by Travis
I’m going to begin a new Hog’s Head practice of starting each week off with a subject for discussion. This week – the Olympics and the TriWizard Tournament. With the Beijing Olympics underway, Potter fans are reminded of the “Olympic” event that is the TriWizard Tournament in Goblet of Fire. The HP Alliance is noting the parallels along the lines of international cooperation and the Olympics’ theme, “One World, One Dream,” particularly in their call to use this time to raise awareness about Darfur.
Most definitely, Goblet of Fire, particularly in the character of Dumbledore, emphasizes the need for international cooperation in the fight against evil. But beyond Book 4, this theme gets little to no attention. In Deathly Hallows, Voldemort is brought down quite apart from widespread international cooperation. In reality, he’s brought down by the courageous actions of a few (non-government) individuals.
In light of this, some questions for discussion:
- What happened to the theme of international cooperation in Harry Potter?
- Does the lack of emphasis on the theme after Book 4 reflect the improbability of international cooperation (”it just ain’t gonna happen”), or does it reflect the Fabian element (”it’s gonna take a long time and a lot of work before that happens”)?
- Is there something discordant about the emphasis on globalization in Book 4 and the clearly localized solution to the Voldemort problem in Book 7?
- Is it simply a plot issue – Voldemort didn’t have time to become an international threat before Harry brought him down?
- Overall – what is message of the Potter books about international cooperation?
Travis Prinzi on 
Arabella Figg on 
SPT on 
Lily Luna on 
Loading ...
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
Great questions, this is definitely a theme that I never thought of. Dumbledore did stress the international cooperation pretty heavily during the tournament.
Will, yes he did! The theme got lost pretty quickly, though. It’s the kind of thing that makes the political series itself, apart from what Rowling’s intentions might have been, rather interesting. While Goblet might advocate international cooperation against dark forces, the series’ conclusion leans more toward local solutions to local problems. (Globalism vs. Localism).
It’s similar to political philosophy in the series. Despite Rowling’s being a big fan of Bobby Kennedy, Benjamin Barton has argued that the HP series just might do more for libertarianism than any writing since John Stuart Mill.
Since the series isn’t primarily about these issues, it’s no wonder they’re not treated in detail, of course. But the issues are raised nonetheless.
Yeah, what happened to that theme? It did sort of fade away. I thought Krum would be in book 7 a bit more, with the way Dumbledore sort of “invited” he and Fleur and any of the TriWizard foreign students back. Krum’s main role in DH was telling about what he thought was Grindelwald’s sign, and being funny. (I love that quote, “Vot is the point of being an international Quidditch player if all the good-looking girls are taken?”)
It’s interesting to ponder if Rowling may have wanted to emphasize the “local solution,” or if it was too complicated to resolve the plot including the “international cooperation” theme.
I think it’s mainly one of those themes that sounded nice but would’ve taken much too long to resolve, kind of like the whole thing about the houses having to unite to defeat Voldemort. I’m not quite sure if Slughorn & a handful of Slytherins fighting against Voldemort counts as house unification.
I also think that, in the end, Jo had really set up the conflict as regional. Voldemort, for all his terribleness, was largely confined to England. No doubt he would’ve expanded outward if he had won.
But as Krum notes about Grindelwald, he was never powerful in England & so most people didn’t think much about him. Which kind of goes against what Jo said in earlier interviews, things that hinted that the war against Grindelwald was a world wizarding war like the one going on at the same time in the muggle world. The sense we get of it in DH is that Grindelwald was a continental phenomenon & that Dumbledore was called in because everyone thought he was the only one who could beat Grindelwald.
The closest thing to following up on this theme is sending Hagrid as an envoy to the Giants. And honestly, that plotline seems to devolve only into Hagrid doing what Hagrid always does — bringing home a stray.
Rowling’s books have always been largely localized, even colloquial in some ways. I’m not sure exactly what Rowling wants to say with the Tri-Wizard tournament. Like a lot of things concerning that tournament, the international politics stuff seems a little half-baked.
I think International Magical Cooperation is one of those things that sounds nice to Jo, but seeing as it doesn’t really fit in her plot, it just gets thrown in but then ignored in the bigger picture. I think it’s just a bit of Jo’s Hermioneishness coming out.
Along the lines of what revgeorge said, an international effor would have taken too much plot and character development time away from the principals.
In order to have meaningful international participation – by which I mean staff, students and graduates of Beaubatons and Durmstrang – we’d need interesting characters with backstories. That takes time. The only fleshed out foreigners we get are Karkaroff, Krum, Mme. Maxime and Fleur. And beyond that, the foreigners would have to get involved in significant ways in the goings-on. The only two who do get involved are Karkaroff and Fleur, and both are in fairly secondary roles.
