Harry Potter vs. Books of Magic: why is this formula so popular in youth fantasy?

"Is this sort of fantasy meant for geeky teenage boys who often feel like outsiders, so having a protagonist who's also a geeky outsider, yet is revealed to possess powers beyond anyone else, works as wish-fulfillment?"

yes.

But as far as I know fantasy is very popular with girls too. So are there any books with a geeky, outsider teenage girl as the protagonist?

This beedin' obvious has been stated by an adFINNistrator

Also, you'd think Harry Potter's popularity proves the formula works with non-geeks too?

everyone thinks they're an outsider?

Tuomas I wrote something about this on FT last week (not the Books of Magic stuff - I never read those beyond the miniseries)

http://freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2007/07/harry-pooter/

Reading book 7 hasn't changed my opinion (except that Lord V did actually have a plan)

Also, the "learning about your responsibilites" part is kinda interesting. I can't think of any book or comic where magic would be just a fun thing the protagonist plays around with, because, you know, adult world isn't supposed to be about having fun.

a geeky, outsider teenage girl

HP, one of the main characters is Hermoine. See also His Dark Materials.

I don't know about the books, but in the movies Hermione doesn't appear to be a geeky outsider.

I guess The Invisibles wasn't such a good example, because Morrison twists the formula a bit by making his teenager outsider a cool, non-geeky anarchist. But even he has to face his responsibilites.

She's definitely a geek b/c she's super-studious. She's also muggle-born which causes her to be out of step with the rest of the wizarding culture. All three of them are outsiders.

Also, see His Dark Materials for one of the greatest female protagonists ever.

Read everything C.S. Lewis wrote about myth and the sense of wonder. As for the age of the protagonist, as different people have written(and I agree with), the prime age to first be captured by this stuff is 12.

Read everything C.S. Lewis wrote about myth and the sense of wonder.

Er, couldn't you elaborate a bit?

I think if you haven't read these books we are discussing you should bust out your library card before starting a thread.

Er, I think I've read enough fantasy books to recognize this formula. And I've seen the Harry Potter films. What I want to discuss is, what makes it so appealing to be repeated over and over?

For one, especially discussing HP, it's a classic archetype. Orphaned hero called upon to fight in the war of good vs. evil. It's a winning formula time and time again, not just in juvenile literature. See Star Wars.

Also magic and fantasy are just fun. Fiction is an escape from reality and what better way to escape than into worlds which are entirely different than our own.

My comment about reading was not meant to be so brusque. Truly, if you haven't read CS Lewis's and Phillip Pullman's books, and this is a question that truly interests you, get reading!

your points 1, 3, and 5 are pretty much a part of the standard mythic hero archetype

xpost

kids dig the fantasy/magic, teenagers dig the angst, adults dig the jailbait

plus adults are allowed to drink

j/k obv. The angst I think is a big part of HP's appeal for all ages; I think most people identify with Harry's self-deprecation and having to face that so fucking many people are depending on him and making huge sacrifices because of him. And the fact that he's always out of the loop, other people are making his decisions for him, etc. It's that frustration that keeps me reading, anyway.

Two books to check out: C.S. Lewis' An Experiment in Criticism

and David G. Hartwell's Age of Wonders, which is more about science fiction but goes into the history of why fantasy and sci-fi tend to be written, published, and read by the same people. I've been reading it lately and it draws much from the Lewis book.

Yeah, I know there's an overlap with the classical mythic hero, but I'm still interested in thinking why the formula is so popular, especially in youth fantasy (in adult-oriented fantasy there seems to be a bit more variation). Why is the hero an orphan? Why is he an outsider? Why must he be socialized by elders to use his power in a "proper" way? Why must he fight evil in the first place?

(xxx-post)

Why must he fight evil in the first place?

oh ffs

get yo popcrn rdy

As far as the orphan bit. . .I think this gives the character the freedom to go and do ridiculous things like fight wizards and darth lords. If a kid had a parent there's no way s/he would be able to get away with that. Also it provides the angst to allow them to go out and risk everything. They've been abandoned, what do they have to lose now? Maybe this will get them recognition and love?

I don't think "good vs. evil" is such a clear theme in most books meant for small kids, nor (obviously) books meant for adults. Is there some reason it's so prevalent in (pre)teen fiction? (I think the fact that Books of Magic isn't about good vs. evil is one of the indicators that it is, despite having a similar formula, meant for older readers than H. Potter.)

the orphan thing is specifically popular in children's literature because every kid wants to find out s/he's secretly a wizard or space alien and can do awesome cool shit with lasers

I speak from experience

Also, the orphan thing is a convenient way of not letting them know about their special gift (if it comes from their parents). If they'd been raised right from infant with the knowledge that they are destined to fight evil, that'd make it less dramatic. Also, the character would be less easy to identify with, because he already is (and knows he is) special when he's introduced to the reader.

