Harry Potter Alert
Vince Eremos | 18.11.2000 18:15
Its quite right to oppose USA "Brand Goods", but we must also be aware of the relentless pushing of British consumer items
In many ways it can be even more blatant, except we tend not to notice it because its the establishment doing it as much as direct commercial concerns. Recently we've had "Spice Blurasis" Britpop, and this year it was hardly possible to sit through a BBC news report or open a newspaper without a bogus "Harry Potter" story hitting us in the face.
"Harry Potter" has been marketed beyond the normal limits of childrens books so successfully that it has now impinged upon the consciousness of supposed grown- ups. The degree to which I have personally witnessed adults engrossed in a volume of this commericial fiction on public transport (I dont get out of London much, so I can only speak for the puportedly sophisticated capital) is horrendous. At first I assumed it might be diligent parents keeping up to date with the latest "fad" but then I noticed whole groups engaged in serious conversation about the merits of these works.
There is something highly disengenuous about the whole exercise. It seems to be a throwback to the days of public school fiction ( "Jennings", "William", "Bunter") with a little Enid Blyton thrown in. Religious groups have voiced their unease that it might be used to inculcate occult beliefs among young people, but this would be more plausible a charge if their own faith wasnt steeped in such mysticism.
Every age needs an ideology. Substantial, profound, times need literature of gravitas. In 1848 Europe shook with Marx's Manifesto cry "Workers of all countries unite". In Paris in 1968 the students had the towering intellect of Sartre to give them inspiration. In 2000, in our much reduced circumstances, where our Prime Minister proclaims the end of ideology itself, "Harry Potter" seems sufficient for our citizens, together with Hugh Grant films. (Thought: is Blair the political reflection of Grant's characters, as perhaps Reagan was to John Wayne ?)
I dont know how to go about this "Alert". Perhaps challenge the "Potter" reader every time we see a copy being flaunted ? Once I happened to have with me Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" , which I held up in oppositional ostentation, and which seemed to embarrass the culprit. I make no apologies for that. A Name and shame campaign perhaps ?
"Harry Potter" has been marketed beyond the normal limits of childrens books so successfully that it has now impinged upon the consciousness of supposed grown- ups. The degree to which I have personally witnessed adults engrossed in a volume of this commericial fiction on public transport (I dont get out of London much, so I can only speak for the puportedly sophisticated capital) is horrendous. At first I assumed it might be diligent parents keeping up to date with the latest "fad" but then I noticed whole groups engaged in serious conversation about the merits of these works.
There is something highly disengenuous about the whole exercise. It seems to be a throwback to the days of public school fiction ( "Jennings", "William", "Bunter") with a little Enid Blyton thrown in. Religious groups have voiced their unease that it might be used to inculcate occult beliefs among young people, but this would be more plausible a charge if their own faith wasnt steeped in such mysticism.
Every age needs an ideology. Substantial, profound, times need literature of gravitas. In 1848 Europe shook with Marx's Manifesto cry "Workers of all countries unite". In Paris in 1968 the students had the towering intellect of Sartre to give them inspiration. In 2000, in our much reduced circumstances, where our Prime Minister proclaims the end of ideology itself, "Harry Potter" seems sufficient for our citizens, together with Hugh Grant films. (Thought: is Blair the political reflection of Grant's characters, as perhaps Reagan was to John Wayne ?)
I dont know how to go about this "Alert". Perhaps challenge the "Potter" reader every time we see a copy being flaunted ? Once I happened to have with me Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" , which I held up in oppositional ostentation, and which seemed to embarrass the culprit. I make no apologies for that. A Name and shame campaign perhaps ?
Vince Eremos
Comments
Display the following 6 comments