Accio Empathy: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire through the Lens of Cognitive Literary Studies

Regis University Regis University

ePublications at Regis University ePublications at Regis University

Regis University Student Publications

(comprehensive collection)

Regis University Student Publications

Spring 2019

Accio Empathy: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire through the Accio Empathy: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire through the

Lens of Cognitive Literary Studies Lens of Cognitive Literary Studies

Elise Horning

Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.regis.edu/theses

Part of the Cognitive Psychology Commons, Other Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons, and the

Reading and Language Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation

Horning, Elise, "Accio Empathy: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire through the Lens of Cognitive Literary

Studies" (2019).

Regis University Student Publications (comprehensive collection)

. 910.

https://epublications.regis.edu/theses/910

This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Regis University Student Publications

at ePublications at Regis University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Regis University Student Publications

(comprehensive collection) by an authorized administrator of ePublications at Regis University. For more

information, please contact [email protected].

ACCIO EMPATHY: HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE THROUGH THE

LENS OF COGNITIVE LITERARY STUDIES

A thesis submitted to

Regis College

The Honors Program

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for Graduation with Honors

Elise Horning

May 2019

Thesis written by

Elise Horning

Approved by

Dr. Mark Bruhn

Thesis Advisor

Dr. Amanda Miller

Thesis Reader or Co-Advisor

Accepted by

Dr. J. Thomas Howe

Director, University Honors Program

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

I. INTRODUCTION 1

II. THE MAGIC OF COGNITIVE LITERARY STUDIES 7

III. HARRY POTTER in ACADEMIA 17

IV. THE LITERARINESS OF HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE 26

V. ACCIO EMPATHY? 51

WORKS CITED 59

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First, I would like to thank J.K. Rowling for writing this series that transformed

my life in an incredible way. Thank you, Aunt Anne, for sharing your love of this series

with my mom and encouraging me to dive into this magical world with you! Mom, thank

you for inspiring me to love books like you do and for being my lifelong teacher and

friend! Reading these books aloud with you and Gretchen was incredible. Thanks to Drs

Kleier, Narcissi, and Howe for your continued support throughout this thesis-writing

process; you held me accountable to deadlines and assignments that were incredibly

helpful in the long-run, and I’m so grateful for your guidance. Ethan, thank you for sitting

next to me as I typed for many hours and for patiently helping me with my writing along

the way. To all my friends and family members that listened to me throughout this

process, as I encountered victories and defeats, I am grateful for your support. Thanks to

Dr. Miller for encouraging me to stay true to my interests as I dove into this literary

analysis. Finally, thank you Dr. Bruhn, for assisting me through this process with

incredible patience. You taught me so many wonderful lessons about literature that I will

not easily forget, and you helped me transform small, undeveloped ideas into this sixty-

page thesis project. You gave me confidence to add my voice into this work, and you

gave me the courage to continue when I thought I could not!

Thank you, dear reader, for diving into this work with me!

Like Harry, I was about 11 years old when I received my owl from Hogwarts

School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, and I was so thrilled to learn that I would be studying

under the impressive leadership and creativity of the one and only J.K. Rowling. I have

many older cousins, most of whom were totally engrossed in the series by the time I was

in middle school, and I couldn’t wait until it was my turn to read these books. My cousins

and my aunt, Anne spoke constantly of the series, referencing the brilliant prose, sorting

themselves into houses, and chattering about their favorite characters. While they were

careful not to expose any secret plot information, discussion on the Harry Potter books

was a constant topic at family gatherings. I couldn’t imagine a world with a giant named

Hagrid, castles, wizards and witches, magic wands, or mail delivered by owls. My little

brain was eager to learn about these things so that I could enter this world for myself and

actively participate in this magical community. I wanted to enter the magical world to

experience the mystical creatures and complex characters that Rowling created. When I

heard my family talk about these books, I hoped that I would be transported into the

magical world, just as they were.

Although I was thrilled when it was finally time to jump into this world, I was

unprepared for the intense, lasting, positive impact that the series would have on my life.

My sister Gretchen and I immersed ourselves into Harry’s world by listening to the books

on tape and reading them out loud to each other as we created potions from berries,

sticks, mud, and rocks from our back yard. We even attempted to transform bugs into

drinking glasses, just like they do at Hogwarts. We imagined and discussed the grounds,

classrooms, and dormitories of the Hogwarts castle, the taste of the food, and even sorted

ourselves into houses (Hufflepuff for me, Ravenclaw for Gretchen). While Harry

completed homework for History of Magic, I studied World History and Government.

Harry played Quidditch, and I played soccer. When I immersed myself in the magical

Harry Potter world, I was unknowingly experiencing the psychological phenomenon of

identification, which will be further discussed in this work. I felt that I understood the

struggles and joys of the HP characters because Rowling’s work reflected the challenges

of adolescence that I experienced as I read her books: her characters dealt with stress in

school, family issues, and cliques just like I did. These similarities made it easy for me to

connect with the characters Rowling created, and I fell even more in love with the series

along the way.

Rowling outlined many relatable, delightful aspects of adolescence in the HP

books including friendship, teamwork, loyalty, and love. Harry and his friends regularly

stand up to bullies to protect their friends; they embrace werewolves, mud-bloods, house-

elves, and giants, groups that that many people in their society hate. Most notably, Harry

and his friends actively fight against the evil Lord Voldemort, an extremely hate-filled,

prejudiced man who is consistently present throughout the series. I admired Harry’s

courage, as he fought for justice and protected his friends and strangers. Rowling’s

narratives invited me to connect with the characters she created, and I truly believe that

the Harry Potter series transformed my life and made me a more empathetic, open-

minded person. As a result, I began questioning the impact that reading has on the reader,

and these ponderings became the genesis of my thesis topic.

In this thesis, I will explore the many ways that literature impacts readers,

specifically examining changes in levels of empathy. According to the Merriam-Webster

dictionary, empathy is “the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to,

and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either

the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully

communicated in an objectively explicit manner” (Empathy, n.d.). This definition notably

includes the word “action,” meaning that empathy is not a passive experience; instead, it

calls for effort so to enter the experiences and identify the emotions of another, even if an

individual has never had those experiences (Kidd & Castano, 2013; Meneses & Larkin,

2017; Sopcak, Salgaro, & Herrmann, 2016). Empathy includes an affective or emotional

understanding of another as well as a cognitive understanding of the other person’s

perspective (Crandall & Marion, 2009; Gibson, 2007). Importantly, each individual

brings their own experiences and memories into the situation, so there is no special

formula for empathizing with another; some people empathize with those that are similar

to themselves, while others are able to understand situations that are completely new

(Gibson, 2007). Clearly, empathy is a fundamental component of successful,

interpersonal relationships and is therefore a key component for social understanding

(Meneses & Larkin, 2017). Empathy allows human beings to gather insight on the

experiences of another person, regardless of whether the reader has experienced that

situation or not, while recognizing that that experience is not their own (Bortolussi &

Dixon, 2015; Meneses & Larkin, 2017; Oatley, Mar, & Djikic, 2012). According to

recent researchers, it is possible to develop empathy by encountering fictional events and

characters, as the genre of fiction immerses readers into the story and invites them to

experience the perspectives of characters they encounter (Sopcak, Salgaro, & Herrmann,

2016).

Researchers in the fields of psychology and cognitive literary studies examine the

impact of literature on a reader’s empathy levels, which I am eager to explore in this

project as well. Empathy is a human capacity that develops with age, but it can also be

altered based on experiences such as reading. While some people are more empathetic

than others based on their genetic code and cognitive abilities, it is possible to increase

one’s empathy by reading fiction, among other methods. Recent research suggests that

reading fiction alters an individual’s ability to empathize with characters within the text

and real people in their own lives (Hsu, Conrad, & Jacobs, 2014; Kidd & Castano, 2013;

Djikic, Oatley, Moldoveanu, 2013; Gibson, 2007; Zunshine, 2015). In a study conducted

by Djikic, Oatley, and Moldoveanu (2013), 100 participants completed questionnaires

that measured lifelong exposure to fiction and nonfiction, personality traits, and initial

affective and cognitive empathy levels. The participants were then placed into one of two

reading conditions: nonfiction or fictional. Next, they were tested again for cognitive and

affective empathy. Finally, participants completed another empirical empathy test.

Results of this study showed that participants who read fiction showed statistically

significant increases in cognitive empathy, and overall, frequent fiction readers had

higher scores on the empirical empathy test than those that did not have long-term

exposure to fiction. These results suggest that fiction plays a key role in the development

of empathy. For my specific project, I wonder, do the Harry Potter books lead to an

increase in reader empathy as well?

I am certain that these books have shaped my life, but I make this claim based my

own life experience and self-reflection. However, when I join the conversation with

literary critics and psychologists, I find that my claim is challenged by the findings of

recent research. Some scholars refer to the Harry Potter books as literary texts, but others

maintain that they are strictly popular fiction texts with no real literary benefits; this

distinction is important because literary fiction has specific cognitive and empathetic

effects on the reader that popular fiction does not (Flood, 2012; Kidd & Castano, 2013;

Kustritz, 2015). Literary texts contain more complex characters and invite the reader to

fill in gaps purposefully created by the author. On the other hand, popular genre texts

have static, two-dimensional characters, and the reader is not as involved with the

creation and interpretation of plot information because the author provides all the

necessary information (Kidd & Castano, 2013; Kidd, Ongis, & Castano, 2016). These

distinctions will be further expanded in chapter two of this text.

Throughout this project, I hope to explore the importance of reading fiction and

the many impacts that reading has on our brains, specifically in the realm of empathy

development. The question that is driving my research is whether Harry Potter and the

Goblet of Fire is considered literary fiction or popular fiction. If it is literary fiction, and

has the potential to increase the empathy of readers, does that mean that certain religious

or educational groups should be encouraged to re-consider their ban on the HP books? In

the following chapters, I will discuss relevant findings in the fields of cognitive literary

studies, psychology, and literary analysis to explore the current research on the impact of

reading on cognition and empathy development. I will do a close-reading analysis of

chapter thirty-two in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, entitled “Flesh, Blood, and

Bone” using criteria outlined by recent researchers to examine the language and form of

the text. I am eager to blend so many areas of my life into one work and hope to learn

even more about these concepts and practices of my favorite series during the process.

The Magic of Cognitive Literary Studies

The fields of literature and science seem to be on opposite sides of the world, at least

in the eyes of many academics. Often, an individual is labeled as a “science person” or an

“English person,” and the crossover between these two fields is minimal. However, in

recent years, this gap is narrowing, thanks to the growing field of cognitive literary

studies (CLS). This area of academia blends research in the humanities and cognitive

science, and its goal is to engage both disciplines in conversation while recognizing their

differences, therefore avoiding consilience (Oatley, Mar, & Djikic, 2012; Zunshine,

2015). At its most basic level, the field of CLS aims to explore the psychological

(behavioral) and cognitive (mental processes) effects literature has on readers. For

example, some researchers in this field explore the impacts that literature has on empathy

levels, which is the area that I will focus on for my project.

