“Is this real? Or has this been happening inside my head?” The Wizarding World of Harry Potter as a constructed site of (artificial) collective memory, identity, and resistance

ABSTRACT

This essay positions the “magic” of The Wizarding World of Harry Potter in Orlando, Florida as residing at the distinctive confluence of multimodal rhetorics, memory, and fandom identity, with ramifications reaching into current socio-political realities of resistance, democracy, and communication. The Wizarding World, as a site central to the Harry Potter fandom’s collective memory and identity, reifies the values of inclusivity, equality, anti-violence, and anti-authoritarianism present throughout the fictional narrative. Despite author J.K. Rowling’s ongoing trafficking in hate speech, these resistance-based values continue to fuel the fandom’s identity, activism, and worldview. To more effectively articulate this nexus of fiction, identity, memory, and materiality, and to better account for the collective remembering of a group whose identity is bound by and to the imaginary events and characters of a fiction, this essay offers the concept of “artificial” collective memory as a useful scholarly heuristic.

KEYWORDS:

• Harry Potter
• resistance
• collective memory
• identity
• social justice activism

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Dr. Patricia Davis for fostering an open, inclusive, and creative learning environment in her Spring 2018 Communication & Public Memory Course at Georgia State University as the idea for this article was born in this helpful environment. We would also like to thank Dr. Billie Murray for her editorial rigor and transparency throughout the review process. Finally, we would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their time and labor in providing us helpful feedback on this essay.

Disclosure statement

An earlier version of this article was presented at the 108th Annual National Communication Association Conference in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Notes

1. Williams, Theme Park Fandom, 47.

2. Dickinson, “Memories for Sale,” 5.

3. Ibid., 1.

4. Blair et al., “Introduction,” 33.

5. Blair, “Contemporary U.S. Memorial Sites,” 48.

6. Additionally, prior to The Wizarding World, Harry Potter fans performed their “Potterhead” identities overarchingly in online spaces, again contributing to the fandom’s shared sense of identity as existing on a cognitive level. While fans of the series did occasionally congregate together at movie premieres and conventions, where they would perform their affinity to the fantasy realm through the purchasing and adornment of Harry Potter themed memorabilia, the fandom’s collective identity remained largely ephemeral, decentralized, and digital. There was, in other words, a disembodied quality to the fandom. We argue, however, that the construction of The Wizarding World merged the metaphysical with the physical within a centralized location, forever imbuing the rhetorical bonds of memory and identity into a built space for the Harry Potter fandom. The disembodied nature of the global fandom found embodiment in a constructed place of memory.

7. Mutz, “Harry Potter and the Deathly Donald,” 723.

8. The state of Florida has enacted legislation to control the state’s K-12 curriculum (dubbed “Don’t Say Gay” laws), banned trans-affirming healthcare, created a registry of trans-identifying individuals, and engaged in political retaliation against individuals, organizations, and corporations (e.g., the ongoing legal disputes with Disney) that communicate their disagreement with the governor’s administration.

9. Many contemporary scholars position three works in particular as pivotal to the study of fandoms in the early 1990s: Bacon-Smith, Enterprising Women; Jenkins, “Textual Poachers” Penley, “Feminism, Psychoanalysis.”

10. Busse and Gray, “Fan Cultures and Fan Communities,” 425.

11. Ibid., 426.

12. Ibid., 434.

13. Stanfill, “Introduction,” 123–134; For more, see the entire (February 2020) special issue on “Reactionary Fandom” in Television & New Media.

14. Pottermore is now called “Wizarding World: The Official Home of Harry Potter” and operates under the Internet domain www.wizardingworld.com. To avoid any confusion, we will continue using Pottermore to refer to the website.

15. Crysel et al., “Harry Potter and the Measures of Personality,” 178.

16. Jenkins, Textual Poachers, 273.

17. Jenkins, “Cultural Acupuncture,” para. 3.2.

18. “Fandom Forward.”

