Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
The books are getting longer, and the tone is growing more serious. The finale of Goblet of Fire also marked the transition from children’s adventure book to a much darker feel. As always, there’s far more to discuss than I can cover in a single review, so I’m going to focus on the two biggest pieces that jumped out at me.
Something that hits harder every time I re-read the books is the parallels between rape culture and the treatment of muggles. There’s a concept called the ‘Rape Culture Pyramid’ that is perfectly encapsulated here. At the lowest level is the simple lack of thought/consideration for muggles. Arthur Weasley - known muggle fan - still can’t figure out muggle money well enough to get past the campground supervisor without suspicion. He loves the concept of muggles, but they aren’t ‘real’ enough or given enough importance in his mind for him to do even minimal preparation when it’s time to actually interact with one. The next escalation/step up the pyramid happens immediately after when the groundskeeper is obliviated to prevent him from registering what’s actually happening. Lockhart’s fate in Chamber of Secrets showed us exactly how dangerous the Obliviate charm can be, when his attempt backfires and he wipes his own mind to the point of permanent hospitalization. So the throwaway line, “Needs [obliviation] ten times a day to keep him happy.” carries a strong implication. Wizards don't actually care about the health and safety of the muggles, only that they don’t remember enough to expose the magical world. (There’s an entirely separate analysis that could be done on the parallels between Obliviate and date-rape drugs.) The fact that even Arthur doesn’t seem to see any issue with this treatment shows how deeply ingrained the mistreatment and dismissal of the muggle experience goes. This in turn enables the next escalation we see:
A crowd of wizards… their heads were hooded and their faces masked. High above them, floating along in midair, four struggling figures were being contorted into grotesque shapes… Two of the figures were very small. More wizards were joining the marching group, laughing and pointing up at the floating bodies. One of the marchers below flipped [one of the muggles] upside down with his wand; her nightdress fell down to reveal voluminous drawers and she struggled to cover herself up as the crowd below her screeched and hooted with glee… the smallest Muggle child… had begun to spin like a top, sixty feet above the ground, his head flopping limply from side to side.
…
We caught [the muggles] before they hit the ground though, they’re having their memories modified right now.
…
“I suppose they had a few drinks tonight and couldn’t resist”
As I mentioned in the Chamber of Secrets review, our bodies remember even if our memories are blocked. The paternalistic approach of sweeping the muggle family’s trauma under a rug and pretending everything is fine hurts everyone. That family is going to be dealing with issues they don’t know how to process because the original event is being hidden from them, and the wizarding world is prevented from fully owning the harm that has been caused, which helps enable future problems. Beyond the single sentence above about how the death eaters ‘couldn’t resist’, this event is never really touched on again in the books. Even setting aside the trauma to the muggles directly, what about the impact on muggleborns watching? On kids? On witches in abusive relationships watching the assault on a muggle woman being dismissed entirely?
As we see in the book, the little things - Arthur Weasley, muggle lover, doesn't know the basics like how money works - feed into medium things - wiping the muggle's memory every time he gets suspicious instead of making any real effort at subtlety - feeds into the big things - purebloods look down on muggles as less than, death eaters feel safe enough to commit a public assault, etc.
The second piece I wanted to focus on was Rowling’s anti-trans sentiment. This is something I’ve been actively trying to look for, and I suspect this book has the most blatant example. Rita Skeeter! Before we even know we're supposed to hate her for her lack of journalistic integrity she's described as having a "heavy-jawed face" and "man hands". Come on. Adding to this, every time she pops up in a new scene she's described with hyper feminine characteristics such as the bleached, highly styled hair and long, bright nails. This easily reads as a trans character. The fact that she constantly lies in wait to ambush the protagonists feeds neatly into JKRs beliefs about how all real-life trans people are predators. There are better researched articles on this already, and other people have said it better. But the fact that I, a straight cis woman, can pick up on this means its not even well hidden. And before you ask ‘but why does this matter?’ Let me point you to a couple statistics. Trans adolescents are at higher risk of suicide. Trans women have a dramatically shorter average life expectancy. Trans people experience homelessness at a higher rate. Trans people are 4 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime. To flip the script, trans people commit crimes at the same statistical rate as the gender they were raised. So we’re left with a population far more likely to be victimized, discriminated against, or struggle with their own mental health than the general population. They’re no more dangerous than your average joe. Knowing this, why would the ‘correct’ response be to make their lives even more difficult by adding onto the existing stigma?
If this made an impact on you, please consider donating to one of the charities/organizations below:
