The Harry Potter movies cut a controversial storyline from the books, but the new TV remake can’t be afraid to add it back to Harry’s story. Like many pieces of fiction from past decades, modern perspectives have shifted how people look at the Harry Potter series. Certain aspects of the wizarding world have been deemed problematic or insensitive, which could mean that the HBO remake series will see a few changes from what audiences are used to. However, some controversial topics serve as impactful social commentary and can do more harm than good if left out.
Among the problematic elements of the Harry Potter series that the HBO remake will have to contend with, house-elf enslavement is among the most controversial. In canon, wizards grew up understanding that house-elves enjoyed servitude, making it okay in their eyes. This is an obvious issue, only made worse by the fact that only one character, Hermione Granger, seemed to think this wasn’t okay. Still, there was much more to this topic than was seen on the surface level of Harry Potter, and it could be wise for the new TV series to dive deeper than the films did.
The House-Elf Plot In Harry Potter Is Divisive (But Makes Important Points)
House-elves were certainly enslaved in the Harry Potter movies, but the overall conversation about whether this was good or bad was left out. Ultimately, this was the most important part of the house-elf plot since the way each character participated in this debate reflected the different arguments about real-world bigotry. Despite being otherwise good, characters like Ron and Hagrid defended house-elf enslavement because it was so normalized in their society. Harry knew it was wrong but was apathetic. Then, Hermione, who recognized that house-elf enslavement was immoral, took on the harmful “white knight” role.
The fact that the house-elves themselves embraced their enslavement demonstrated how oppressors aren’t the only ones who experience inadvertent bias. The oppressed can begin to believe these things about themselves as well—which is precisely when bigotry is at its most dangerous. The house-elf debate in Harry Potter was uncomfortable, but it raised a tougher question than just “Is this right or wrong?” The conversation was meant to explore how deeply engrained specific issues are in society and that finding a solution isn’t as easy as choosing to be a hero rather than a villain.
The Harry Potter Movies Made The House-Elf Problems Worse By Cutting S.P.E.W.
Hermione’s S.P.E.W. movement in the Harry Potter books didn’t make it to the movies, which ultimately did more damage than good. By only showing the enslaved creatures happily going about their business and never bringing up the conversations surrounding them, the critical social commentary that the S.P.E.W. plot represented was lost. The subtle parallels established by the books became even more diluted, and the idea that the Harry Potter series supported concepts of slavery gained traction.
The Harry Potter movies often reduced the moral ambiguity that was so present in the books. This was seen with the changes in Severus Snape, who was, in the text, just as despicable a character as he was a hero. The films simplified this and made Snape a far more tragic and likable character rather than the childish and vengeful man he was written to be. Ultimately, this change made Snape’s character arc far less impactful, and the same is true for S.P.E.W. The films wanted to avoid messy ideas of morality and created a far more black-and-white picture instead. However, the world is never really that simple.
House-Elf Rights Are Never Resolved In The Harry Potter Books (For A Good Reason)
The detail that made the house-elf plot all the more difficult to adapt to the Harry Potter movies was that the debate was never resolved. There was never a big moment when that all the characters realized that Hermione was right and the house-elves were happily freed. Though there are some indications that Hermione successfully established laws to protect house-elves while she was Minister for Magic, it’s never clear whether she was right about the importance of freedom. Still, the answers are in the subtext.
House-elves like Dobby, Winky, and Kreacher were all used to show that even those who believed they were happy were still tragically harmed by their magical bind to wizard-kind. Their inability to act against their masters without hurting themselves is increasingly seen as more disturbing—so there is no doubt that Hermione was correct that it was unethical. Still, she was wrong in how she went about it. Hermione was looking for a quick fix with S.P.E.W., but she couldn’t find it. Just like bigotry can’t be solved overnight in the real world, the same is true in Harry Potter.
A ‘Book Faithful’ Harry Potter Remake Can Fix The House-Elf Misconceptions
The house-elf plot in the Harry Potter books continued the series’ overarching themes that ethics and morality are rarely black and white and that bigotry is just as engrained in good people as it is bad. By cutting this, the movies attempted to simplify a complex situation, which resulted in a broad misconception that hurt the franchise as a whole. Now, the upcoming HBO Harry Potter TV remake can set the record straight, and its longer format makes it uniquely equipped to do so. There will be a lot more time to include the nuances of the debate and better establish the series-long ideas about moral ambiguity.
Of course, even with a TV series, these complex social parallels are difficult to communicate to the screen, and the decade-long misconceptions won’t make this any easier. Therefore, the Wizarding World franchise’s best move may be to not only include the house-elf controversy but to add some clarity. It’s essential that the house-elf problem not be solved too easily, but by more overtly seeing Harry realize that the enslavement is a problem and having characters like Ron called out for the unintentional bias, the important themes the Harry Potter series embraces can be better explored.