To begin this exploration of the impact of literature on the reader, I will first provide

some distinctions between two genres, fiction and nonfiction. Works of fiction contain

content that comes from an author’s imagination while non-fiction describes how

processes work or how one’s life was lived, refraining from intentionally engaging the

reader’s emotions through the style of the prose (Abram, 1981; Djikic, Oatley, &

Moldoveanu, 2013; Richardson, 2015). Although fiction is born from imagination, this

genre somehow reflects reality because of the way characters interact with one another,

their environments, and themselves in very complex, human ways, even if the characters

are mystical or non-human (Cheetham, Hanggi, & Jancke, 2014; Cohen, 2006; Djikic,

Oatley, & Moldoveanu, 2013; Zunshine, 2015).

Along with the previously mentioned distinctions between fiction and nonfiction,

another key difference between these genres is how the stories are told. For example,

fiction is usually told in narrative style, which engages the reader through dialogue,

detailed character and setting descriptions, and emotional content using a variety of

stylistic devices and intentional grammatical style. Mar (2008) portrays reading fiction as

a means of simulating social experiences, during which chronic readers gain social

knowledge and can hone key socio-cognitive abilities (Kidd & Castano, 2013; Mar R. A.,

2008). These features of fiction encourage readers to immerse themselves in the stories

and lives of the characters while non-fiction aims to communicate facts and findings

without intentionally inviting readers into such immersion (Djikic, Oatley, &

Moldoveanu, 2013; Sopcak, Salgaro, & Herrmann, 2016). Non-fiction authors may

choose to deliver their content using stories, but other common methods include essays,

journal articles, scientific or economic writings.

Evidently, fictional narrative is not just a collection of words and phrases that tell a

story; instead, the story comes to life in the reader’s mind, inviting the reader to directly

engage with and react to the events they read about (Abram, 1981; Breithaupt, 2015).

Although readers of fiction know that the events they are reading about are not really

occurring, they often connect strongly to the plots and characters they encounter (Cohen,

2006). While some sub-types of fiction invite this emotional connection and immersion

more than others, works of fiction provide access to the private thoughts and experiences

of the characters involved, thereby evoking emotions in the reader that are not often

present in works of nonfiction (Caracciolo, 2014; Paul, 2012).

As previously mentioned, reading fiction offers a simulation of reality to readers.

Just as human beings develop emotional and intellectual maturity through interactions

with real people that challenge their perspectives and expand their worldviews, engaging

with fictional characters has a similar effect (Cohen, 2006; Hsu, Conrad, & Jacobs, 2014;

Kidd & Castano, 2013; Sopcak, Salgaro, & Herrmann, 2016). Works of fiction are often

used in higher level educational settings to help students build critical thinking skills,

encounter diverse people, and increase their empathy (Boyaltzis, 1992; Carlson, 1992;

Cavanaugh, 1999; Cohen, 2006; Crawford, 1994; Kidd & Castano, 2013; Viggiani,

Charlesworth, Hutchinson, & Faria, 2005). For example, Kidd and Castano manipulated

the empathy of readers by exposing participants to different types of fiction, and they

found that participants that read fiction experienced an increase in empathy while those

that read nonfiction did not experience such a significant increase (Kidd & Castano,

2013). Just as internships and laboratory practicums are important for assessing student

application and acquisition of knowledge, educators use fictional literature to teach

empathy and compassionate listening in the classroom, specifically in the fields of

counseling, medicine, and social work (Gibson, 2007). Gibson describes the

implementation of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone into counselor education and

claims that reading about the personal experiences of fictional characters allows students

to practice empathizing with “clients,” collaborate with others and strategize a care plan,

and monitor their own emotions under direct supervision for long periods of time

(Gibson, 2007). These skills are quite valuable for making strong connections between

people, and this study helps illustrate that empathy-building has a place in the

professional world and is an important method for increasing empathy. However, some

types of fiction are more effective at enhancing empathy than others, and these

distinctions will be made clear in the following paragraphs.

While there are some clear differences between fiction and non-fiction, there are also

important distinctions within these genres. In this work, I will focus primarily on the

variances between literary and popular fiction. As described by Kidd and Castano in their

article “Reading Literary Fiction Improves Theory of Mind,” literary fiction is a genre

that challenges readers by unsettling their expectations, while popular fiction predictably

portrays characters and the world (Kidd & Castano, 2013). This tactic is called

“defamiliarization” and occurs when a reader is challenged to engage with the text on a

deeper level because their expectations are shaken (Kidd & Castano, 2013). While the

primary goal of popular fiction is to entertain the audience, literary fiction directly

encourages the reader to be involved with the story creation alongside the author (Kidd &

Castano, 2013; Oatley, 2006). Literary fiction more effectively allows readers to access

the experiences of characters, as this genre aims to preserve the complexity of their

characters, and therefore mimic real humans (Kidd & Castano, 2013; Kidd, Ongis, &

Castano, 2016; Wulandini, 2018). Because of the complexity and reader involvement in

literary fiction, evidence suggests that literary fiction may increase empathy development

(Kidd & Castano, 2013; Kidd, Ongis, & Castano, 2016; Oatley, 2006; Wulandini, 2018;

Zunshine, “The Secret Life of Fiction,” 2015). These distinctions show that literary and

popular fiction invite varying levels of reader involvement, so it is logical that their

impacts on the reader are different as well.

Clearly, empathy is a capacity that is activated whilst reading fiction, but it is not the

only one. Another concept that invites readers to connect with real and fictional

characters is Theory of Mind (ToM). ToM gives humans the capacity to comprehend the

mental states of others, so essentially it is necessary for empathy to occur (Burke,

Kuzmičová, Mangen, & Schilhab, 2016; Kidd & Castano, 2013; Starr, 2015). ToM plays

a critical role in perspective-taking, a cognitive component of empathy, specifically when

the other’s feelings are not immediately apparent, are unfamiliar, or are complex

(Mitchell, 2015; Singer, 2006). As we have learned, reading fiction gives us access to the

minds of characters, and this encounter can enhance an individual’s ToM (Burke,

Kuzmičová, Mangen, & Schilhab, 2016; Paul, 2012). Although all fiction invites readers

to be active participants in stories, many researchers in this field maintain that literary

fiction is the sub-category of fiction that is most effective for developing ToM (Kidd &

Castano, 2013; Zunshine, 2015). After mainpulating the type of fiction participants

received, Kidd and Castano found that readers of literary fiction scored higher on ToM

tests than those that read non-fiction or popular fiction (Kidd & Castano, 2013). The

complexity of literary fiction forces the reader to engage in ToM processes so to interpret

the implications hidden within the text or to fill in intentional gaps left by the author

(Kidd & Castano, 2013; Miall & Kuiken, “Foregrounding Defamiliarization,” 1994;

Miall & Kuiken, “Understanding Literary,” 1994; Miall & Kuiken, “What is

Literariness,” 1999). Improvement of ToM allows readers to better understand the

emotional and mental states of others (fictional or real), but also gives them the tools to

communicate their own emotions effectively (Zunshine, “The Secret Life of Fiction,”

2015).

Empathy and ToM are two ways that readers engage with the texts they encounter,

but identification is another capacity that is important to discuss. While empathy and

Theory of Mind help humans to understand the thoughts and feelings of another person

(real or fictive), identification invites individuals to transport themselves into the

experience of another, basically giving readers the power to become a fictional character

or a real person they encounter (Cheetham, Hanggi, & Jancke, 2014). This process invites

the reader to claim that “this character is like me,” which then leads them to enter the

story themselves. This means that identification often occurs when a reader feels similar

to characters they encounter (Bortolussi & Dixon, 2015). Some researchers claim that

identification is possible because of Theory of Mind, or that having more empathy

enhances an individual’s ability to identify with another (Cheetham, Hanggi, & Jancke,

2014; Livingstone, 1998). Increased levels of these two capacities allows individuals to

understand the mental and emotional experiences of another, which then could make it

easier to project oneself into the story.

When experiencing identification, the reader uses his or her imagination to take

on the perspectives, feelings, or experiences of another while drawing upon their own

experiences to do so (Cheetham, Hanggi, & Jancke, 2014; Livingstone, 1998). When a

reader empathizes with a character, the self-other distinction is maintained, so although

one may understand the feelings and emotions of a character, they recognize that these

feelings are not their own. However, during identification, the reader engages directly

with the characters, and it seems that whatever is happening to the character is also

happening to the reader (Cheetham, Hanggi, & Jancke, 2014). In other words, the self

and other are merged together, and the reader adopts the characteristics of the person they

read about (Cheetham, Hanggi, & Jancke, 2014). Instead of merely understanding the

thought processes and emotions of a character, the reader seems to adopt the mental and

emotional experiences of another as their own.

While it is quite easy to confuse the boundary between empathy and identification, it

is important to recognize that when an individual is empathizing with another human or a

fictional character, they are able to understand the emotional state of another, without

directly experiencing the events they read or hear about (Burke, Kuzmičová, Mangen, &

Schilhab, 2016). Importantly, identification, like empathy and ToM, can occur when an

individual is interacting with real or fictive people, but this section will focus on

identification with fictional characters. Cohen argues that identification incorporates both

empathetic and cognitive components, because a reader must first understand the

emotions and goals of the character to successfully immerse themselves in the story

(Cohen, 2006). Identification requires the reader to have an open mind to experience life

through the lens of another, just as empathy and ToM do, but identification takes it a step

further when the reader seemingly becomes a character and adopts their emotions, goals,

fears, and triumphs. When an individual identifies with a fictional character, their own

experience in reality is momentarily forgotten (Cheetham, Hanggi, & Jancke, 2014;

Cohen, 2001). Identification is a capacity that increases a reader’s ability to interact with

fictive and real characters, so along with empathy and ToM, it is crucial for relationship

building.

Human beings are social beings, and we can learn important socio-cognitive skills

from real and fictional experiences. This chapter explores three major capacities of

human relationship building (empathy, Theory of Mind, and identification). These three

capacities are key for building healthy relationships with real people and can be used to

interact with characters from fictional texts as well. Evidently, daily activities such as

reading have the power to alter the circuitry in our brains, and the capacities of ToM,

empathy, and identification can be increased as a result of such activities. Specifically,

through exposure to literary fiction, readers can experience alterations that allow them to

connect more effectively with other people in the world in professional, casual, and

personal settings. This chapter is really the foundation for my research, as it is crucial to

understand the topics of empathy, ToM, and identification in order to have the lens of

cognitive literary studies for the rest of my project. The field of CLS is important to those

in and out of academia, as it illustrates that reading, which is a common daily activity,

can so drastically alter one’s ability to encounter another. The field of CLS is crucial

because it blends subjects that are not often in conversation with one another in order to

expand our understanding of the human mind.

In the following chapter, I will explore the literariness of the Harry Potter books,

including insights from literary scholars, psychologists, and other vocal members in both

academic and non-academic circles. I hope to gather a general sense of whether members

of the general public and academia would categorize Harry Potter books as literary or

popular fiction, and then I will conduct my own analysis to hypothesize where I believe

the book should be categorized.

