This year's Depaul Pop Culture Conference spotlighted Harry Potter. It was another fascinating conference filled with great conversations and analyse.
My own complex relationship with Harry Potter:
After attending this conference I have been thinking about my own relationship with the texts. Growing up I never read HP, for a variety of reasons including the fact that the concept of "Boy finds out they are magical, and goes to magic school" was not original (and so I did not really understand the fuss). In addition, HP became so popular with my peers that became uncool in my mind. I liked the idea of Harry Potter because it got so many kids reading and I was all for that but I was not particularly interested in reading them myself.
My earliest introduction to HP was probably through fanfiction. Then in my late twenties I had a free month and read all 7 books before the first movie of the last book came out so I would know what was happening since my roommates were going to a midnight screening.
This was probably not the best way to enjoy the series and I struggled to connect with Harry or the rest of the Trio. There is quite a bit of teenage angst in the series which when binged really gets to be very tiresome. For me, I connected with Snape as a character the best and felt that I was Luna off in her own amazing world and not caring too much what others thought.
This personal background with the texts was highlighted for me because for many of the attendees the trio had become their friends, the characters they grew up with (and for many literally grew up with reading a book a year as they were published).
My conference experience in review:
I started the day with the 2nd half of the Panel
The Harry Potter Alliance, Fan Activism, and Stories of Social Change.
There was a great conversation about the use of Metaphors in Activism. The group discussed how Simplified metaphors used as shortcuts don't open doors/invite others to join the conversation. It was then proposed that maybe Negative metaphors (Ex comparisons to Vortamont, Umbridge etc) close the doors of conversation whereas positive metaphors (Ex comparisons to the strengths of the different houses, patronises etc) can open doors of communication and connection.
Next was A day at Hogwarts: "Magical Menagerie" and "L.O.W's (Levels of Ordinary Wizarding" with Jennifer Jones where were a couple of fun activities, a quiz, a scavenger hunt, and making creatures.
Next was a fascinating Academic Keynote:
"Defending Tom Riddle: The Failure of Albus Dumbledore" by Dr. Christopher Bell.
Dr Bell started with the idea:
It is less why Tom Riddle became a mass murder (aka Vortamont) as for why it took so long.
He explained how in western culture the "Moral Institution" which keeps our "Primal Self" in check is "Achievement" and when opportunity is unevenly distributed this leads to "STRAIN" which leads to one of two main responses a) Harm yourself, b) Harm everyone else. (Many of these terms are based on another classical thinker who I did not write down the name of my apologies)
He also stated that Wizarding Society is militarised distopia (filled with inequality, exclusion, exploitation, and repression where everyone has weapons (wands)). I found this a very interesting view of the Wizarding Society and for me provides context to why the action of HP occurs.
Dr Bell went on to say that Tom Riddle showed signs of having Reactive Attachment Disorder which leads to Moral Disengagement (From either an individual's conduct, the effects of the conduct, or the victims of the conduct). And how our "Monkey Sphere" (the number of individuals we can keep in our minds and care about before they become things) for most people is somewhere around 37 for Vortamont this was 3 (Himself, Bellatrix, and Nagini)
He also stated Dumbedore misses the "point of intervention" or the moment things could be different when Tom Riddle first comes to Hogwarts and therefore through unintentional neglect is responsible to what Tom Riddle became. And seems to recognise this by doing the absolute opposite with Harry Potter who had a similar horrible childhood as Tom Riddle.
Dr Bell also presented the interesting idea that students are only put in Gryffindor if they are asked. Asking is their first act of courage. He suggested that the trio all belonged in different houses if not for the fact they wanted to be Gryffindor. Hermine = Ravenclaw, Harry = Slytherin, Ron = Hufflepuff
Next was a panel on Queer Readings of Harry Potter where the lack of LGBTI representation in Harry Potter was focused on. As was stated Fandom is not a Substitute for Canon and while within fanfiction there is queer representation it is a serious problem that it is not included in the text. Out of 772 named characters, only one is gay (Dumbledore) and that was something retcon in after all the books were written.
The fact this was retconed in upset many because there was a feeling if this was how JK Rolins saw the character there should have been some passing reference included in the text. Also, it was seen as a missed opportunity because of how many characters are referenced in relationship to kissing someone in the text and how simple it would have been to have a few of those background characters be LGBT. There were also strong feelings around the fact that in the end of the story absolutely everyone is paired up with someone and off having kids. There was a feeling that while many did not trust JKR to have written LGBT characters well they still would have preferred if she had tried.
Next was the Keynote: Alanna Bennett which for me personally felt different from Keynotes in the past mainly due to this year being based on a book series and therefore not providing the opportunity for a discussion of behind the scenes or how the writing process of the text goes.
Alanna Bennett did discuss a bit about the phenomena of fandom coming up with a concept and it becoming fandom cannon. And how moving forward she hopes there can be a better understanding between Cannon and Fans. And that Cannon can learn from the Fans and the Fans responses.
(Again for me this highlighted the different responses to different forms of media, as a book series which is complete, JKR has much less opportunity to incorporate fandom. A TV show can add a throwaway line which confirms a theory or incorporate fans and fandom in some way whereas JKR can only tweet hay I like that idea. There is some wiggle room in the various spin-offs/prequels she is creating but it still more static)
Next was
Harry Potter and the Infinite Syllabus: How Harry Potter has shaped education which showcased how different educators used the Harry Potter text working with elementary school aged children to multiple frameworks used with University Students (Such as a Hero's Journey, as literature, as sociology). There were some fun examples of student created projects.
Finally was The Religous Potter: Religious, Ethics, and Meaning in Harry Potter which was interesting but was more high-level Religion and philosophy. There was a discussion of how different faith traditions responded differently to HP depending on whether they used a Descriptive or prescriptive lens.
I also picked up a copy of Time Lords & Tribbles, Winchesters & Muggles edited by Paul Booth which covers the past 5 years of The DePaul Pop Culture Conference. I can't beilve it has been 5 years nor that I have attended since the beginning. I already learned from the intro that the original Doctor Who conference was going to be a one-off event, I am glad it has changed and continues to this day.
I am really excited to read more and that will be a later post :)
He also talked about how we are living in the world we always dreamed of where obscure characters are now in movies as big as or bigger than star wars (like Black Panther, Guardians of the Galaxy etc). He mentioned that all his work is based on something real (his life or the life of others).
