When you work in the book industry, you will undoubtedly at some point be involved with something related to "Harry Potter."
To me, "Potter" always seemed to be one of those universal positive things that practically everyone could agree was good, like puppies or hot fudge sundaes. However, this view changed for me this summer when I interned for a book news site and discovered just how many people on the Internet are angry at J.K. Rowling.
This July 31 marked both the 52nd birthday of the Potter author, as well as the 27th birthday of her fictional boy wizard. Much of the Potter fandom and entertainment media took to the Internet to celebrate this unofficial 'HP' holiday, sharing their own homemade birthday cakes, Potter memes, and favorite HP memories.
In honor of all this Potter love, the website where I was interning decided to share a slideshow on Facebook of "J.K. Rowling's Most Inspiring Quotes."
The article featured advice, mottos, and words of wisdom from from the "Harry Potter series," interviews with Rowling and candid interactions between the author at book signings and conventions. Yet despite this overwhelmingly positive and light cotent, the reaction from readers was overwhelmingly irritated, rude and even downright hostile at times.
I waded through almost 500 Facebook comments calling Rowling a "hack," telling her to "go back to Scotland" and "stay out of the public-eye," or vowing that they "would never ever read another word this woman writes."
As a lifelong lover of Rowling and her writing, I was personally shocked to read all these passionate and vicious attacks and wondered what she could have done to cause such a Facebook frenzy. I soon learned that, as with almost every online news controversy lately, it had to do with Donald Trump.
The night before, Rowling had gone on one of her infamous "Trump Twitter rants," this time calling out the President's announcement that transgender individuals would no longer be allowed to serve in in the U.S. military as well as his sexist attacks on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" host Mika Brzezinski, where he tweeted that Brzezinski suffered from a "bad face lift."
On her own Twitter, Rowling struck back against Trump's character, by responding to the President's account with a quote from Abraham Lincoln:
On another date Rowling went so far as to compare Trump to HP's most wicked villain, tweeting back in June, "Voldemort wasn't nearly as bad."
However, this is hardly the first time Rowling has taken to Twitter to express her strong personal or political beliefs.
Last year, she publicly opposed the U.K.'s decision to pass the Brexit vote and withdraw from the European Union. She also regularly uses Twitter and her websites to promote her own charity: Lumos, an international non-profit that has raised money to give over 8 million impoverished children access to health care, education, and a strong family community. Yet, if someone were to only read these latest responses to any news featuring Rowling, they might wrongly assume that she spends all her time looking for new ways to "troll" Trump on Twitter.
Even on content that had no relation to Rowling's personal beliefs or statements, such as a sneak preview of the trailer for her new 'Corman Strike' TV series, was flooded with outraged cries urging her to quit the business and worry about the U.K. rather than try to express opinions on American politics.
I'd like to take a moment to address Rowling's critics and explain why I completely disagree with the idea that she needs to stop her political Twitter posts and quit publicly expressing concerns about U.S. political policies and the actions of President Donald Trump.
Today, the idea that one nation, especially one as militarily and economically dominate as the United States, has no effect on the people of another nation is completely incorrect. The policies of the Trump administration, for instance the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris Agreement and the enforcement of Trump's new immigration ban, have long-term consequences on the lives of people far beyond the U.S. border, and they have a right to be concerned.
Among all of these attacks, insults and misguided judgements, the type of response I found the most troubling were those that advised Rowling "to stick to doing what she knows" i.e. writing novels, and keep out of real life political issues. So many of these critics wrote that as an "entertainer," Rowling had no business expressing her opinions on current events, and they would prefer that she would contain her writing to worlds of fantasy and magic.
Firstly, the idea that entertainment is somehow entirely detached from politics is obviously false. From the Harriet Beecher Stowe's "Uncle Tom's Cabin" shifting public perceptions of slavery, to the communist trials of the Hollywood Ten during the 1950s era of McCarthyism, to Emma Watson and Beyonce's recent speeches on the importance of feminism, our actors, singers, and authors have always had a large influence on society and our own thoughts about the ways the world works.
Any famous person, by virtue of being in the public eye, automatically has the power to enact cultural change because they have a wide audience of people watching everything they do our say. People admire and seek to emulate their favorite celebrities, from copying their hairstyles and workout routines, and even their moral philosophies.
Therefore, it's incredibly important when internationally recognized figures like Rowling or George Clooney, or speak up for the causes that they believe in and use their platforms and wealth to support the causes they believe in.
Secondly, Rowling may be a "fantasy author," but the values and ideas found within the "Harry Potter" series are far from fictional.
Rowling drew much of her inspiration for the Wizarding World and the violent conflicts between pureblood and muggleborn wizards from our real-life history of racism and prejudice. It's no coincidence that Gellert Grindlewald's defeat is set in 1945, the sam year of the conclusion of WWII. Similarly, Voldemort and his followers used many of the same tactics as Hitler himself, such as spreading fearful propaganda, when they took over the ministry in "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows."
These parallels and ideas about human nature did to go unnoticed by the millions of children and parents who read the series and formed much of their first impressions of good and evil from Rowling's characters and their efforts to protect and defend their friends and love ones.
For many young children, hearing Draco Malfoy call Hermione a 'mudblood' in "Chamber of Secrets" or watching a competent professor Lupin resign from teaching because parents wouldn't trust a werewolf around their children was their first exposure to the fact that the existence and unfairness of prejudice, hatred, and bigotry that sadly still exists in our own society.
I remember as an eight-year-old feeling motivated by reading about teenage Hermione's passion for House Elf rights and imagining starting my own "S.P.E.W." campaign for the better treatment of household pets.
Back in June, the "New York Times" published an editorial in honor of the 20th anniversary of "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone," which attributed a rise in millennial "youthful liberal activism" and passion for politics due to growing up reading the HP books and absorbing their messages of anti-prejudice, tolerance, and revolution.
As a proud member of this HP generation, I for one hope that Rowling continues to share her thoughts and expose injustices both online and through her storytelling. To quote Dumbledore: There comes a time when we all must "make a choice between what is right and what is easy."