Key Terms from Chapter 1

Cognitive literary studies: an emerging academic field that blends the worlds of

cognitive science and literary analysis/criticism

Fiction: a genre of writing that communicates information from an author’s

imagination as opposed to relating facts

Non-fiction: a genre of writing in which the author conveys historical events,

biographical information, or facts that are true

Literary fiction: a sub-type of fiction that invites the reader to creatively interact with

the text and fill in gaps left intentionally by the author; reading this type of fiction

often results in increased empathy and ToM levels

Popular fiction: a sub-type of fiction that is straightforward and predictable; this type

of writing can be read passively, as it does not require much reader interpretation or

involvement; reading this type of fiction does not often result in increased empathy

Empathy: the capacity to comprehend and share the experiences, thoughts, and

intentions of another without directly experiencing these with them

Theory of Mind: the capacity to understand another’s mental state; a necessary

component for empathy; an important distinction from empathy is that ToM does not

allow one to share in the other’s experience, just helps to recognize and comprehend

the mental state of another

Identification: a psychological concept that occurs when a reader projects/transports

themselves into the experience of another, similar person, therefore becoming the

other person so to speak, and taking on their goals, intentions, aspirations, etc.

Harry Potter in Academia

Since the Harry Potter series arrived into the world of popular culture in June of

1997, people have engaged in debates on its literariness; some classify the series as

literary, while others deem it popular. In order to further engage with this debate, this

chapter will explore critics’ views on the HP series as well as outline criteria that

researchers use to classify texts as popular or literary fiction. These criteria will be used

in the following chapter analyse the literariness of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

Many areas of academia focus on the scholarly exploration of the Harry Potter books.

Some explore the psychological implications of these books, while others critique the

literary content such as the hero’s story or the mythological references. In short, these

books and their content are highly esteemed by some in the realm of academia. In 2012,

the University of St Andrews School of English in Scotland held a conference called “A

Brand of Fictional Magic: Reading Harry Potter as Literature.” This conference was

organized by John Pazdziora from the University of St. Andrews, and 60 academics

gathered for this event featuring 50 scheduled lecturers. The specific purpose of this

conference was to explore the literariness of these books as a larger, academic

community. Pazdziora stated that “In 100, 200 years’ time, when scholars want to

understand the early 21

century, when they want to understand the ethos and culture of

the generation that’s just breaking into adulthood, it’s a safe bet that they’ll be looking at

the Harry Potter novels” (Flood, 2012). Pazdziora believes that these books contain a

plethora of complex content which requires discussion in the academic world and pulls

them out of the “children only” category. In a similar vein, Dr. Anne Kustritz, a presenter

in this Scotland conference, believes that the Harry Potter books are important to study

because the characters experience “othering” (as discussed in the introduction to this

thesis), prejudice, friendship, love, war, and so forth. Kustritz argues that the content of

these magical, fictional stories provides parallels to the complex reality that we live in,

and these similarities are valid reasons to study this series in an academic setting. Many

academics believe that these books are truly literary and should be continuously studied

as time goes on.

John Mullan, an English professor at University College London, has quite a different

take on the literary merit of the Potter books and this “Brand of Fictional Magic”

conference. He claims that “Harry Potter is for children, not for grownups…it's all the

fault of cultural studies: anything that is consumed with any appearance of appetite by

people becomes an object of academic study” (Flood, 2012). He believes that these books

do not contain content that deserves such intense academic research, as he believes that

the scholars are just focusing on this series because of their impact on popular culture and

the fandom surrounding them.

Clearly, the great Harry Potter debate will continue, so I will add my own voice into

this discussion and challenge the arguments previously presented. Pazdziora and Kustritz

believe that the Harry Potter books are worth studying due to their complex fictional

content which somehow mirror challenges in reality, and Mullan claims that this content

does not deserve such attention because they are merely a childish, popular phenomenon.

To begin, I challenge Mullan’s claim that these books are merely children’s books not

intended for “grownups,” because when the final installment of the HP series was

available, 47% of the book buyers did not, in fact, have children (“Harry Potter Preorders

Top 1 Million,” 2007). This statistic illustrates the significant popularity of these books

amongst adults; clearly, the HP books are important to adults and children alike. While I

believe that the content of these books will likely have a lasting impact on this generation

and those to come, I’d like to argue that the content of a work of fiction is not the most

important factor in classifying it as literary or popular fiction; instead, the style and

delivery of this content are what give a work literary merit. In short, I believe that the

Harry Potter books are so much more than just popular phenomena, and I will analyze

their literary merit in the next chapter, using the criteria I will lay out in the following

pages.

Categorizing a work as literary or popular fiction is quite subjective, but according to

experts, the delivery of the content is the primary distinction between the two genres. In

the article “Reading Literary Fiction Improves Theory of Mind”, David Comer Kidd and

Emanuele Castano (2013) set up a few stylistic criteria for classifying works as literary

fiction. The first of these criteria is the presence of unusual or abrupt semantic devices

such as similes or metaphors. For example, if a character was described to have a “voice

like the sound of a dehydrated camel”, the reader would likely stop and question what on

earth that means (Dawe, 2018). This phrase was used by my communications professor

last semester, and everyone was quite confused about the meaning of this phrase. I began

brainstorming whether he was referencing the tonal quality, roughness, or the loudness of

a voice and struggled to imagine what camel sounds could be attributed to a human

being. Authors of literary fiction regularly utilize such devices to defamiliarize the

readers while also encouraging them to think outside the box as they encounter the text.

Another distinct criterion of literary fiction that Kidd and Castano outline is the use of

phonological devices, or devices that specifically relate to the sounds of letters in

relationship to one another (Kidd & Castano, 2013). These include consonance,

assonance, and rhyme. Consonance is the repetition of certain consonant sounds like in

the phrase “clean coffee cup.” Assonance is the repetition of a vowel sound like in the

phrase “I like to hike.” Correspondence between the sound of words in a phrase or stanza

is called a rhyme; for example, in the phrase “fun in the sun,” “fun” and “sun” rhyme.

While it is common for works of poetry to contain such language, the presence of these

and other phonological devices is much less common in works of fictional prose. The

presence of such devices in prose defamiliarizes the reader and encourages him or her to

pay closer attention to the text.

Grammatical style is another criterion that distinguishes between these two genres,

specifically with the placement of the subject and predicate in a sentence. Often in prose,

sentences follow the structure of a simple sentence in which the subject comes first,

followed by the predicate (e.g. “Elise studied for her exam this weekend.”) (Kidd &

Castano, 2013). Although sentences may vary in length and complexity, popular fiction

may contain more examples that follow this simple order (Basic Sentence Structure,

2016). Works of literary fiction are different because they do not follow this grammatical

style all the time. Sometimes authors will flip the order of subject and predicate, add

dependent clauses, or incorporate unusual punctuation to defamiliarize the reader (e.g.

“Here comes the train.”). As a result, the reader may be taken aback and encouraged to

re-read the sentence to gather its full meaning.

The main difference between popular and literary fiction is the amount of reader

engagement with the text, specifically in the creation and interpretation of content.

Popular texts are classified by experts as “readerly texts” because the reader passively

experiences the text (Kidd & Castano, 2013). By this I mean that the reader does not have

to draw conclusions based on interpreting implications within the text; instead, the author

clearly lays out information for the reader which requires little to no reader creativity or

action. This information is often transferred to the reader through narrator or dialogue

between characters. Literary texts, on the other hand, are considered “writerly texts”

because they invite the reader to actively fill in gaps in character development, plot

points, or other parts of the narrative. In his article, “Simulation of Substance and

Shadow: Inner Emotions and Outer Behavior in Shakespeare's Psychology of Character,”

Keith Oatley claims that to fill in these intentional gaps, readers must use a mixture of

“substance” and “shadow” (Oatley, 2006). According to Oatley, the observable behavior

or dialogue readers encounter within a text is referred to as the shadow. The substance of

a character includes his or her inward motivations and thoughts that drive an

action/shadow. If, in a literary text, a fictive character’s behavior is described without

explanation of his or her motivations, the reader is encouraged to fill that gap by using

the shadow to comprehend the substance. This process invites the reader to creatively

engage with the text as a writer and use their knowledge of the character’s personality,

speech, thoughts, and past decisions to understand their unexplained behaviors. Often in

literary fiction, the reader is asked to fill in the gaps by “writing” in their own

interpretation of the character’s motivation, responding to it alongside the original author.

Creating writerly texts is a stylistic decision that literary fiction authors make to give

readers more power to contribute to the narrative and fill the gaps effectively as the story

unfolds (Kidd & Castano, 2013).

Another component of literary fiction is the activation or increase in a reader’s

Theory of Mind resulting from reading a work of fiction. This criterion is very closely

tied with the previous one, as the reader can only interpret information that is given in the

text, so it is challenging to read the minds of characters when the substance is unclear.

Works of literary fiction lead to an increase in a reader’s Theory of Mind, because they

are invited to read the minds of the characters in the story (Kidd & Castano, 2013).

Readers of literary fiction are challenged to gain access to the characters’ subjective

experiences by using their ToM and their imaginations (Kidd & Castano, 2013). While

most story types require the activation of imagination, the distinction between popular

and literary fiction lies in the function of the imagination. In popular fiction, imagination

allows readers to visualize the world that is clearly described by the text; this may be

easily predictable thanks to its conformity to genre expectations. In literary fiction

however, readers rely on imagination to fill in the gaps in the content/plot/character

development; the reader must attempt to read the mind of the characters portrayed,

increasing their ToM because their expectations have been challenged. By using

imagination in such a way so as to expand ToM, readers of literary fiction are granted

some amount of authorship, as they are invited to creatively fill in the gaps they

encounter. So, if the character exhibits behavior that is not fully explained, the reader is

able to take the previously illustrated information of that character (e.g. past action

behaviors and verbal behaviors) and creatively infer why the character acted in that

specific way.

Literary fiction is a genre that challenges readers to encounter characters that are

complex, confusing, and often very real as a result; to fully understand and engage with

these characters, readers are often invited to empathize with the characters they

encounter. Another criterion that Kidd and Castano set up for distinguishing between

popular and literary fiction is the impact that a work has on the readers’ empathy levels.

As previously stated, the results of their research show that literary fiction leads to an

increase in reader empathy and ToM, but this does not often occur with popular fiction

(Kidd & Castano, 2013). In his article, “Moral Education at Hogwarts: The Role of

Empathy in the Moral Life,” Dr. Gregory Bassham discusses the importance of empathy

in moral development and points out that the Harry Potter books incorporate a lot of

moral education throughout the series (Bassham, 2012). As the characters mature, they

begin to recognize the importance of acceptance and equality as opposed to segregation

and hatred of those that are “other,” and they come to these realizations by means of

engaging with empathy (Bassham, 2012). Empathy is a character trait exhibited by a lot

of the “good guys” in the Harry Potter books, as characters such as Harry and

Dumbledore are willing and able to imaginatively enter into the experiences of others so

to better understand their behaviors (Bassham, 2012). While the Harry Potter books

clearly exhibit moments of characters empathizing with each other, increases in character

empathy do not necessarily correlate with increases in reader’s empathy. Instead, this

criterion encourages readers to pay attention to the shadow and substance and experience

increases in empathy organically from the text, which is often a result of the reader

response to gaps in the text, as previously described. Kidd and Castano’s research shows

that reading literary fiction results in a statistically significant increase in reader empathy,

likely due to the gapping previously explained (Kidd & Castano, 2013).

