In an interesting article, Megan Mcardle argues that Harry potter books are bad economics,
Yet in the Potter books, the costs and limits are too often arbitrary.
A patronus charm, for example, is awfully difficult – until Rowling wants a stirring scene in which Harry pulls together an intrepid band of students to Fight the Power, whereupon it becomes simple enough to be taught by an inexperienced fifteen year old. Rowling can only do this because it’s thoroughly unclear how magic power is acquired. It seems hard to credit academic labour, when spells are one or two words; and anyway, if that were the determinant, Hermione Granger would be a better wizard than Harry. But if it’s something akin to athletic skill, why is it taught at rows of desks? And why aren’t students worn out after practicing spells?
The low opportunity cost attached to magic spills over into the thoroughly unbelievable wizard economy. Why are the Weasleys poor? Why would any wizard be?[link]
I am not really a Potter fan. Perhaps, more well informed readers can shed some light on it.
Filed under: Literature/Poetry
Confused,
The topic of your post should have been: “Megan Mcardle Fails the Employment Test”
Megan clearly seems to be unemployed at this point. If she has the time to bring a book about wizards floating in the air in broomsticks to the testing grounds of economics theories, then she is not doing enough with their economics degree or knowledge.
The article to me is funny in so many levels, I can not even count!
Megan seems to be the economics correspondent for The Economist’s Global Agenda section. Just a heads up.
I am not really a Potter fan either, but do try to catch up with Terry Pratchett, far more intelligent and hysterically humorous fantasy writer…one has to throw away his/her sanity and ideologies while reading his Discworld books
http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue449/interview.html
Megan Mcardle kick-started her article quite well, but somewhere failed to sustain her logic in ticking off her subject! fantasy tales are not just about indulging in “vanishing acts”, but to leverage certain comparative advantage or edge one garnered from the clouds and waits to pounce on ceremonious occasions, to use it in varying degrees,in order to create that much desired levels of aspirations, “oh I wish I could…” it’s a mechanism that creates certain amount of tension / conflict in one, and now is this measurable or tangible is a big question! now if the empowered decided not to use certain spell thus increasing the premiumness of it, would certainly be justified by that grudgingly noisy demand.
Who knows all those visible imperfections make this Harry Potter mania dearer n more realistic to readers that cuts across all age groups? can the world of Wizardry Magic be tangibalise with restrictive laws and principles, I wonder. the critic does not even bother to analyse with her economically drugged eyes, this whole aspect : “it’s fashionable and hip to be a reader of Harry Potter..”as she kept this as yet another variable that surely must have ignited further the fire, this is an environmental factor, the populace ?
…..if your characters will be using magic, they must do so by some generally believable system…….I wholly disagree with this
What do you know about economics ??
Well, hmm… hope this helps..
The patronus charm requires a state of mind.. the wizard or witch has to concentrate on anything happy, and then perform the spell.
It takes practice… watch the movies… Harry himself fails to perform the patronus charm quite a few times..
Megan has obviously never heard of Gamp’s Law of Elemental Transfiguration, or the five exceptions to it. For instance, you can’t multiply food or gold by magic.
Still, however much Rowling tries to fill in those holes in logic, she can’t fill them all. So ultimately all I can say is, it’s a kid’s book, and a fantasy book to boot. You’re supposed to suspend your disbelief!
Have you read the Barry Trotter books?
Clearly, JKR doesnt have a very good opinion about schools and teachers. Teachers are routinely portrayed as bullies and one of them even bumps off the headmaster. I wonder which school she went to.
