A PhD project exploring intersectionality through fan podcasts

Header image with the text Marginally Fannish

Tag: J. K. Rowling

Episode 16 The Queer Paradise: Exploring Diverse Gender Identities in Speculative Worlds

Episode Resources:

1) Fan podcast – Pottercast: Sorting It Out With Jackson Bird

2) Fan podcast – Harry Potter and the Sacred Text: Community responses to J. K. Rowling’s transphobia

3) Fanzine – Harry Potter and the Problematic Author 

4) Fan podcast – Imaginary Worlds: Dumbledore’s Army

5) Fanzine – Tonk’s Tale

6) Article – Creator of ‘She-Ra and the Princesses of Power’ Noelle Stevenson and actor Jacob Tobia on season four’s radical inclusion

7) Article – Noelle Stevenson & Jacob Tobia talk bringing genderqueer awesomeness to ‘She-Ra’ Season 4

8) YouTube video – Aliens, Monsters and Faceless Demons: The Dehumanisation of Non-Binary People in the Media

 

Episode Transcript:

This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity. If you would prefer the original, unedited version, please let me know!

Left – Double Trouble from She-Ra and the Princesses of Power; Right – Janet from The Good Place

[Intro music]

Welcome to Marginally Fannish, a show where we aim an intersectional lens at some of our favourite media and their fandoms.

[Intro music]

My name is Parinita Shetty and you’re listening to the sixteenth episode of Marginally Fannish. In this episode, I talk to Tam Moules about different gender identities in science fiction and fantasy. We also discuss how fans learn to identify and question transphobic implications within their favourite media and grapple with transphobic creators of their favourite worlds.

Transphobia is often couched under language that ostensibly speaks of women’s empowerment but fundamentally excludes trans people. This reactionary and limited form of feminism can be seen in mainstream discourse as well as embedded in beloved media. Fan conversations help highlight and decode implicit bigotry in the texts. But what happens when fans imbibe messages of radical inclusivity and equality from their favourite books only to discover that the writer doesn’t live up to these ideals? We see fans either giving up on the media altogether or disowning its creator.

Due to an overall absence of gender nonconforming characters in SFF, trans and nonbinary fans frequently have to read themselves into cisgender characters. Fortunately, there is a small but increasing number of nonbinary and trans characters in media. This representation of diverse gender identities has a particularly important impact in mainstream children’s media. Creating worlds for kids where queerness is the default allows them to recognise themselves or learn about those who don’t mirror their own identities. Queer characters, cast and crew help create a supportive space for marginalised identities which, in turn, impacts which stories are told and how they’re told. When queerness is normalised in a fictional world, no one way feels like the default or the token. Many different ways of being emerge.

Find our conversation about all this and more in today’s episode.

Happy listening!

[Intro music]

Parinita: I’m so happy to have Tam Moules on the podcast today. Tam is currently a freelance academic with an MLitt in Fantasy Literature from the University of Glasgow. They have written and presented papers at various conferences and have published an essay with the Luna Press anthology A Shadow Within: Evil in Fantasy and Science Fiction. Their essay is called “I have done only what was necessary: An exploration of individual and structural evil in the works of N. K. Jemisin” if you wanted to look that up. Tam and I were studying for a master’s at the University of Glasgow at the same time though not for the same programme. I was there doing an M.Ed in Children’s Literature and Literacies. But as a book and fantasy nerd, I attended some of the lectures on the Fantasy course as well where Tam and I became friends. So today, we’re going to be talking about how different gender identities are represented in mainstream science fiction and fantasy media. And as much as we don’t want to be spending too much time on the transphobic elephant in the room, we’re going to have to unfortunately spend a little time talking about J. K. Rowling before quickly moving on to happier, queerer, more inclusive things. But before we begin with that, Tam, could you tell us a little more about your own experiences with our theme today?