Although many scholars have assessed the Harry Potter books with regard to the

literariness of their content, I have not encountered researchers that analyzed the HP

books specifically for their stylistic literariness based on the criteria listed above. This

chapter offers a set of criteria which will guide my analysis of the Harry Potter books in

the next chapter, during which I will conduct a close-reading analysis of “Flesh, Blood,

and Bone,” a chapter in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

Criteria for Literariness

1. Unusual semantic devices such as similes or metaphors

2. Phonological devices such as consonance, assonance, and rhyme

3. Unusual grammatical style that defy the normal subject, predicate order

4. Writerly texts, as opposed to readerly texts

5. Theory of Mind activation and increase

6. Empathy activation and increase

The Literariness of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

This chapter will examine specific excerpts from the Harry Potter series, as I

attempt to analyze their literariness. To refrain from cherry-picking passages that confirm

my claims directly, I hoped to analyze specific passages chosen by the speakers at the

conference in Scotland previously referenced. However, after perusing the documents

provided by these authors, I found that many of them discussed specific themes that

spanned the series (e.g. friendship, good vs. evil, love, bravery, slavery, etc.) as opposed

to dissecting specific passages. So, I have chosen to analyze passages during which Harry

matures immensely, the plot becomes more complex, and the general feeling of the book

is altered. While I based my choice of passage on the content of that passage, I will be

analyzing the passage based on its formal literariness using the criteria from the last

chapter.

After some personal research and conversations with family members that are

hardcore HP fans, I decided to analyze a section of the fourth book, Harry Potter and the

Goblet of Fire (GF). This book is significantly different from the previous three, starting

with the most obvious difference: the length. While the first three books in this series are

well under 500 pages, GF is 734 pages total. In addition to its length, this book is about

Harry’s involvement in an international wizarding student competition called the

Triwizard Tournament, so the Hogwarts bubble is temporarily popped. The incorporation

of more culturally diverse characters encourages Harry, Ron, and Hermione to expand

their worlds and learn about people, cultures, and traditions outside of those they interact

with regularly at Hogwarts. The biggest difference is that at the end of this book, Lord

Voldemort returns in the flesh. In the past three books, Voldemort was present but too

weak to directly engage with others. Instead, he borrowed the bodies of other people,

worked through servants, or hid while others did his bidding. At the end of GF, however,

Voldemort’s body is restored, more powerfully than ever. Harry and his friends deal with

countless challenges and obstacles as the year progresses, and at the end of this book,

Harry matures immensely as a result. He meets the man who murdered his parents and

countless others, battles him, and realizes that the world as he knew it will be completely

altered now that Voldemort has a body of his own. The world will be divided, and he

must learn how to navigate this new world as a teenager.

I will analyze the thirty-second chapter of GF entitled “Flesh, Blood, and Bone.”

In this chapter, Harry and Cedric are transported to a graveyard after touching the

Triwizard Cup simultaneously. They believe that touching this cup signifies the

victorious end to the Triwizard competition in which they participated the whole year, but

instead it is a trap. In this graveyard, Cedric is murdered in front of Harry. This is the first

time Harry directly experiences death (his parents were murdered when he was quite

young), and he is later asked to take Cedric’s body back to his family. This is a moment

of maturation for Harry, as he is called to act as a caretaker even though he is quite

young. After Cedric’s murder, Harry encounters a man named Wormtail in the graveyard

and many strange occurrences take place. Harry is bound to a headstone and gagged, then

Wormtail brings out a cauldron and starts creating a potion, and all the while, there is a

bundle of something alive stirring in a pile of robes that is terrifying to Harry. In this

chapter, Harry directly faces a darkness that has been flitting on the outskirts of the past

three books. This is the point in the series in which Harry realizes that he has power to

protect others, advocate for justice, and fight with love to destroy evil.

As mentioned previously, the content of a work does not make it literary fiction,

rather the delivery of the content and the text’s overall style are what truly classify the

work as literary fiction. The presenters at the conference in Scotland previously

mentioned may disagree with this claim, so allow me to further expand this concept.

Many of the presenters pointed to themes, specific characters, or large concepts that

spanned the series as the basis for their literary analysis. For example, Bassham writes

about the presence of empathy throughout the series, the similarities between Voldemort

and Hitler, and the interesting moral and personal growth that many characters

experiment throughout the series, specifically Snape, who was thought to be a “bad guy”

but is revealed to be one of Harry’s closest allies in the final book (Bassham, 2012).

Hitchcock, another conference speaker, analyzes the Harry Potter books as an allegory

for the story of Christ, pointing out the themes of sacrificial suffering, loneliness,

importance of forgiveness (Hitchcock, 2012). With these examples in mind, I would

argue that these points are important, but the delivery of this content is what makes it

literary.

So, after explaining the important plot information associated with this chapter, I

will now analyze the specific stylistic content of this passage to assess whether it is

literary or popular fiction. To do so, I will use the criteria outlined in the previous

chapter. The goal of this analysis is not to check off all criteria to label a text as popular

or literary. Instead, I will be analyzing the text based on a continuum that runs from

extremely popular to extremely literary, judging the family resemblance or similarities of

this passage to other works of fiction. Basically, if the text has more characteristics of a

literary work, I will classify it as such, but keep in mind that literariness is also on a

continuum.

A few criteria including what constitutes a writerly text and the involvement of

Theory of Mind will be discussed in conversation with other criteria. Both of those

criteria invite the reader to make inferences about the intention behind a character’s

behavior or speech; to use terminology previously explained, the reader is invited to

analyze the shadow of a character in order to infer the character’s inner substance

(Oatley, 2006). Some stylistic devices invite more reader involvement than others, and

the more the reader has to fill gaps and read the characters’ minds, the more literary the

text. Keeping these criteria in mind, I now begin my analysis on this chapter.

The first criterion to categorize a work as literary is the use of unusual semantic

devices such as similes or metaphors (Kidd & Castano, 2013). Although both are used to

compare two concepts, similes use “like” or “as” to do so while metaphors set up the

comparison without those words. According to Kidd & Castano (2013), literary texts

have more similes and metaphors than popular texts. Because I am not comparing this

book to any others, I will instead list and analyze the amount and type of unusual

semantic devices I find in this chapter. The mere presence of these devices in GF tips this

book out of the popular fiction category and into the literary fiction realm. During my

analysis, I found many examples of similes and metaphors, but I also judged the

literariness of each example. To do this, I labeled each example of a simile or metaphor

as either “conventional” or “novel.” Conventional comparisons are lexicalized and/or

entrenched in modern English while novel comparisons require the reader to engage their

imagination to comprehend the meaning. The phrase “gravelly voice” is an example of a

conventional comparison, as it is commonly used in our society; the reader will most

likely not imagine tiny rocks in the throat of the character being described. Instead, they

likely associate that phrase with a specific quality of sound. On the other hand, if a

character is described to have the voice like “a dehydrated camel,” the reader will most

likely need to pause their reading endeavors and imagine what that would sound like, as

this phrase is novel in describing a vocal characteristic (Dawe, 2018). While the use of

any simile or metaphor tips a book into the literary realm, the presence of novel

comparisons makes a book more literary. With these distinctions in mind, let us explore

some examples directly from the chapter “Flesh, Blood, and Bone” from Harry Potter

and the Goblet of Fire.

Conventional

Within the realm of conventional comparisons, there is another sliding scale

specifically that categorizes examples as more or less conventional. The most

conventional comparisons are easy to process and rarely draw images to mind when they

are stated or written and are therefore less literary. In other words, the reader knows

exactly what the author is trying to convey with the phrase, and readers are not

challenged to employ their imaginations to decode the phrases. Instead, the reader can

effortlessly experience the text. Conventional comparisons that are more literary on that

spectrum of conventionality invite the reader to bring an image or sensation to the front

of their minds. In other words, the reader must use his or her personal experiences to

imagine the sensation or image being described.

After I gathered a list of similes and metaphors, I divided them up again into two

categories: comparisons that have processing ease (less literary) and those that have

processing richness (more literary, use imagination). In this chapter, during his accidental

visit to the graveyard, Harry experiences pain in his scar unlike any he felt in the past. To

describe Harry’s pain, Rowling uses a few conventional comparisons with processing

ease, including “[Harry’s] scar exploded with pain” and “[his] head was about to split

open” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). These are conventional metaphors

because they are phrases often used to describe intense, physical pain, and they are

commonly used, so they are easily processed by the reader. With these comparisons, the

reader does not actually imagine Harry’s head being split open with an ax, or his skull

and brain literally exploding because of his pain. Instead, we associate the phrases

directly with painful sensations we have experienced and do not have to work hard to

process what Rowling is attempting to convey.

Comparisons that contain processing richness are scattered throughout this

chapter as well. In one example, Rowling describes the life form stirring in the bundle of

robes: “[i]t was as though Wormtail had flipped over a stone and revealed something

ugly, slimy, and blind” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). This is considered a

conventional simile because it is a comparison that is easy to process semantically due to

the use of imagery. This comparison requires little work on the reader’s part besides

pulling an image into the front of their mind’s eye. Many people have flipped over a

stone and felt disgusted or revolted by the creepy, multi-legged, slimy creatures that lurk

underneath, so the reader is invited to draw upon a similar experience and imagine how

Harry and Wormtail are feeling after seeing such an ugly, frightening image. Here, the

author calls the reader to use their imagination to visualize the comparison being

described. This extra effort is what makes this conventional comparison somewhat more

literary than the previous ones I examined.

Novel

There is also a sliding scale amongst the novel comparisons that can be split

between descriptive and substantial comparisons. Descriptive comparisons pull the reader

into the action of the plot and may help dramatically depict the scene and characters.

These comparisons call the reader to use their imagination a little bit less than in the other

type of novel comparison because they are describing behaviors and speech that can be

observed, that is, the shadow of the story rather than its substance. In a substantial

comparison, the writer gives insight into the themes of the book, characters and

motivations, calling the reader to use their world knowledge and imagination to fill in the

gaps of the metaphors. This type of comparison requires more reader involvement,

making it the more literary of the two types of comparisons. The more the reader is

invited to infer the substance behind an action or speech, the more imaginatively

productive is the example and thus the more literary the work.

Descriptive

Novel comparisons challenge the reader to engage his or her imagination more

creatively than conventional ones do, and descriptive comparisons dramatize characters,

scenes, and actions to do so. The following three examples include descriptive, novel

comparisons. For the first example, the being in the bundle of robes is what is left of the

humanity of Lord Voldemort, the villain of this whole series. Rowling describes

Voldemort’s face as something “[w]hiter than a skull, with wide, livid scarlet eyes and a

nose that was flat as a snake’s with slits for nostrils…” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and

Bone,” 2000). This comparison can be classified as novel because Rowling describes a

human face using animal features, and it is difficult to piece those features together to

create a visual image of this face. The reader cannot passively read this description

because Rowling defamiliarizes the reader’s experience of imagining faces, and her

description invites the reader to pause and pay close attention to the details given. The

reader is challenged to imagine the characteristics of a snake and human face combined,

which takes a fair amount of mental effort. Pausing even briefly to imagine this terrifying

face engages the reader with the text as they are pulled into the drama with Harry.