(xx-post)

the orphan thing is specifically popular in children's literature because every kid wants to find out s/he's secretly a wizard or space alien and can do awesome cool shit with lasers

And also b/c the sometimes secretly wish they were parentless.

Tuomas, I just plain disagree with you. I think the fight against good and bad (even if it's not so overt as evil monster-type characters) is one of the most prevelant themes in fiction, period. Also there's a fine line but juvenile and adult fiction. In fact, I think it's mostly made up by the publishing industry.

x-post, it seems to me most often the "specialness" and "call" derive from whatever made them an orphan.

http://czerniec.com/2007/03/26/joseph-campbell.jpg

Stories about heroes fighting evil have been around for at least 6,000 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces

As for the trappings, remember the target audience. If you're a 12 year old who kinda socially inadequate and normal life among the mundanes/Muggles/straights ain't working out too well, you seek an escape. You're usually too young for booze and drugs, and haven't found out about punk rock quite yet. So you get to reading, and you find out about these heroes who are just a bit different from their quitidian surroundings. The process of identification hooks you into the story, and you go from there.

tuomas I would consider engaging in some correspondence with the people in charge of your education that you've never heard of Joseph Campbell. I mean I forgot what your focus was in your university curriculum or whatever but I mean right now you're the liberal arts dude getting schooled on this topic by a couple of engineers (three if I count with my M.S. but I did anthro for most of my undergrad)

I know good vs. evil is prevalent in all fiction, but it seems to most prevalent in fiction meant for certain ages. How many classic grown-up books do you know which would paint the world in such crude Manichean terms as most teen fantasy does? Maybe it's because teenage is the age when you really learn and have to think about morality. Small kids usually trust that the world around them unconditionally, therefore you have lots and lots kids' books with no real conflict at all. In teenage you realize there's a lot of shit in the world, and often tend to think about in black-and-white terms. Whereas as an adult you realize making moral decisions isn't really that easy at all, therefore the moralities in grown-up fiction tend to more ambiguous.

Yeah, seriously. We could strain at trying to encapsulate everything Joseph Campbell ever wrote about the hero into several hundred posts, or we could just suggest you go check out two books:

1) Hero of a Thousand Faces

2) the PBS interview series with Bill Moyers, called _The Power of Myth_. There's a companion book out for it, too, which is basically a transcription of the interviews and very accessible. Hell, they start the series by breaking Star Wars down into its mythic archetypes.

So Tuomas, get to readin'.

http://www.wexarts.org/db/fv/1698_Return-of-the-Fly_226.jpg

Whereas as an adult you realize making moral decisions isn't really that easy at all, therefore the moralities in grown-up fiction tend to more ambiguous.

moral ambiguity/ambivalence != no clear boundaries between "good" and "evil." (Also HP is full of moral ambivalence)

“Shades of grey wherever I go. The more I find out the less that I know. Black and white is how it should be. But shades of grey are the colors I see.” - Billy Joel

(x-post)

Actually I major in social sciences. But yeah, I know of Joseph Campbell's theory, it's just that what I've read about it hasn't explained why this sort of a mythical hero is so appealing. Also, it's interesting to think of (post)modern variations of the theme, which I think are best exemplified in fantasy fiction: which parts can be considered timeless, and which are more like reflections of the era we live in?

(xxx-post)

WE DIDN'T START THE FIRE
IT WAS ALWAYS BURNING

it seems like all you're saying is that children's literature is more hamfisted with its symbolism than adult literature, but really in a lot of ways the thing that makes it seem hamfisted is the fact that we grew up on this shit and so it seems passe in comparison to Shakespeare or Heart of Darkness or A Clockwork Orange or what have you (all of which concern good vs. evil and seem more and more hamfisted the more you analyze them, just like every other work of literature)

xposts

Also, youth vs grown-up has nothing to do with it. Clear-cut good vs evil usually involves the sophistication(an unfortunately loaded but accurate term, here) of the writing and audience, not age. There's shitloads of books out there with stark, neo-con-like divisions, and Harry Potter ain't one of them.

fuck it, i'm talking about Star Wars now.

Moral Ambiguity = Han Solo. He goes from a very self-centric, neutral type to a hero. He begins to care about something or somebody other than himself, and in the process transcends who he was into something greater. We meet Lando Calrissian who acts as a contrast, showing who Han would have been had he not made the leap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_mythology

asking for a big fat "why" the mythical hero and good-vs-evil is so appealing seems to me to be a bit like asking "why do so many people love pentatonic noodling but hate the diminished 5th"

"How dinosaurs became extinct is one of the greatest questions of all time.
Those who do not believe the Biblical account of Creation have to come up with other theories."