Tam: Hello! About 2017 I realised I was non-binary. And coming to terms with that and existing within academia has been a very weird experience. [laughs]

Parinita: [laughs]

Tam: I think it’s good that we’re seeing more representation of that within media and so I’m quite excited to talk about that today.

Parinita: Yeah, for sure. I’m cisgender and heterosexual, so for me, it’s also something that I’m learning through media.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And through fandom specifically. Because in India, now I know some non-binary, gender nonconforming people.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: But when I was growing up as a teenager, I didn’t really have any access to this. Even just gay people in general, I didn’t have any access to. And it was largely through fandom and largely through Harry Potter fandom actually that I encountered different people. When I was thirteen, I joined Mugglenet and just read a lot of fanfiction there. Which is why it’s so much more disappointing – okay right, let’s get it out of the way. Back in December, when I hadn’t launched the podcast yet but I was putting it together and approaching guests and fan podcasts, J. K. Rowling tweeted something in support of a transphobe – Maya Forester I think her name is? [it’s actually Maya Forstater]

Tam: Yeah something like that.

Parinita: Yeah. We don’t need to know.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: I don’t mind if I get her name wrong. J. K. Rowling’s own tweets were couched in transphobic language which, if you don’t know the debates and things happening in the background, you might not have seen anything wrong with that tweet.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: So there are a bunch of people who decoded that, including one of the fan podcast episodes that we listened to. And she was then silent about it. Silent about all the critiques and all the outrage, right until June this year since when she’s been on this spree of transphobic tweeting. And it’s not even covert anymore.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: J. K. Rowling is a TERF.

Tam: [laughs] Yeah, it’s been a bit weird the past few weeks. She’s suddenly gone full mask-off and is just saying the quiet part out loud as it were.

Parinita: [laughs] So for those who don’t know, TERF stands for trans-exclusionary radical feminist. So it’s a version of feminism which doesn’t include trans women or trans folks, like even trans men. For me, even as a cis, straight person, I don’t understand this idea of feminism that doesn’t include all women and all … actually anybody who’s marginalised. Because a non-binary person isn’t a part of the dominant culture; they don’t have privileges that cis people have for example, right?

Tam: Yeah. I mean it’s profoundly reactionary as a form of feminism. It’s inherently self-contradictory in a lot of ways. I don’t know if you read her “statement” about the whole thing but every single point she made was contradicted by a different point that she made effectively.

Parinita: I couldn’t bring myself to read it. As a researcher who’s including Harry Potter in my PhD project and as a Harry Potter fan – I’m still very attached to it because it played such an important role in my childhood

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: I can’t really untie that from my sense of self. I can absolutely untie J. K. Rowling though; how fandom has kicked her out of her own creation.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: Anyway, I couldn’t read that essay just because I know she’s spoken about domestic violence. And I have experience with domestic violence. I grew up in a house where my mum survived domestic violence. So when I heard the conversation around that I was like, okay I still need more distance because there’s too much going on in the world.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: Right now there’s the pandemic, there’s the Black Lives Matter movement, there’s migrants just dying in India because of the pandemic and I can’t add this other thing to stress me out. It’s just so disappointing. The response to her transphobia from what I’ve seen – maybe it’s just because of the spaces that I’ve cultivated – but wherever I’ve encountered the responses to her tweets, it’s been very much in support of trans people. And divorcing J. K. Rowling from Harry Potter and reclaiming Harry Potter. There’s this Harry Potter fan podcast I listen to called The Gayly Prophet and one of the hosts there is trans and the other host is a queer person of colour – both American. And both of them said that, “We’re just going to reclaim it angrily for the fans.”

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: And they launched this campaign called Make Harry Potter Gayer 2020.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: So they’re curating all this trans and non-binary and queer fiction and Harry Potter things and just fighting back against it. Because the thing is a lot of fans who grew up with Harry Potter read these messages of being inclusive in the books. And she’s not seeing that herself? Or it’s only applicable to a certain group of people and not everybody.