However, the reader must remember that this example provides detail about the external

shadow, as it does not invite the reader to supplement subjective information about what

this terrifying face is thinking or feeling.

In another example of a descriptive, novel comparison, Rowling describes the

cauldron (that holds the previously mentioned potion) as “a great stone belly,” which is a

novel way to describe such a container (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000).

Although I noted that a stone cauldron is unusual, as they are often made of metal, the

most significant defamiliarization in this example is the presence of the word “belly”

(Cauldron, n.d.). While a cauldron may be associated with a belly in that the food

prepared in it will likely end up in a human belly, this metaphor suggests that the

cauldron itself is a belly. Here, Rowling “collapses the conventional relationship of cause

(food preparation in a cauldron) and effect (putting the prepared food into one’s belly)

into a relation of identity,” and this defamiliarizes the reader immensely (Bruhn, 2019).

Later in the text, Rowling sets up yet another descriptive, novel comparison when

she claims that the sparks were “so blindingly bright that it turned all else to velvety

blackness” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). This description helps the reader

to imagine the contrast being observed: the sparks from the fire were so bright that the

textures and structures in the graveyard outside of the illuminated area seemed to be

covered by a large black piece of fabric. Darkness is not often described with texture

words, so the reader is invited to imagine what qualities of velvet can be attributed to this

darkness. Maybe the darkness is so infinite and impenetrable that it seems to be smooth

and somehow soft like the fabric of velvet feels. Maybe the overwhelming, infinite

darkness makes Harry feel claustrophobic, as if the graveyard is covered by a piece of

such fabric. Similar to the previous examples, this comparison invites the reader to

engage with the text in order to imagine the scenes being portrayed.

Transitional

The next two examples illustrate comparisons that are essentially descriptive,

even though they characterize a specific internal experience of Harry in this chapter.

According to Oatley, these invitations to interpret the internal experiences from a shadow

description help the reader determine the substance, but since the comparison makes the

substance explicit, the reader does not need to do all the work to infer this substance

The first transitional example occurs during the previously mentioned, explosive

scar-pain episode: “the pain in his scar reached such a pitch that he retched” (Rowling,

“Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). Here, Rowling describes Harry’s pain by comparing it

to sound, which is a novel association. In this metaphor, the reader is called to imagine

that pain has a loudness/volume. While this comparison does not give the reader

additional insight into Harry or the other characters’ minds, it allows the reader to

imagine Harry’s experience through this dramatic description of his pain. Apparently, the

volume dial of this pain is turned up so high that it makes Harry physically ill. This

comparison is another that causes the reader to pause and ponder the association between

the two concepts being compared, and this draws the reader further into the scene with

Harry.

While I have just outlined the distinction between novel and conventional comparisons, it is important to

point out that some comparisons can be classified as novel initially and transition into conventional if they are overused

(Bruhn, 2019). This transformation occurs a few times in the current chapter. For example, Rowling uses an interesting

novel metaphor when describing Voldemort as the bearer of a “high, cold voice” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone”,

2000). This association of temperature and sound of voice is interesting, as it calls the reader to imagine and sort

through the qualities of cold-ness and sound of voices. I have never heard someone with a cold voice, so I imagine that

hearing this voice would have the same sensation as if someone whispered in my ear. I might get goosebumps and want

to shrug my shoulders up to protect my ears and make myself smaller. While this began as a novel comparison,

Rowling uses this description for Voldemort’s voice two other times; once the reader has actively imagined this

sensation once, it will take less work the next two times, making it a more conventional comparison due to its frequent

presence/usage.

A similar situation happens when Rowling describes the surface of the water as “encrusted with diamonds”

(Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). The first time this comparison is used is quite effective in engaging the

reader’s imagination because the reader must imagine what diamonds and water may have in common. Diamonds are

slightly transparent, shiny, and reflective when lights hit them, so the reader is invited to imagine the water’s surface in

a similar way. Rowling uses this same comparison two more times when describing the “diamond surface of the water”

and “diamond sparks” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). By the third time, the reader can pass over this

comparison easily, as they have already done the necessary work.

Finally, Harry experiences an “icy surge of terror” when he figured out what was

in the bundle of robes, and this comparison is novel for sure (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood,

and Bone,” 2000). Terror is not something that we naturally associate with temperature. It

takes a moment of creative thinking to imagine this sensation. I imagine that Harry felt so

frightened that his breath caught, he got goosebumps, and he felt physically chilled, as he

would if he were immersed in ice water, except these sensations occur as a result of his

fear. This is a novel way of describing the physical responses to emotional sensations.

These metaphors draw the reader to the characters’ inner thoughts, but because they

contain an explicit reference to this substance, they do not require the same degree of

inferential work as a substantial metaphor, as you will soon see.

Substantial

Substantial comparisons demand increased reader involvement, as they ask the

reader to use their Theory of Mind and imaginations to infer the substance (inner

thoughts, feelings, motivations) behind the observable shadow (behavior, speech) given

in the text. A significant example of a substantial comparison occurs when Cedric dies.

The narrator explains that “He was dead,” so the reader knows this information, but

Harry is struggling to process the sudden murder of his friend (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood,

and Bone,” 2000). Because he cannot fully comprehend what just happened, Harry can

only describe what Cedric’s body looks like: his eyes are “blank and expressionless as the

windows of a deserted house” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). Again,

Rowling uses strange descriptors to defamiliarize the reader, as features of a human being

are not usually compared to building/structural features. The reader is challenged to

deduce what Rowling wants him or her to take away from the comparison and imagine

what qualities of a house could be associated with a human face. A deserted house may

have broken, dark, sad-looking windows, giving the house an overall feeling of

loneliness. A human face may have similar features if the individual is dead, including

dark, lifeless eyes. Although houses can be deserted, they can also be re-occupied, and

the reader implies (by observing the shadow) that Harry is hoping that the house

(Cedric’s eyes/body) becomes re-inhabited so that somehow, Cedric will come back to

life. This comparison allows the reader to imagine how lonely Harry must feel now that

his friend is gone, and shows his fear, as a deserted house can often be perceived as being

slightly creepy as well. Harry has never experienced death like this before and seeing the

corpse of his friend is probably (understandably) quite unnerving. This comparison

allows the reader to enter Harry’s mind as he struggles to process Cedric’s death, and

they can comprehend his fear, loneliness, and despair. Although this is a very productive

example, it is notably the only example of a substantial comparison in this section, so

clearly, Rowling did not incorporate many intentional gaps in her work.

Phonological devices: alliteration, rhyme

The second criterion of literariness is the presence of phonological devices such

as consonance, assonance, and rhyme (Kidd & Castano, 2013). When a work contains

these phonological devices, it is considered more literary than popular (Menninghaus,

Wagner, Wassiliwizky, Jacobsen, & Knoop, 2017). However, I will add another layer of

complexity to this. If a device is iconic, the phrase is considered more literary because it

resembles the concept being described. An iconic pattern imitates the thing being

described or the idea being conveyed; this connection between the object and descriptive

pattern is pleasing to perceive and invites the reader to experience “phonetic-semantic

integration” and a deeper understanding of the phrase (Bruhn, 2019). While the presence

of any of these devices makes a work more literary than popular, the presence of iconic

devices makes it even more literary on the scale. A device that is not iconic simply

describes the concept without mimicking its qualities.

Non-Iconic Sound Effects

First let us examine some alliterations used by Rowling in this chapter “Flesh,

Blood, and Bone.” Rowling provides at least three examples of alliteration that are not

iconic according to the distinctions previously set. Two of these examples utilize a

repeated “h” sound: Harry and Cedric see a “house on the hillside;” and later, “Harry

heard the high, cold voice” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). The “h” sound in

these alliterations does not point to characteristics of a house, hillside, voices, or coldness

so these examples are not iconic alliteration. The third example in this set exemplifies a

repeated “k” sound: Wormtail “carried the creature to the rim of the cauldron,” and this

example is also not iconic (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). The repeated k

sound does not point to any characteristics of the creature or cauldron, so it does not call

the reader to further engagement with the text other than to simply imagine what is being

described. Although these are non-iconic examples, there is still a certain amount of

literary pleasure that results from perceiving these patterns of alliteration in the text.

Iconic

Rowling provides a few examples of iconic alliteration that provide an obvious

connection through resemblance between the phonological and semantic “planes” or

“levels of expression” (Bruhn, 2019). The following phrases are examples of iconic

alliteration: “Wormtail was whimpering;” “snake slithered away;” “sickening splash

”

(Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). The first example shows repetition of the

“w” and “m” sounds, which are commonly produced when a person is crying or

whimpering. The second example with the repeated “s” sounds like a snake hissing. The

final example begins with repeated “s” sounds which are continuant consonants, followed

by the stop consonants “k,” and “p,” which make the reader pause before the final part of

the phrase (“-lash”). This combination of sounds mimics the initial sound of something

solid hitting liquid, and the final “sh” sound is also continuant, mimicking the experience

of a splash falling back onto the water surface. This combination of stop and start mimics

the sound of a splash as it hits the water. These examples absorb the reader into the story

and exemplify the relation between phonetic pattern and semantic content of the words

involved. With an iconic sound effect, the reader experiences the pleasure of the sound

pattern, but he or she also recognizes that the pattern imitates the idea or thing being

expressed. Iconic sound patterns are more literary than non-iconic patterns because of

this added pleasure.

“Sickening splash” is also an example of a metaphor, as the splash is being compared to an

uncomfortable, physical state of being ill. This is one example that shows that the devices outlined in this

chapter interact with one another in varying degrees, while still individually contributing to the overall

literariness of the work.

Rhyme

Next, we will examine the presence of rhymes in Rowling’s work. Rhymes, like

examples of alliteration, can be divided into iconic and non-iconic categories. To

reiterate, iconic rhymes are more literary than non-iconic rhymes. An example of a

simple rhyme that is not iconic is the following: “outline of a fine, old house” (Rowling,

“Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). This example has repeated long “i” sounds, but this

repetition does not represent any specific characteristics of a house. Because the

phonological content of this example does not reinforce the semantic content, this

example is considered non-iconic.

However, when Wormtail “stuffed it [a rag/gag] roughly into Harry’s mouth,” the

repetition of vowel sounds here mimics the experience of being gagged, as “uff” and

“ough” sounds are associated with that experience (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,”

2000). “F” is a fricative consonant that temporarily blocks off the speaker’s air supply

when spoken, whereas vowels are less restricted, so when reader this phrase, the reader

experiences changes in airflow, just like Harry does in this scene; this repetition gives the

reader a greater understanding of the semantics of the phrase (Bruhn, 2019). Because the

phonological patterns in this phrase mimic the experience being described, this is an

iconic rhyme. Similarly, when Harry is tied to the headstone, he tries “struggling

hopelessly against the ropes” to avoid being touched by Wormtail; this rhyming pattern

of the long “o” sound in addition to the varied vocalization of consonant sounds links the

reader to Harry’s hopelessness. “P” is a bilabial consonant, so when this letter is

pronounced, the speaker’s air supply is partially stopped because both lips are involved

and close in order to pronounce this letter (Bruhn, 2019). “G,” however, is a velar

consonant, articulated with the tongue at the back of the mouth (Bruhn, 2019). The

specific sounds in this phrase are pronounced in different areas of the mouth, so the

phonological content of this passage directly mirrors the struggle and hopelessness that

Harry experiences, so it too can be classified as iconic. Rowling incorporates many

productive, iconic examples of sound patterning, so I believe that the examples in this

section tilt GF even more into the realm of literary fiction rather than popular fiction. The

iconic examples blend the phonological and semantic experiences and are powerful

methods to invite the reader into authorship to unpack the implications of the sentences.