19. Jenkins, “Cultural Acupuncture,” para. 5.2.

20. Ibid., para. 5.2.

21. Ibid., paras. 1.3, 1.9, 4.1.

22. Ibid., para. 1.9.

23. Zoltan et al., “Harry Potter and the Sacred Text.”

24. Hinck, “Theorizing a Public Engagement Keystone,” para. 1.5.

25. Ibid., para. 1.2.

26. Ibid., para. 1.5.

27. Kligler-Vilenchik, “Alternative Citizenship Models,” xi.

28. Smith, “From Worldbuilding to Worldblending,” 27.

29. Jenkins, “Cultural Acupuncture,” para. 3.4.

30. Collective memory is sometimes used interchangeably with “public memory,” “popular memory,” “cultural memory,” and “historical memory.” There are, however, important distinctions. To learn more about these distinctions, see Sturken, Tangled Memories; Noon, “Operation Enduring Analogy;” Prosise, “Collective Memory of the Atomic Bombings;” Davis, Laying Claim.”

31. Zelizer, Covering the Body, 3.

32. The focus on the “group” is what helps differentiate “collective” memory from “public” memory. While both are inherently concerned with how memory is communicated beyond the individual, Blair et al. argue that designating memory as “public” helps identify instances in which the communicated “shared memory” is the “most salient” to larger collectives and is “positioned [as a] relationship of mutuality that implicates their common interests, investments, or destinies, with profound political implications.” In other words, public memory is oftentimes more generalized, pertaining to occurrences of communicated memory that impact whole cultures or nations. Collective memory, meanwhile, refers to more specific instances of a particular group remembering a shared past. For the Harry Potter fandom and its constructed site of memory, we believe using the designator “collective” provides a more precise description of the type of memory being communicated.

33. Zelizer, Covering the Body, 3.

34. Wernecke, “Gazing into the Past,” 510.

35. Blair et al., “Introduction,” 6.

36. Ibid., 6.

37. Ibid., 26.

38. Ibid., 26.

39. Ibid., 27.

40. Ibid., 29.

41. Ibid., 29.

42. Paul, “Your Brain on Fiction.”

43. Armstrong, How Literature Plays with the Brain, xi.

44. Yang et al., “Comparison of Memories ,” 1089.

45. Landsberg, Prosthetic Memory, 2.

46. Hariman and Lucaites, “Public Identity and Collective Memory”; Hariman and Lucaites, No Caption Needed.

47. Dickinson, “Memories for Sale,” 4.

48. Blair et al., “Introduction,” 6.

49. Mutz, “Harry Potter and the Deathly Donald,” 723.

50. See, for example, Armstrong, How Literature Plays; Yang, Deffler, and Marsh, “ Comparison of Memories; Landsberg, Prosthetic Memory.

51. In particular, because of the saga’s appeal to younger readers, Millennial and Gen Z voters may continue the anti-authoritarian trend Mutz identified in the 2016 US Presidential Election.

52. Smith, “From Worldbuilding to Worldblending,” 112.

53. Ibid., 112.

54. Barnes, “Universal Plans to Expand,” para. 11.

55. Ibid., para. 15.

56. Dickinson, “Memories for Sale,” 4.

57. Ibid., 1, 5.

58. Throughout the literary and film series, there are several mentions regarding the magic of identity and memory at work within wands. The renowned wand creator Ollivander is often at the center of these discussions and argues that wands function as identity and memory extensions of their magical wielder. For example, he says Bellatrix Lestrange’s wand, Voldemort’s de facto second in command, is an extension of her cruelty and violence.

59. Zoltan et al., “Being a Stranger.”

60. Ibid.

61. Ibid.

62. Dickinson, “Memories for Sale,” 6.

63. Ibid.

64. While this essay does not present first-hand accounts of how individual members of the fandom are negotiating this issue, it acknowledges the importance of considering both responses. The decision to cut ties or to separate the writing from the writer adds depth and complexity to the overall analysis of the construction of artificial memory spaces. Understanding the diverse ways fans respond to the controversy and navigate their connection to the Harry Potter series enhances our comprehension of the fandom’s experiences within The Wizarding World theme park. Indeed, further research into fans’ reactions to Rowling’s rhetoric and the franchise could offer valuable insights into the multifaceted responses within the fandom, including how these responses may influence their engagement with the narrative, their emotional experiences within the theme park, and their perceptions of the broader implications of authorship and fandom culture.

65. Universal Orlando Resort, “Harry Potter and the Escape.”

66. Smith, “From Worldbuilding to Worldblending,” 112.

67. Universal Studios Florida, “Florean Fortescue’s Ice-Cream Parlour.”

68. Smith, “From Worldbuilding to Worldblending,” 112.

69. Dickinson, “Memories for Sale,” 5.

70. Romano, “Harry Potter and the Author.”

71. Mutz, “Harry Potter and the Deathly Donald,” 723.