Tam: Yeah. In a lot of ways the fan response to it has been really positive and uplifting – seeing all these people saying essentially we don’t care what she has to say anymore. And I also think it’s an interesting test case in the sense that it’s one of the biggest fandoms online effectively disowning its own creator.

Parinita: Yeah. Were you a fan of Harry Potter growing up as well?

Tam: I was obsessed growing up, yeah.

Parinita: [laughs] I know that some people have had more of a difficulty in divorcing the creation from the creator. You know what I mean? For me, I can’t. I can’t let go of Harry Potter.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And in the resources that we looked at for this episode, a lot of the fans said the same thing. They had a real difficulty grappling with her hatred and bigotry but also being unable to let go. What has your experience been with this?

Tam: I think on a purely practical level, I have so many books to read. [laughs]

Parinita: [laughs] Yeah.

Tam: That not going back to Harry Potter is quite a straightforward decision. But I have copies that my grandparents gave me for birthday presents and things that I’m still sentimentally attached to.

Parinita: Yeah.

Tam: And I have good memories of rereading the series. I had a summer job in Germany once where basically I had nothing to do but read. And I ended up going through the whole series in like a week. And I still have good memories of that. But at the same time, it’s also interesting going back to it and seeing like … obviously when I was a kid, I didn’t necessarily notice the actual amount of bigotry that’s implicitly coded into the books.

Parinita: Yup. [laughs] Yup.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: I’m re-reading the books now just as background research to inform my conversations here on the podcast for the PhD. And I have re-read the books as an adult previously because I used to try and re-read the series annually.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: I stopped that when I started doing my master’s because you don’t have time to read so much.

Tam: [laughs] Yeah.

Parinita: But even then, as an adult I wasn’t really able to think as critically as I do now. Just decoding the messages, because that’s something that I’m still learning through the internet actually and through fandom.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: Where I’m learning to be able to critically analyse things and question things and question canon and question the creators. And fans are great for that. Especially Harry Potter fans. There’s this excellent podcast called Witch, Please, The Gayly Prophet does that as well – they apply an intersectional lens to Harry Potter. And oh my god reading it as an adult, it’s quite alarming. [laughs]

Tam: A lot of it is, yeah.

Parinita: I also wanted to talk about some of the more problematic elements in Harry Potter. As someone coming from India and we have our own social problems and social issues there. But currently in the UK, transphobia seems to be quite mainstream.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And it seems to be quite a loud part of – I mean maybe it’s a small group, but they seem to be really loud. I live in Leeds. And just recently, last week, the Leeds public library, they were going to … do you know the Drag Queen Story Hour?

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: So they were going to do that here. Just a virtual reading. And then it got attacked by this group on Mumsnet I think along with a Leeds city councillor who started calling it – they were very transphobic and were accusing it of all sorts of things. And they got it shut down. And luckily that has been picked up by lots of media channels after that. But it still happened. They still got it shut down. And especially during Pride Month, all these kids were excited about seeing their own identity represented. Because the books that she read included different identities. She did it anyway on another Facebook page but the fact that institutionally it was shut down because of an institutional TERF was very … ugh!

Tam: Obviously I’m not an expert but I think part of is that homophobia has become socially unacceptable even among a lot of conservatives.

Parinita: Hmm.

Tam: Not many of them are open about it anymore. But transphobia is still relatively normalised in a lot of ways. And the fact that the UK’s system for treating trans people in particular is horrendously badly run and underfunded and there’s multiple-year-long waiting lists which is part of the problem but also on purpose kind of.