Grammatical style

Punctuation

Another criterion of literariness is the use of unusual grammatical style that

somehow defies the normal subject-predicate order (Kidd & Castano, 2013). “Flesh,

Blood, and Bone” contains many examples of normal sentence structures when the

subject is followed by the predicate, and the prose contains a mixture of narrative and

dialogue. However, there are a few times when this standard structure is broken. In these

instances, the reader perceives the stylistic change. For example, Rowling uses this

phrase at the beginning of a sentence that describes Harry’s reaction to Cedric’s death:

“For a second that contained an eternity,” followed by a normal subject-predicate

independent clause (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). This is an effective

stylistic decision because it further delays the reader’s exposure to information, stretching

our experience into a small, suspenseful “eternity” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,”

2000). Rowling uses that same style in a variety of places in this chapter, and each time,

she invites the reader to slow down by delaying the communication of information.

Rowling’s use of variable punctuation helps build suspense in this section and

pulls the reader deeper into the experiences of the characters. For example, when they

enter the graveyard, Harry and Cedric feel as if they are being watched, and soon enough,

a hooded figure begins walking towards them in the darkness: “And — several paces

nearer, the gap between them closing all the time — Harry saw that the thing in the

person’s arms looked like a baby… or was it merely a bundle of robes?” (Rowling,

“Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). This example shows an abrupt change in sentence

structure and punctuation that invites the reader to experience the situation with Harry.

The main subject and verb in the example are “Harry saw,” but there is a lot of

information preceding the main clause structure. The sentence begins as a declarative

sentence during which Rowling describes the scene and the characters in it with the

statement, “Harry saw that the thing in the person’s arms looked like a baby” (Rowling,

“Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). Then, after the ellipsis, the sentence turns interrogative

and we enter Harry’s mind as he processes the unfolding events: “or was it merely a

bundle of robes?” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). Because of the

grammatical structure of this sentence, it feels panicked, jumbled, disorganized, and

confused, all of which are feelings that Harry may be experiencing. In this example, the

grammar invites the reader to enter the mind of Harry, therefore stimulating our Theory

of Mind. In this example, Rowling uses her grammatical style to help the reader

experience situations alongside Harry, and we are challenged to interpret his emotions by

reading through the lines of text.

In another example, Rowling uses semi-colons to punctuate Harry’s extreme pain:

“It was agony such as he had never felt in all his life; his wand slipped from his fingers as

he put his hands over his face; his knees buckled; he was on the ground and he could see

nothing at all, his head was about to split open” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,”

2000). The author’s repeated use of semi-colons creates parataxis by juxtaposing phrases

that are not otherwise related. This grammatical style invites the reader to engage with

the shadow provided in the text to interpret the substance behind the actions and fully

comprehend the sentence’s meaning. In this quote, the semi-colons imply a close

relationship to phrases that aren’t otherwise related if separated. This juxtaposition invites

the reader to fill in the gaps and infer the relationship between these events. The pain that

Harry is experiencing causes many events to occur as a result: he drops his wand, covers

his face, cannot support his own weight, and is blinded by the intense pain in his head.

Each event is worse than the previous one as the pain increases, and the reader begins to

comprehend the intense physical reaction that Harry experiences.

In another example, Rowling uses punctuation, specifically ellipses, to invite the

reader into Harry’s mind and comprehend his fear: “Harry watched it [the bundle of

robes], and his scar seared with pain again . . . and he suddenly knew that he didn’t want

to see what was in those robes . . . he didn’t want that bundle opened . . .” (Rowling,

“Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). This passage puts the reader in Harry’s point of view as

he faces this frightening situation. The word “again” is important, because it invites the

reader to recall that the first time Harry’s scar hurt in the graveyard, when a horrible

event followed the pain…the death of his friend. This connection between pain and

danger are made by the reader, as Rowling never explicitly states in this passage that the

two are connected, so this is an example in the text where the reader must act in a

writerly way, inferring the substance from the shadow presented. In this case, the ellipses

are not solely building suspense to delay information for dramatic purposes; instead, they

allow the reader to tangibly relate to Harry’s fear, as he is obviously terrified of what is

coming next. He seems to be wishing that time would slow down so that he will not find

out what is in the bundle.

The examples of unusual grammatical style in “Flesh, Blood, and Bone” slide GF

even further into the realm of literary fiction. Rowling’s style challenges the reader’s

grammatical expectations and encourages the reader to slow down and decode the

implications of the text, inviting the reader into a writerly experience of this chapter of

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

Font style

Another significant stylistic device is Rowling’s use of italics throughout this

chapter. In a recurring example, Harry’s thoughts, fears and distress are conveyed

through italicized phrases. Harry is extremely frightened of whatever is wrapped in the

robes, and when Wormtail lowers this being into the cauldron filled with the potion,

Harry’s thinks the following: “Let it drown…please…let it drown” (Rowling, “Flesh,

Blood, and Bone,” 2000). Later, he repeats this mantra: “Let it have drowned…let it have

gone wrong…” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). Further on, he tries to

convince himself that the chant and potion were unsuccessful: “It’s gone wrong…it’s

drowned…please…please let it be dead…” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000).

This italicization eliminates the necessity to read Harry’s mind based on his shadow of

outward actions. Instead, we read exactly what Harry is thinking. We directly perceive

his distress and pleading or praying to the night. Although the reader is unsure to whom

or what Harry is speaking, we are acutely aware that he is in deep distress. These

passages show Rowling’s intentional parallelism as she repeats these pleas. The repetition

and font style break Rowling’s typical prose style, so the reader must pay close attention

at these points.

In another example, Rowling uses italics to bring out the tone in dialogue. At the

very beginning of this chapter, Cedric speaks to Harry about the events that just occurred

and asks him, “Did anyone tell you the cup was a Portkey?” (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and

Bone,” 2000). This italicization helps the reader enter the mind of Cedric, as his tone

seems accusatory. Cedric and Harry grew in friendship during the year’s trials and

challenges and began helping each other along the way. When it was time to reach out

and take the Triwizard Cup, the two friends took the cup at the same time so that they

could split the honor and prize money. However, when they touched the cup, they were

transported to the graveyard, which is where we find them now. When Cedric says this to

Harry, the emphasized word “you” implies that Cedric is upset and frustrated, as he

seems to accuse Harry of keeping secrets from him. As soon as Harry assures Cedric that

he had no idea that this would occur, Cedric’s tone and word choice relaxes, and he

casually says, “Wands out, d’you reckon?” bringing the blame out of his voice (Rowling,

“Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000; Strouse, 2019). In response to this question, Harry

agrees with Cedric’s suggestion, and the description that follows says that Harry was glad

that Cedric suggested that so that he didn’t have to say anything, implying that Harry is

much more nervous about the situation than the narrator is telling us. The dialogue and

descriptions in this passage allow the readers to enter the minds of Cedric and Harry and

exercise their mind-reading skills.

A final example in this chapter associates italics to magic or supernatural qualities

of speech. Before Voldemort has a body of his own, his speech is recorded using italics.

Quickly after arriving to the graveyard, Wormtail receives orders to “Kill the spare” from

a high-pitched, unidentified voice (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). We learn

later that this creepy, murderous, bodiless voice belongs to Voldemort. However, at the

end of the chapter, after he emerges from the potion in the flesh, Voldemort’s words are

no longer italicized. Once again, Rowling uses the font style to illustrate the magical

powers and mystery of Voldemort, which is an effective tool for grabbing the reader’s

attention.

As we know, literary texts are classified as such because they often contain many

stylistic devices that invite the reader to actively fill in gaps in the text instead of

passively reading for the sole purpose of entertainment. In “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,”

Rowling inserts three lines of chant/poetry and in doing so, she breaks many stylistic

patterns previously set up in this chapter which is primarily prose/dialogue. While he is

creating the potion in the giant cauldron, Wormtail speaks this mystical chant or spell to

the night:

“Bone of the father, unknowingly given, you will renew your son!”

“Flesh — of the servant — w-willingly given

— you will — revive — your

master.”

“B-blood of the enemy…forcibly taken…you will resurrect your foe.” (Rowling,

“Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000).

Notably, these phrases do not appear immediately next to each other in the original

chapter. In fact, these three short lines are scattered throughout the chapter, surrounded

by prose, but the italics are the first clue that they are related. Over time, however, the

evident parallelism firmly establishes their relationship, so for these reasons, I thought it

best to analyze these lines simultaneously.

This chant is different than the other examples of spells throughout the HP series

because spells are often depicted as short phrases, often one or two words. For example,

earlier in the chapter, the spell that killed Cedric was “Avada Kedavra,” which illustrates

the typical spell formula (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). With the current,

In the second line of the chant, the sentence is not very smooth because the speaker, Wormtail, is

stuttering in anticipation of self-harm. This is an example of ToM activation as a result of unusual spelling,

illustrating yet another interaction between literary devices. During this scene, Wormtail cuts of his hand

using a dagger and an upward swinging motion. While this seems like a strange detail fixate on, this action

reveals Wormtail’s fear and distress as he prepares for what he must do. A dagger seems to be a bad tool to

choose for this task, as it is small and usually used to stab, not cut through materials. Possibly, Wormtail

may have been ordered to use such a tool or feels that he must punish himself, because a dagger would

inflict intense pain. He uses an upward swing which would require more force than a swift downward

motion, so this invites the reader to use their ToM, mind-reading skills to infer that maybe, although he

must perform this task, he does not want to harm himself, or hopes that he will somehow fail. In the

previous HP book (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban), the readers learn that Wormtail is the man

that betrayed Harry’s parents to Lord Voldemort, so he was the man responsible for their murder. We

learned that Wormtail is a coward who idolizes strong people so that he is protected. At the end of the third

book, the readers (and Harry) hate Wormtail. However, in this scene, when he must sacrifice a part of his

body to bring back his master, I cannot help but hope that he is somehow spared from this pain. Somehow,

Rowling invites the reader to empathize (to an extent) with the man that ruined Harry’s life with his selfish

actions.

three-lined chant, the reader is invited to pay more attention due to the italics, which

point to the mystical and magical quality of the language, as well as the length of this

spell. In addition to italics, Rowling uses a range of poetic devices to make this passage

stand out, beginning with “apostrophe.” Apostrophe addresses something non-human as

though it can understand and act in a human way. In this poem/chant/spell, Wormtail

address “bone,” “flesh,” and “blood” as though they have human qualities (Rowling,

“Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). These objects are addressed by Wormtail as “you” and

apparently have qualities that will revive Voldemort.