Now think of how little use JKR made of some of her best-developed Hogwarts characters – Snape comes to mind, although many of the teachers got short-shrift – and ask: was there enough room there to build an active role for an international cast as well?
As well, the series focuses on the dynamic between Harry and Voldemort. All the other interactions and all other action is secondary to that. The battle of Hogwarts, for all the drama and fireworks, is not where Voldemort is defeated, and is not essential to his defeat. In the end, it’s mano-a-mano. The boy who lived vs. the boy who never wanted to die.
The one thread in the plot where there is some room to bring in an international cast is in the horcrux hunt and destruction. Seven people are involved in this, in approximate historical order: Harry, Dumbledore, Ron, Crabbe, Hermione, Voldemort and Neville. Why couldn’t one or more of them have been international, in order to give some support to the sentiment that the wizarding world has to unite against Voldemort? Well, the answer is obvious: Dumbledore really wanted this to be a Harry and friends mission. And I strongly suspect that reflects the author’s position as well.
So why all the talk about how the wizarding world has to pull together to defeat Voldemort? Well, it sounds good, like a lot of stuff politicians say – and Dumbledore is an excellent politician. And don’t forget: GoF was the fourth of seven books. I think that when you’re in the middle of a seven volume epic, you might be forgiven for thinking that you’re going to have time – and pages – enough to develop and wrap up a lot more sub-plots than you eventually have time – and pages – for.
Dave, I love your deconstruction of the outcome of Hagrid’s mission amongst the giants: in the end, Hagrid did what Hagrid always does: bring home a stray.
I like what revgeorge said too: it’s a little bit of Jo’s Hermioneishness coming out.
I think everyone has brought up excellent points. To echo what everyone said or meant, I always thought international magical cooperation was just an idea that comes from Jo’s personal beliefs, but not intended to be an integral part of the series besides a plot devise in Goblet.
Also, because the books are from Harry’s perspective, if there was an international cooperation, we most likely would not have seen it. Although if Dumbledore was true to his word, he would have had somebody in the Order working on that and its possible Harry would have learned that information, he spent most of his time isolated in Phoenix and learning and executing his Horcrux mission in the last two books.
I think the nail was hit on the head;
Dumbledore wanted the international cooperation, Dumbledore was a politician when it came to that. Despite his efforts, in the Tournament all we see it that there is no cooperation, just rivalry and competition. I think that is a pretty good set-up for the fact that there will be no cooperation in later events. To me it was not surprising at all that it was a local effort !
What fascinating questions, and answers too! I agree that there was no way JKR could really develop this theme given time and space constraints, but that makes it all the more interesting that it’s there in the first place. I really expected a lot more of Viktor in the finale than we got. That was one of those mildly disappointing realizations I had along the way, that we weren’t going to see him beyond the one scene. Although precisely how he might have ended up in the final battle, one has to wonder…and I think Jo was “spot on” to have that battle at Hogwarts. So much of the story unfolded there, and it was home for Harry. In the end, this was much more of a “homefront” war story than anything else.
Beth,
I too was expecting a lot more from Krum: the way he was integrated into both the TriWizard Tournament and the thing he had going on with Hermione. But in the end he was no more than a momentary distraction. There was a lot of that going on in GoF, I think: Krum, Madam Maxime, Mundungus Fletcher. JKR opened up a lot of doors she didn’t go through.
I believe the whole international cooperation theme was used to highlight the more central theme of pride in Book 4; pride being the force behind the schools resistance to working together, and the motivation for their competition. Dumbledore set up the tournament to bring everyone together to compete but, more importantly, to learn more about each other.
Somewhat ironic, of course, that the tournament was subverted by Barty Crouch and used, ultimately, as a means of bringing about Voldemort’s return.
Just a thought: Where might JKR’s experience at Amnesty (see her Harvard graduation address) fit in with the localism v. internationalism debate?
The thing that I think is misleading in GoF is Dumbledore’s final speech, where he says that, in light of Voldemort’s return, international ties are more important than ever before. We just don’t see international ties playing an important role in the fight against Voldemort.
Believability is part of this. Voldemort is not going to try to take over the whole world at once. He’s going to start with one country. And if the wizarding world is like the real world, other countries won’t interfere much until Voldemort starts posing a threat specifically to them. (Could this be what Rowling is trying to address in Dumbledore’s speech? Maybe this is where her experience plays at Amnesty plays a role?)
I also think that this could be another example of the Fabian approach. Rowling is smart enough to know that international problems will not be solved overnight, similar to the issues of house-elves. Like the unity of the magical brethren focuses on Harry, the unity of the wizarding world focuses on Hermione and Ron. Hermione is friends with Viktor; Ron is tied to Fleur by way of Bill. We do at least see these relationships continuing in DH. Even if we don’t see them playing much of a role against Voldemort, I think we can be confident that they’ll make a difference in the future.