As for the difference in the increase of danger, that's part of just learning & growing up, now isn't it. You can't really handle much as a 6-year-old, but you can handle a bit more as you age.

No training with mentors for Jesus though, right?

John the Baptist, the Essenes etc to thread. (altho its true there is a large chunk of Jesus' bio that is missing, and it just happens to be the period when he would most likely have had mentors)

x-post

xpost

nabisco there is in fact a bit more ambiguousness than that, unfortunately most of it comes out in the last book

Tuomas, the reason people are kind of boggling here is that some of these things seem too transparent and obvious to even start explaining. I mean, geez:

- really little kids don't even have much of a moral sense yet -- they have a right/wrong sense based on what adults have taught them to do, and they have very little ability to imagine themselves into characters' moral situations beyond that

- along the way they learn the narrative conventions of "good guys" and "bad guys," without much caring or analyzing WHY one thing is good or bad (and usually the good/bad split is a pointless Macguffin where bad "wants to take over the world" or steal jewels and good wants to stop them)

- by the time they are a little older, they are ready to start imagining themselves into grand heroic adventures with slightly more moral shading, and to begin aspiring to the qualities of the heroes in them -- to want to be brave, loyal, intelligent, etc., or at least to ask themselves if they are those things, and if they could be

Western culture has, over many years, apparently decided this sort of system suits children better than the old system, where they were possibly told fairy tails, which are generally frightening and amoral, and unsettlingly inconsistent in which qualities they reward -- or rather, kids still get some of those, and I think they still stick in kids' heads as weird and complicated and lifelike on a whole different level.

hahahaha Also, I think Christian bipolar morality has probably made Western youth fiction more concerned with good vs. evil than it is in some other cultures. If you look at manga and anime, it's actually harder to find such clear-cut examples of good vs. evil there.

word

I love how all major villains in j-narrative redeem themselves in the end by explaining why they have been so angry at the world and how they let that anger blind them to the fact that their actions would not be approved by Kant. Right before they die from wounds inflicted in a battle which the hero(es) were FORCED to engage in for self-preservation.

Ever seen or read Akira? Or Ranma? Or Princess Mononoke? Or Battle Angel Alita? Or Patlabor? I'm not saying there aren't pure evil guys in Japanese teen fiction, they just seem less prevalent, and often even the bad guy's actions are given some sort of rational justification instead of him just being evil.

good vs. evil seems to more prevalent in teen and preteen fiction than in books for smaller kids, where danger and conflict in general is less pronounced (Winnie the Pooh or Moomins are good examples).

good v. evil was very pronounced in Care Bears!! The evil guys wanted to suck all the caring out of the world!!!

Japanese culture's senses of morality, good/evil, social order, and guilt-based versus shame-based behavior differ from those of the west in ways that go well beyond anime (which BTW is not necessarily comparable to Harry Potter in the age group it's directed at).

nabisco OTM as usual

yeah he's pretty 8080 when he's part four of four people saying the same goddamn thing (not a dig at nabisco just smc for being predictable)

American culture is fucked up partially because it abandoned the good vs. evil format for outlaw anti-hero "we make our own rules" cowboy bullshit (and then conflated it with the traditional Western/Christian good vs. evil dichotomy, thus vindicating asshole jingoistic bullshit like "America does what's good for America, and what's good for America is good, period.")

it is essentially all daniel boone's fault

yeah, fuck that prick

part 1000 of 1000... Tuomas, how did you miss the basic narratives of Western civilization?

btw I would read all this Daniel Boone As Told By Osamu Tezuka

For the 1000th time, I haven't missed the basic narratives of Western civilization, what I wanted to ask is why these are the basic narratives of Western civilization?

People be liking them.

Yeah, but why?

12 bar blues

root - second ostinato

Because it's an inherited pattern of thought or symbolic imagery derived from the past collective experience and present in the individual unconscious?

why do koreans think opera should all be in 3, at a tempo of about 20 bpm, and feature minimal orchestration?

why do white people enjoy the polka beat

AND WHY, FOR THE LOVE OF PETE, DO BLACK GUYS DRIVE LIKE THIS???!

"western myths drive like THIS" is unfortunately what we're stuck with. prehistoric cultural conventions reinforced over time. nobody knows who told the first one! have you guys seen the brothers grimm? I thought that was a pretty fun movie actually

God wants us to love our 'basic narratives,' it's intelligent design.