In addition to the apostrophe, Rowling introduces a parallelism between the lines,

a tactic that usually suggests similar qualities between concepts. For instance, “Bone,”

“Flesh,” and “Blood” are in parallel position in the three lines, which is logical as these

are all parts of a human body that can be seen. Much stranger is Rowling’s parallel

placement of “father,” “servant,” and “enemy,” as these are concepts that are not often

associated with one another. Is Rowling trying to break the normal understanding of these

words to challenge the reader’s expectations? For example, should a “father” be thought

of as a “servant” and/or an “enemy”? This may be another example of Rowling breaking

conventional understandings or associations between words by defamiliarizing the reader

in this way, inviting puzzlement and therefore additional cognitive load and processing.

(Later in the series, we learn that Voldemort had a complicated, negative relationship

with his father, so this may be a bit of foreshadowing for the reader.) The parallelism

between “unknowingly,” “w-willingly,” “forcibly” is significant, as these words are not

often associated with one another. In fact, “willingly” and “forcibly” and are opposites

describing participation in this magical ritual, and “unknowingly” illustrates ignorance of

the situation. This parallelism illustrates the different relationships that father, servant and

enemy may have with the thing being transformed by the potion. The parallelism between

“renew,” “revive,” and “resurrect” is logical and familiar, as these words are easily

associated with one another. Finally, the words “son,” “master,” “foe” are not easily or

often associated with one another, but these are all roles that the thing being created has

played, which is why they are juxtaposed in this way. The parallelism in this chant

creates puzzling semantic relationships, and these examples force the reader to fill in the

gaps to comprehend Rowling’s meaning. The examples in this section are strong enough

to tip GF even further into the literary realm, because they invite the reader to search for

implications using the available text to do so.

This chapter includes a detailed analysis of “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” and my

conclusion from this analysis is that GF can in fact be classified as a literary text due to

the number and productivity of the examples provided. Overall, there are more novel

comparisons than conventional comparisons, tipping this book into the land of literary

fiction. However, I will classify this work as moderately literary because of the number

of examples within the subcategories. For example, in GF, there are more examples with

processing ease than those with processing richness, and there are more descriptive

examples than substantial examples. The division of examples within these subcategories

is significant because examples with processing ease and descriptive examples are less

literary than their counterparts. On the other hand, the division of examples in the sound

effect category are extremely productive and their presence makes the work more

literary. For example, there are more examples of iconic sound effects over non-iconic

sound effects, and there are twelve significant examples of Rowling’s use of unusual

grammar in this section. While Rowling has countless examples following the standard

sentence structure, these twelve examples are prominent and productive, as they

effectively defamiliarize the reader. The final chapter will discuss the importance of these

seemingly small categorizations, and the importance of this research in the world of

academia.

Accio Empathy?

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is a work that can likely be classified as

literary fiction, according to the criteria established by Kidd and Castano and others,

outlined in the previous chapters. While a work need not include all criteria to be labeled

as literary, interestingly, the portion of GF that I read meets all the criteria, nudging this

book towards literary as opposed to popular fiction. The previously analyzed chapter

contains many examples of similes, metaphors, rhymes and alliterations, unusual

grammar, and activation of ToM and empathy, and the mere presence of these devices

slides the book along the scale away from popular and into the realm of literary fiction.

While the analysis I did was important for me to learn more about the cognitive

and empathy effects of a book in my favorite series, my analysis did not follow a specific

scientific method or procedure, so my work is not a replicable experiment. To expand

upon this work, I would propose a future study in which Harry Potter and the Goblet of

Fire is empirically measured for literariness and empathy and ToM activation as in the

Kidd and Castano experiments (2013, 2016). In these experiments, expert raters including

literary prize jurors judged the texts based on the presence of metaphor and other devices

(similar to my method) and analyzed the character development and complexity to

categorize texts as literary or popular (Kidd, Ongis, & Castano, 2016). To classify GF, I

believe this professional analysis would be beneficial, and then researchers should

determine the empathy and ToM activation that results from reading an excerpt from this

book, as in Kidd and Castano’s experiment, using a standardized empathy test (Kidd,

Ongis, & Castano, 2016). My hands-on analysis focused on examining literary devices

and, in certain especially literary instances, interpreting gaps in the text to infer the

substance from the observable shadow. However, to analyze literariness in a more

standardized way, researchers have developed a computer program to attempt to quantify

the literariness of a text by analyzing the words in a text (Kidd, Ongis, & Castano, 2016).

This quantification points out the reflective function (RF) of a work, and if a work has a

higher RF score according to the computer program, then the text is often classified as

literary fiction. However, it is important to note that RF scores are not the most

significant method for determining literariness. In Kidd and Castano’s recent experiment

(2016), researchers combined measures of literariness in order to categorize the excerpts

they used in their experiment. They relied on expert jurors, as previously described, but

also determined the RF score of the same texts. A significant note is that one of the texts

that was classified as literary had the lowest RF score of the examples chosen. This is

interesting because it shows that RF does not catch all components of what makes a text

literary, specifically examples of gapping. For texts that include little gapping, RF is

probably a good measure of literariness, but for texts that invite the reader to gather the

implications that lie between the text itself, RF is not a good measure of literariness. My

analysis of “Flesh, Blood, and Bone” in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire suggests that

the book does not contain many examples of gapping and instead contains many

comparisons or other literary devices that are found within the text, so RF would most

likely be a good measure of literariness for this work. By combining my analysis with an

empirical measure, this potential experiment may provide further evidence as to whether

GF is in fact literary or not and if it causes similar empathy effects as works of literary

fiction.

An important factor to examine in this conversation is the level of register that

Rowling was aiming to provide. As many know, the Harry Potter books are written at a

level primarily for children in early adolescence, a neutral register, although people of all

ages enjoy the series. So, Rowling possibly intended the balance of novel and

conventional devices to suit her audience.

Children process literature and empathy differently from adults, so it is possible

that the empathy effects are different depending on the age of the reader. According to

recent research, children acquire the ability to empathize over the course of early

development, and this impacts their social interactions. One hypothesis of empathy

development suggests that there are five different stages: (1) newborn reactive cry occurs

when infants reflect the emotions of those around them (e.g. cry when others cry); (2)

egocentric empathic distress is the next stage in which children recognize the emotions of

others without being overwhelmed or distressed; (3) quasi-egocentric empathy is the next

stage during which children learn how to console others in the face distress; (4) veridical

empathic distress is the following stage during which children can understand that the

feelings of another person are different from their own; (5) empathic distress beyond the

situation is the final stage which occurs in late childhood and during this stage, empathy

is not restricted to one situation, but is instead generalized (Licata, Williams, & Paulus,

2016). When the readers meet the characters of the first Harry Potter book, Harry and his

friends are approximately 11 years old. According to this theory of empathy

development, the Hogwarts students are most likely in the veridical empathic distress

stage (4) and can recognize the emotions of other individuals and cognitively process the

emotions of others separately from their own. For example, when they are in the

graveyard, Harry can recognize that Cedric’s nerves and fear about their situation are

different than his own emotions (Rowling, “Flesh, Blood, and Bone,” 2000). In another

theory of empathy development, recent research suggests that affective and cognitive

empathy increase in girls as they develop from childhood to adolescence while these

decrease in boys in that same age range (Overgaauw, Rieffe, Broekhof, Crone, &

Güroglu, 2017). This gender theory is reflected in Rowling’s writing specifically in the

fourth book, when the characters are about 14 years old. Over the course of the year,

Hermione becomes dedicated to a cause that hopes to free house elves, magical creatures

that often perform tasks such as cooking and cleaning and must work with a family or

institution until they are freed. Hermione claims that the house elves are enslaved to their

human masters, and suddenly starts a movement called Society for the Promotion of

Elfish Welfare (SPEW) after feeling deeply troubled by their fate (Rowling, “The

Unforgivable Curses,” 2000). When she announces her society to Ron and Harry, they

seem neutral about the situation. Although they join the movement, they do not invest

themselves in this cause as Hermione does. It is not until the seventh book, when they are

about 17 years old, that Ron becomes a dedicated house elf supporter and protector.

During the final battle at Hogwarts, many characters engage in a battle to the death

against Voldemort and his supporters, showing their alliance and support to Harry.

During this intense battle, Ron rushes to the kitchen to protect the house-elves by

removing them from harm’s way, gaining an overwhelming amount of appreciation from

Hermione (Rowling, The Battle of Hogwarts, 2007). This example shows that Rowling’s

text represents gendered differences in empathy development.

Notably, children interact with text differently than adults do, so it is possible that

the interpretation of substance and empathetic results may be missed by children reading

this series. The reader must interact directly with the text itself because the writer is

typically removed from the work after publication (Kaplan, 2013). Because the reader

does not have direct access to the mind of the author, they are invited to interpret the text;

however, each reader brings their own experiences to the text, so sometimes

interpretations are different than what the author intended. According to recent research,

literary processing abilities usually evolve as individuals go through school because of

their increased exposure to written, spoken, and world experiences (Kaplan, 2013). One

article explains the development of narrative processing and claims that by age 8, readers

recognize main character goals and intention behind behavior. At age 10, readers

appreciate the causal relationship between series or episodes. Early adolescence (appx 14

years old) is the first time that readers integrate motivations of characters and events

together and use world knowledge to inform comprehension as well. When reading

narrative texts at a younger age, children report facts and events, but later in adolescence,

readers can evaluate and interpret these texts more completely (Kaplan, 2013). According

to Kaplan, younger readers rely on their knowledge of the world rather than information

given in the text to give meaning to text (Kaplan, 2013). 7

graders have more mature

processing of narrative due to their higher-level self-monitoring and self-regulation tools

as well as more experience with literature and the world in general; they related more to

the characters in the text. 11

graders understood texts as whole entities and could recall

and make meaning from the information given. They can comprehend what is implicit

and evaluate the texts, partially due to their greater autonomy (Kaplan, 2013)

We know that empathy levels can increase as a result of exposure to literary

fiction, and it is possible that the Harry Potter books may have similar effects. I believe

that the findings of this project may add valuable information to the controversy

surrounding the Harry Potter books, as some religious groups ban these books from

homes, schools, and libraries around the world. Some vocal fundamentalist Christians

that believe the Bible to be the literal truth from God claim that Rowling’s books are

appalling and should not be read to children (Tucker, 2017). Some extreme groups have

organized public book burnings across the United States, claiming that the content of the

series is Satanic, anti-family, and promotes violence in children (Kennedy, 2018;

Maughan, 2001; Tucker, 2017). However, based on the research in this thesis previously

stated, evidently, content is not the most important factor in analyzing the effects of a

work. While it is important to protect children from harmful and violent content during

their development, the content in the Harry Potter books has very little to do with their

potential empathy effects. As previously stated, the empathy effects occur as a result of

the literariness of the work, due to the presence of literary devices. If this is the case, that

the content is not what is important for the development of empathy in children, and I

would argue that these books should be encouraged instead of banned in the homes of

children all over the world. If children are encouraged to read these books instead of

banned from doing so, they will certainly experience the ToM activation that occurs

when readers experience fiction, and this will help them to develop improved social

skills. Additionally, children may experience an increase in empathy as a result of

reading this book, and that is another

Clearly, fiction is a powerful tool that has the potential to increase empathy

amongst other cognitive and emotional effects, but the clearest results are observable at

later stages of empathy and literary development. When readers are in the later stages of

adolescence, they will likely experience the most notable increases in empathy because of

reading literary fiction. This is a significant finding because currently with the Common

Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) in the education system in the United States,

children are encouraged to read more “complex” texts than stories and narratives

(Zunshine, “The Secret Life of Fiction,” 2015). According to the CCSSI, as children

transition from middle school to the end of high school, the percentage of literary texts in

the curriculum should decrease as the percentage of informational texts increases. CCSSI

researchers claim that this shift is crucial for the development of a richer vocabulary, as

this apparently “predicts academic success” (Zunshine, “The Secret Life of Fiction,”

2015). However, there is little to no research that supports the claim that informational

texts enrich children’s vocabulary more so than stories and literature, yet there is a large

amount of research that suggests that children’s vocabulary is positively correlated to the

development of theory of mind (Zunshine, “The Secret Life of Fiction,” 2015). These

findings suggest that students should be reading at least the same amount or more fiction

than informational text as they continue through middle school and high school, and my

own experience makes this case.

