as sort of "bookends" Pauli made a really brilliant observation once, to which I have been repeatedly indebted in how I think of some of the structural themes/aspects of the books (this one, dealing with the houses, which, as JKR said in interview is a straight lift from the medieval 4 elements cosmology, as John Granger reports in his books, is by nature a structuring mechanism). His observation was that Gryffindor house contains in it, precisely in Harry's year, all 4 houses, and so is a sort of melting pot. Harry (as John Granger and others, among them the sorting hat, have noted) has slytherin qualities. Ron is your straight-ahead hot-headed and fiery red Gryffindor. Hermione is the cool reason of Ravenclaw and Neville, with his knack for (and eventual teaching of) herbology, is a Hufflepuff nature. The fact that these will be "melting potted" together is evident from book 1, where, in the boats crossing the lake (contra the movie representation), these 4, and just these 4, wind up in the same boat together. That's the book 1 opening bookend. In book 7, after Voldy has Hargid (who also led, sort of carried, the troops across the lake in book 1) carry Harry in front of the Castle, Neville breaks through the silence spell and pushes through to shout something about Dumbledore's army forever. Voldy puts him on his knees and asks him if he wants to join the death eaters. Neville tells him where he can shove that idea and Voldy does the flaming sorting hat trick on Neville's head, which then gets transformed into the sword-in-hat trick (a thank you to John Granger here for noticing that great pun and for his pointing us to the Arthurian connections of it in book 2). The book 7 bookend here is the particular thing that Voldy says in this interchange: that there will be no m ore sortings; the house of his noble ancestor Salazar Slytherin, will suffice for all. So, in book 1 we have Gryffindor house "sufficing" for all in the manner of a sort of an umbrella house. In book 7 we have Voldy's alternative conception of what it means for one house to "suffice for all" - which is what we here in academic jargon land call hegemony (forced submission to a cultural etc identity). In other words, Voldy's is a plan of forced homogenization (everybody becoming exactly the same). The Gryffindor model, on the other hand, provides more room for people to maintain the traits that make them unique and interesting (Luna will always be SUCH a Ravenclaw), while still upholding certain universal ideals such as bravery and loyalty. PS: Granger had some nice stuff on Snape as the Slytherin/Gryffindor Androgyne (containing qualities of both, where we get "androgynous" from, which is the original use of the word, a character who has both male [andros] and female [gyne] characteristics) ... an interesting question would be whether or not Dumbledor would be right in sometimes "thinking we sort to soon" - Snape needs to remain a Slytherin for it to work. PPS: on a slightly related note to the last PS, I saw on Travis Prinzi's FaceBook feed that he has something at the Hog’sHead about Snape’s love for Lily: "Devoted, Sacrificial Love or Creepy infatuation)." I don't think they're the only two options. I'm sure different people, including Travis, will be weighing in at the HH with a more nuanced position, but I hope it goes beyond some mere 'middle-point' or 'mixture' theory because I don’t think those are even the only two possible poles in the matter. I think there is a lot more in there than meets the eye. I started thinking this when reading book 3 again recently – particularly in the part where Snape fills in for Lupin and Hermione is trying to answer the questions and Snape keeps docking house points on her for 'speaking out of turn.' And in the shrieking shack he is down-right abusive to Hermione, calling her a stupid girl (yelling it at her – all caps in American text). I think Hermione reminds him a bit of Lily (she certainly connects with Lily, via Slughorn and Harry, in book 6), and that this is like an open burning and festering wound to him. What she reminds him of is that he ruined a friendship. That friendship may have had possibilities of romance and marriage, and Snape may have even had specific conscious desires for that … but Lily was more than just a 'potential lover/spouse' to him … she represented friendship to him, a connection with somebody else, somebody to talk about hopes and dreams and fears and frustrations with (as little as young Snape wants to talk about it, I think it is important to him that Lily asks if his parents are still fighting). So I would add the possibility of not just deep, but, more-over, bitter remorse and regret (at points acerbically bitter, evidenced in his treatment of Hermione as the emblem of a still-open and festering wound). I never could buy the 'completely white hat' (or black hat even before book 7 came out) view of Snape … he's not an angel or a devil, he's a human – and there is a lot of ambiguity when it comes to humans. Anyway, that is enough of a break from studying and syllabus prep for now