From: Maia <maia>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 16:48:19 -0500

John,

Again, I think that the rules are different in High Fantasy than in low. For example, compare Harry to Ged (Le Guin), Will (Cooper), Jill (Lewis), Morgon
(McKillip)... those characters are not, in truth, 'just ordinary' about anything, and their stories are the cosmic sides of the human soul. I personally happen to think that we have both in us - the cosmic and the ordinary, the visionary and the mundane. But stories of High Fantasy don't generally leave a great deal of space for the mundane, although the inherent struggle is often defense of it. (Pamela Dean is an exception to this rule - I'd say that her work crosses the two divisions pretty effectively. Madeleine L'Engle might be considered another crossover. But that's another topic entirely!)

Yes, Harry is an okay, normal kid; truth to tell, I'd probably never notice him in a group. Ron I might pick up on, Hermione I would probably adore, Malfoy would send me home wondering just how early childhood can be derailed. Harry would just be Harry. And that's fine within the framework of low fantasy -- but I must admit, I'm a little curious as to how Rowling will manage to deal with the issues of Good and Evil.

In fact, another thing that may contribute to HP's popularity is that it's more about Us and Them than about Good and Evil. Harry hates Voldermort because he killed his parents rather than for extra-personal ideas about right and wrong, and the various houses are set up in competition and conflict in manners that are probably not completely dissimilar to the structuring of gangs. Harry's fight against Voldermort is a personal, not a cosmic one, and I imagine that this is something with which most children and adults can easily identify.

Maia

JMason at Scholastic.com wrote:
Received on Tue 09 Nov 1999 03:48:19 PM CST