Uh!! dat article doesn’t deserve a secnd look… mixing fantasy with teh laws of the real world is really foolish!! If she ahsdn’t noticed there were laws too… a ministry of magic… they could have transfigured soemthing for food nd clothes… but these things don’t last long…
secondly, according certain stuff.. if u notice teh transfiguratin pattern… everything could be transfigured into soemthing basic… not just any damn thing!! the money that they used were Goblin made…. and according to folklore they were the most skilled craftsmen ever… so obviously.. a magically created gold coin wud be different from a goblin made… so the wizards worked…. and thus someone can be poor!!
the author has failed to observe how closely the magical society was knit along teh lines of the real society so the subtle things of life would also be applicable there….
reagrding teh patronus charm… the reason it was a 5th year charm was because it required one to have immense strength.. incidentally…. the mentioned “intrepid band” were mostly 5th years and above….. apart from dat it requires one to concentrate on something happy….. however, it is but evident that teh author had overlooked certain basic details in favor of her article!! Quite stupid……
Oh!! btw, even the famed harry potter fails to cast a patronus at times!!
When I shared this post from R n Megan Mcardle’s article with a Gorgeous woman who is a Harry Potter fan at my work place….amidst work related conversations
a few interesting points emerged :
a) Never in all the books has Rowling suggested that new things could be made to appear through magic. You cant just ‘accio’ a new pair of robes – that is considered stealing even in the magic world. You can repair tears and rips and even this doesn’t apply to everything (eg. Harry’s wand is broken beyond repair in the 7th book). Ron’s too poor to afford a new robe because he doesnt have the money – same as human principles. This is what makes the book closer to reality.
b) As far as the cost of performing magic goes, its like saying, there should be a cost to performing well in work, or studies. There are certain qualities that are inherent, such as magic. There are ’squibs’ in the book – ppl born to magic familes who can’t perform magic, alongside ‘muggle’ born wizards and witches. So it does have to do with the power within you to do magic. Harry has excellent wizarding skills due to the fact that his parents were great wizards. Hermione’s parents were both muggles, so she learns her magic through the textbook, and then practices to perfect.
c) A ‘patronus’ was taught to Harry by a professor in the 4th book. It did cause him to be tired and it took relentless learning to perform the magic. By the 5th book, they are all a year older which is when he starts to teach the others to do it. It is not about being taught by an inexperienced 15 year old. If you know how to do something, you can also pass that knowledge to others. As you progress in years, your skill set increases and this is how the others can also learn how to practice advanced magic. This learning process is what makes the book more beilevable…..
Hey wait.. ..
Why didnt Harry Potter and Hermione use the time-turner again in the subsequent books, after the Prisoner of Azkaban?? They could have stopped Sirius Black from dying in the “Order of the Phoenix” !! And so many other things…
But then, its fiction.. just assume what is not stated
IMHO, that time-turner is the coolest contraption in the whole series..
Actually Rippu, the time turner thing is explained… Harry and the others smash the entire ministry’s repository of time turners by mistake in the chase at the Department of Mysteries at the end of the fifth book. But yes, the coolest contraption indeed
Prashanth,
I must have missed it.. or rather the significance of this event..
Wow.. they kept a repository of time turners… something like huge Servers storing data about the past.. so you can use the time-turner to access it online and go back in time
I hope JKR comes up with sequels.. with some other adventures, I am tired of You-Know-Who
Though I aint a fan, but still they are an interesting read. Surrealism and fantasy do have appeal. Another good read is the “Lord of the Rings” series.
You may see a list of similar fantasy fiction works on wikipedia, but I havent seen any of these at any popular bookstores like Crosswords. Many of these books were published much earlier, so it may not be easy to find them.
Also, in public interest – Crosswords sells the seventh book at Rs 925 or so. Its about Rs 200 higher than prices at other places.. So dont buy the 7th book from Crosswords..
Maybe they have reduced the prices now, I saw the price on the day the 7th book was released.
Its nice to know that there are people who are willing to criticise fiction because they dont coincide with reality.
This is a really stupid article. If you have really read the books then you wouldnt be asking this and if you havent why are you bothering?
Check for something called Gamp’s Law of Elemental Tranfiguration and read a book called Harry Potter and The Prizoners of Azkaban to clarify your doubts. Save us the trouble now.