Parinita: Yeah. And it’s also like J. K. Rowling’s tweet and a lot of the words and phrases that they use to couch the transphobia is so unknown.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: First of all, they think that TERF is a slur. And they want to be called gender-critical feminists. When TERF is actually describing what they are, which is they exclude trans people in their feminism. So in Leeds last year, there was a transphobic march; it was a march full of transphobes who were marching against trans people or to protect lesbians in the LGBT umbrella. So Jack and I went for the anti-TERF protest – it was a march and a counter-protest.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And it was so ridiculous because at one point, when they were marching around, they were shouting things like, “Women don’t have penises!” at random bystanders.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: Who were like, “What? Was this a topic of debate?” Obviously they were very confused

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: Because if you don’t know the history and the background, it is confusing. The Pottercast episode that we listened to had some great resources about that. It was called Sorting It Out With Jackson Bird featuring a trans Harry Potter fan who’s played a big role in the fandom. And they were responding to J. K. Rowling’s transphobia and that had some really good resources to try and understand, unpacking this language a little bit and also presenting the context of it. Even though they’re in the US, they were talking about it from a UK perspective as well. But yeah, it just seems to be so uncomfortably mainstream in the UK and I don’t like it. I don’t like it at all.

Tam: Yeah. There’s a lot of talk of “reasonable concerns” because they end up using so much coded language that people end up taking it at face value basically.

Parinita: Yeah. You were telling me about what happened today with Stephen King. He retweeted something J. K. Rowling said, right?

Tam: She made this big, long thread complaining about stuff and then at the end of it she had like an Andrea Dworkin quote which was clipped out of context. And so he retweeted that quote out of context – removed from both its original context and from the context in which J. K. Rowling was using it – then replied to someone else saying, “Trans women are women.”  And J. K. Rowling’s unfollowed him over it. Which is quite funny.

Parinita: Yeah. And before that, when he retweeted her, I think she was so happy that she got some celebrity endorsement that she wrote this long tweet praising Stephen and was fangirlish about it and then she deleted that tweet as well as soon as he wrote trans women are women. And something similar happened in December as well. Because her tweet is couched in language that you wouldn’t find problematic if you didn’t know what was happening. Mark Hamill had retweeted or liked it as well. But he didn’t know the context; presumably neither did Stephen King today. So he was just trying to be supportive of women, I guess, not realising what she was saying. And then he did apologise. He was like I didn’t know what I was doing and this is not what I meant to do. It’s so easy to include people in that or trick people into supporting you when you’re trying to make it seem like you’re including and protecting women but you’re not actually. Or you’re only protecting a certain group of women.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And among these TERFs, I don’t even know how many other intersectional identities there are. Not just in terms of gender identity and cisgender versus trans but just race and class and national origin and everything. What would they think of me, for example? A brown immigrant from India. I feel like if you exclude one, it’s so easy then to find problems with other groups as well who aren’t exactly like you.

Tam: Yeah. There’s always someone else to transfer it on to once your original target is sort of legislated away as it were.

Parinita: Exactly! Which is what I don’t understand why lesbians have caught onto this so much; a group of lesbians, of course, not all lesbians. But they think trans women are going to impinge on their own rights. But once they start excluding trans women, they’re going to be targeted by the homophobes as well. It should be a solidarity amongst all marginalised identities, not just in-fighting. And quickly before we move on to happier things, I just wanted to talk about how there are some transphobic implications within the Potterverse which I would never have noticed before J. K. Rowling outed herself as a TERF. Or even without the help of fans identifying this. Like I said, fans have helped me so much in being more critically analytical of things. But there are quite a few transphobic implications not only in the Potterverse but also in J. K. Rowling’s crime booksthe Robert Galbraith books.

Tam: Definitely. Well, I think there’s some fairly obvious trans implications with the Polyjuice potion being such a central part of the books. The ability to change appearance and change gender but the fact that you can only copy someone else. You can’t use it to become a new person. You have to use it to become a copy of someone who already exists. It’s interesting because it could very easily be written in a way that is trans-inclusive and is positive. But instead it’s like people have a sort of inherent essence and if they ever stop taking their medicine, they will revert back to that essence. It’s very gender essentialist.

Parinita: You saying that makes me think of Tonks as well. Any Metaphor – Metaphorgo -? Okay I don’t know how to pronounce that word [laughs]. [I was trying to say Metamorphmagus].

Tam: [laughs]

Gif of Ginny and Tonks. Tonks has changed her nose into a duck (?)