Re-visiting the Re-visiting the Harry Potter series as an adult reader allowed me

to experience a depth of Rowling’s writing that I did not previously appreciate. If these

books were forbidden to me, as they are to many children, I would not have experienced

the transformation that I did and will likely carry with me into my future. Exploring the

impact that literary style has on the reader led me to question whether I can integrate both

literary and informational writing approaches into my future. Evidently, the content of a

work does not determine its literariness, so what would it look like to communicate non-

fiction information in a way that mimics the fictional literary style by incorporating

metaphors, rhymes, or altered grammatical style? Rowling’s moderately literary style

gave me access to Dumbledore’s wisdom, Hermione’s intelligence, Harry’s bravery, and

Neville’s loyalty, qualities that I would like to carry forward in my research and writing

as a science communicator.

Works Cited

Abram, M. (1981). Teori pengantar fiksi [Indonesia]. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Hanindita

Graha Wida.

Basic Sentence Structure. (2016, August 22). From Butte College:

http://www.butte.edu/departments/cas/tipsheets/grammar/sentence_structure.html

Bassham, G. (2012). Moral Education at Hogwarts: The Role of Empathy in the Moral

Life. A Brand of Fictional Magic: Reading Harry Potter as Literature (pp. 1-7).

St Andrews: The University of St Andrews School of English.

Bortolussi, M., & Dixon, P. (2015). Transport: Challenges to Metaphor. In L. Zunshine

(Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Literary Studies (pp. 525-540). Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Boyaltzis, C. (1992). Let the caged bird sing: Using literature in teaching developmental

psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 221-222.

Breithaupt, F. (2015). Empathic Sadism: How Readers Get Implicated. In L. Zunshine

(Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Literary Studies (pp. 440-459). Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Bruhn, D. M. (2019, February 28). Chapter 3 Advising Session. (E. Horning, Interviewer)

Burke, M., Kuzmičová, A., Mangen, A., & Schilhab, T. (2016). Empathy at the

confluence of neuroscience and empirical literary studies. Scientific Study of

Literature, 6(1), 6-41.

Caracciolo, M. (2014). The Experientiality of Narrative: An Enactivist Approach. Berlin:

de Gruyter.

Carlson, J. (1992). From Metropolis to Never-Neverland: Analyzing fictional characters

in a personality theory course. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 153-155.

Cauldron. (n.d.). From Oxford Dictionaries:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/cauldron

Cavanaugh, J. (1999). Integrating the humanities into a liberal arts course on adult

development and aging. Teaching of Psychology, 26, 51-52.

Cheetham, M., Hanggi, J., & Jancke, L. (2014). Identifying with fictive characters:

structural brain correlates of the personality trait "fantasy". Social Cognitive and

Affective Neuroscience, 1836-1844.

Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of

audiences with media characters. Mass Communication and Society, 245–264.

Cohen, J. (2006). Audience Identification with Media Characters. (J. Bryant, & P.

Vorderer, Eds.) Psychology of Entertainment, 183-197.

Crandall, S. J., & Marion, G. S. (2009). Identifying Attitudes Towards Empathy: An

Essential Feature of Professionalism. Academic Medicine, 84(9), 1174-1176.

Crawford, M. (1994). Rethinking the romance: Teaching the content and function of

gender stereotypes in the Psychology of Women course. Teaching of Psychology,

21, 151-153.

Dawe, D. I. (2018, Fall). Public Speaking Course Lecture. (E. Horning, Interviewer)

Djikic, M., Oatley, K., & Moldoveanu, M. C. (2013). Reading other minds. Scientific

Study of Literature, 3(1), 28-47.

Empathy. (n.d.). From Merriam-Webster : https://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/empathy

Flood, A. (2012). Harry Potter and the Order of the 60 Scholars Gets Mixed Initial

Reception. The Guardian.

Gibson, D. M. (2007). Empathizing with Harry Potter: The Use of Popular Literature in

Counselor Education. Joumal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and

Development, 46, 197-210.

Harry Potter Preorders Top 1 Million, Shows Strong Popularity Among Adults. (2007,

May 15). From Comscore: https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Blog/Harry-

Potter-Preorders-Top-1-Million-Shows-Strong-Popularity-Among-Adults

Hitchcock, C. (2012). “What about my Soul?” Empathy and Moral Responsibility in

Severus Snape. A Brand of Fictional Magic: Reading Harry Potter as Literature

(pp. 1-11). St. Andrews: The University of St. Andrews School of English.

Hsu, C., Conrad, M., & Jacobs, A. M. (2014). Fiction feelings in Harry Potter:

haemodynamic response in the mid-cingulate cortex correlates with immersive

reading experience. Neuroreport: For Rapid Communication of Neuroscience

Research, 25(17), 1356-1361.

Kaplan, D. (2013). Development of reading comprehension from middle childhood to

adolescence: Distributional and qualitative analyses of two genres. Written

language and literacy, 16(2), 208-240.

Kennedy, E. (2018, September 24). The Harry Potter Controversy: Book Banning and

Censorship Battles. From ThoughtCo.: https://www.thoughtco.com/harry-potter-

book-ban-controversy-626313

Kidd, D. C., & Castano, E. (2013, October 18). Reading Literary Fiction Improves

Theory of Mind. Science, pp. 377-380.

Kidd, D., Ongis, M., & Castano, E. (2016). On literary fiction and its effects on theory of

mind. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(1), 42-58.

Kustritz, A. (2015). Harry Potter's Slaves: The Ethics, Empathy, and Racial Difference in

Harry Potter. A Brand of Fictional Magic: Reading Harry Potter as Literature

(pp. 1-13). St Andrews: The University of St Andrews School of English.

Licata, M., Williams, A., & Paulus, M. (2016). The Development of Empathy in Early

Childhood. In D. F. Watt, & J. Panksepp (Eds.), Psychology and Neurobiology of

Empathy (pp. 111-148). Munich: Nova Science Publishers.

Livingstone, S. (1998). Relationships between media and audiences: Prospects for

audience reception studies. In T. a. Liebes (Ed.), Media, ritual and identity:

essays in honor of Elihu Katz (pp. 237-255). London: Routledge.

Mar, R. A. (2008). The function of fiction is the abstraction and simulation of social

experience. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(3), 173-192.

Maughan, S. (2001, February 8). Harry Potter Tops List of Banned Books. From The

New York Times on the Web:

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/01/02/04/abim/pw-

potter.html?mcubz=0

Meneses, R. W., & Larkin, M. (2017). The Experience of Empathy: Intuitive,

Sympathetic, and Intellectual Aspects of Social Understanding. Journal of

Humanistic Psychology, 57(1), 3-32.

Menninghaus, W., Wagner, V., Wassiliwizky, E., Jacobsen, T., & Knoop, C. A. (2017).

The emotional and aesthetic powers of parallelistic diction. Poetics, 63, 47-59.

Miall, D., & Kuiken, D. (1994). Foregrounding, Defamiliarization, and Affect: Response

to Literary Stories. Poetics, 22, 389-407.

Miall, D., & Kuiken, D. (1994). Understanding Literary Response. Discourse Processes,

17, 337-352.

Miall, D., & Kuiken, D. (1999). What is literariness? Three components of literary

reading. Discourse Processes, 28(2), 121-138.

Mitchell, R. &. (2015). The overlapping relationship between emotion perception and

theory of mind. Neuropsychologia, 70, 1-10.

Oatley, K. (2006). Simulation of Substance and Shadow: Inner Emotion and Outer

Behavior in Shakespeare’s Psychology of Character. College Literature, 33(1),

15-33.

Oatley, K., Mar, R. A., & Djikic, M. (2012). The Psychology of Fiction: Present and

Future. In I. Jaen, & J. J. Simon, Cognitive Literary Studies: Current Themes and

New Directions (pp. 235-249). Austin: University of Texas.

Overgaauw, S., Rieffe, C., Broekhof, E., Crone, E. A., & Güroglu, B. (2017). Assessing

Empathy across Childhood and Adolescence: Validation of the Empathy

Questionnaire for Children and Adolscents *EmQue-CA). Frontiers in

Psyschology, 1-9.

Paul, A. M. (2012). Your Brain on Fiction. The New York Times.

Richardson, A. (2015). Imagination: Literary and Cognitive Intersections. In L. Zunshine

(Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Literary Studies (pp. 225-245). Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Rowling, J. (2000). Flesh, Blood, and Bone. In J. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Goblet

of Fire (pp. 636-643). New York: Scholastic.

Rowling, J. (2000). The Unforgivable Curses. In J. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Goblet

of Fire (pp. 209-228). New York: Scholastic.

Rowling, J. (2007). The Battle of Hogwarts. In J. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Deathly

Hallows. New York: Scholastic.

Singer, T. (2006). The neuronal basis and ontogeny of empathy and mind reading:

Review of literature and implications for future research. Neuroscience &

Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(6), 855-863.

Sopcak, P., Salgaro, M., & Herrmann, J. (2016). Transdisciplinary approaches to

literature and empathy. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(1), 2-5.

Starr, G. G. (2015). Theorizing Imagery, Aesthetics, and Doubly Directed States. In L.

Zunshine (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Literary Studies (pp. 246-

268). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Strouse, E. (2019, January 28). Chapter Three Assistance. (E. Horning, Interviewer)

Tucker, T. (2017, June 26). Some Schools Still Ban ‘Harry Potter.’ Here’s How They

Justify It. From Education is Good: https://education.good.is/articles/harry-potter-

censorship-schools

Viggiani, P. A., Charlesworth, L., Hutchinson, E. D., & Faria, D. F. (2005). Utilization of

contemporary literature in human behavior and social justice coursework. Social

Work Education, 24, 57-96.

Wulandini, I. K. (2018). The effect of literary fiction on school-aged children’s Theory of

Mind (ToM). In A. A. Ariyanto, H. Muluk, P. Newcombe, F. P. Piercy, E. K.

Poerwandari, & S. R. Sri Hartati (Eds.), Diversity in Unity: Perspectives from

Psychology and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 159-166). London: Taylor & Francis

Group.

Zunshine, L. (2015). Introduction to Cognitive Literary Studies. In L. Zunshine (Ed.),

The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Literary Studies (pp. 1-9). Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Zunshine, L. (2015). The Secret Life of Fiction. Publications of the Modern Language

Association of America, 130(3), 724-731.