Louis CK to thread!

note that good v. evil does not figure in Tuomas' bullet points - he even makes a point of saying that the book HP reminds him of viz. his bullet points ISN'T about fighting evil

by far the more interesting part of the question for me is why "the chosen one" is such a persistent theme in children's lit and beyond, into things like the Matrix, etc. part of it must be the classic mechanics of hero stories, in which the hero must be someone who doesn't have to play by the rules which would otherwise constrain him/her and make it impossible to do the extraordinary things required of the dilemma presented by the story. (this is why shakespeare plays are usually about nobles, who don't really have to obey the law, and why so many of our current dramas are about policemen or doctors or mafia figures, who have a special permission or leeway to just Make It Happen.) the "chosen one" trope isn't JUST about this though - there are plenty of TV cops who aren't "the chosen one".

when you get down to it, though, both are about Very Special People, and so annoy the hell out of me

The "chosen one" also portrays an individualistic view of the world: it's the one chosen person who ends up changing everything, not, say, a larger group of revolutionaries. The chosen one usually has a group of friends, but ultimately it's him alone who can bring about change.

Though of course from the narrative's point of view it's easier to write about a solitary protagonist than a larger group. (Though the reason why this sort of narrative seems more natural might be exactly the increased individualization of Western societies - older myths are often about archetypes instead of individuals).

two factors

1 - partly for religious reasons, narrative and literature in western culture have often been used for the purpose of moral instruction -- not in the sense of examining moral questions, but in the sense of telling you what the moral danger is and precisely what your Christian reaction to it should be

2 - I could be totally wrong about this, but I get the sense that in the west we are slightly more likely to look at the protagonists of stories as surrogates for ourselves, rather than observing them from more of a curious distance -- this is massively true of most American narratives right up until you get to pretty high literature

and both of those points apply PARTICULARLY to children

Right, and it also works for genre fiction. Like I said, helps with identification. If you have a 12 year old kid who feels a bit out of step and looking for something more, funny how that kid can get into a story about a kid who feels different and destined for greater things.

um wait hold on tuomas the protagonists in a clockwork orange and heart of darkness are not "morally ambiguous," they're bad. i don't think conrad/burgess were too ambivalent about hating imperialism and rape.

and yes i know conrad was a bit of a racist himself but if the point of HoD isn't "imperialism is bad" i don't know what it is.

the more interesting thing about western narrative (and something it has in spades compared to the japanese bidness discussed briefly above) is that lately even the most "cut and dried" good v. evil tales have started leaning on a major antagonist to drive the story and provide the wealth of tension, not just by being the most apparent threat to the hero but by also having an arc that's just as big or sometimes bigger - cf vader, snape, even gollum really. by the end of the cycle the jerk you've learned to hate and fear has as much to do with saving the world as the hero does, something that's nowhere to be found in the campbell model.

what, you mean redemption?

no, that's only a tiny part of the arc. 2 out of 3 of the characters I mentioned don't undergo any real "redemption" anyway, gollum just dies and snape's "redemption" is just a reveal of what's been going on behind the curtain.

and yes i know conrad was a bit of a racist himself but if the point of HoD isn't "imperialism is bad" i don't know what it is.

If I remember correctly the protagonist in the Heart of Darkness seems to be sort of a surrogate for Conrad. He obviously despises imperialism, but doesn't really seem to view Africans as his equal either, and doesn't try to do much to help them. He isn't really "good" or "bad", more like cynical and weary. If that isn't ambiguous I don't know what is.

Unless your point was that Kurtz is the real protagonist, which I don't think is the case. His actual appearance in the end is brief, and even the though the whole story revolves around finding him, I think he works more as a symbol of imperialism than as a proper character.

The family romance is a conscious fantasy, later repressed, in which a child imagines that their birth parents are not actual but adoptive parents, or that their birth was the outcome of maternal infidelity. Typically, the fantasy parents are of noble lineage, or at least of a higher social class than the real parents.

i had a fantasy when i was little that my parents were or were not my "real parents" but regardless were always hatching plans to kill me - i'd see them talking in the garden and i'd be like "yep, there they are, working out how to kill me". then i'd go back to playing with pieces of bark.

I wonder if the fact that real kids imagine their parents not to be their parents comes to them from fiction, or if it's a part of some sort of a psychological distancing process (or both)?

i had a fantasy when i was little that my parents were or were not my "real parents" but regardless were always hatching plans to kill me

I would sometimes become terrified that they were actually aliens or monsters who were about to kill me. Cf. Calvin and Hobbes.

cf PK Dick "The Father-Thing"

"yep, there they are, working out how to kill me"

heh. Like Bill Cosby's "Cream of Wheat" bit.

This is actually an interesting topic to me. I actually might have gotten the idea from Calvin and Hobbes but I feel like it really comes from awareness of how absurdly dependent you are on your parents, and of course they act in scary and inexplicable ways from time to time. Maybe I'm stating the obvious.

Dude my mom and dad actually TOLD me that my mom was really an alien for the first 12 years of my life. I was a gullible kid w/few social contacts and never questioned that they could be joking. Then they got worried and guilty when I asked them at age 12, "So if mom's an alien, then am I half alien?"

haha, you were too young to know about "V" growing up, weren't you