Parinita: What Tonks is, that is her ability to change her appearance into anything – across the gender spectrum essentially. That would be so easy to make inclusive of non-binary, genderqueer, gender nonconforming people. In response to J. K. Rowling’s transphobia, this collective of queer Harry Potter fans, launched this fanzine Trans-Inclusive Education at Hogwarts I think it’s called. I’m going to look up the correct name and link it. [It’s called Trans-Affirming Magical Care]

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: But basically they’ve got all these queer fans to write and draw stuff for the fanzine and all the proceeds are going to be donated to charities that work with trans people. And one of them was Maia Kobabe’s work, which is also on Tumblr. That focuses more specifically on Tonks and how they would be gender nonconforming and  basically their appearance could reflect on what gender they are identifying with on a particular day. And in Hogwarts as well, how the very binary, very gender essentialist dorm system that they have and the bathroom system that they have would accommodate – how the building itself, the magical architecture itself would change to accommodate their identities or any identities in Hogwarts.

Tam: I think it’s interesting that Tonks, one of the most outwardly queer-coded characters in the whole series is effectively married off to someone twice her age. But also the fact that Lupin as well is a queer-coded character in a profoundly negative way. The fact that her werewolves, where she explicitly describes them as an AIDs metaphor and all but one of them are predators who want to eat children and infect them with werewolfness, is a bit, little, little, tiny weeny little bit dodgy.

Parinita: [laughs] Yeah. He’s the good one. But everyone else … he’s the exception to the otherwise terrible, terrible norm. Keep your children away!

Tam: Exactly. It’s a profoundly horrible thing to put in a children’s book series.

Parinita: And then I just recently finished re-reading The Prisoner of Azkaban. And this is something that one of my previous guests Lorrie Kim brought up about the Boggart scene in Prisoner of Azkaban. Where Neville’s greatest fear is Professor Snape – which understandable, because he’s really horrible. In the series, a Boggart turns into your greatest fear. And the way to defeat a Boggart is to make yourself laugh. So you have to turn it into something funny. And the most hilarious thing to Neville here or to Lupin, I guess, because it was his idea is to turn Snape into wearing his grandmother’s clothes.

Tam: Yeah!

Gif from Prisoner of Azkaban of Boggart Snape turning into Snape wearing Neville's grandmother's clothes

Parinita: And that’s such a butt of jokes, right?

Tam: Yeah. I mean it now seems very telling that the first place she went with that was man in a dress. The fact that she thinks that’s inherently humiliating and hilarious.

Parinita: Yeah and when we’re reading it, we’re on the side of Harry and Lupin and Neville, right? We like these characters so we identify with them. So the way that we’re being positioned to look at this scene is that we should find it funny as well and we should find it really strange as well. Whereas not just trans people but even gender nonconforming people can wear or men can wear dresses, right? Why should that be so funny that it defeats this creature that’s supposed to be your darkest nightmare? Anyway, I think that’s enough time that we’ve dedicated in our episode to J. K. Rowling for today. Her books are problematic.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: She is problematic. I can let go of her; I can’t let go of the books. Do you have any closing thoughts on J. K. Rowling before we move on to happier topics?

Tam: I hope she listens to people and learns empathy and gets better.

Parinita: Yeah. [sighs] I hope so too. I’m really optimistic about most things – I’m an optimistic person. But from the way that she’s been constantly treating trans people. Even today, while we’re recording –

Tam: Oh no.

Parinita: It almost sounds very cultish you know.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: I was talking to Jack today earlier and he was reading the responses there because he has much more tolerance for this sort of stuff than I do [going through bigoted tweets, that is; not transphobia]. And he was like, “Yeah this just sounds like a cult that she’s been recruited into.”

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And now she is also doing the recruiting. They’re affirming each other. So she obviously believes that she’s a hundred per cent correct.

Tam: Unfortunately.

Parinita: And that I think is getting in the way and also her privilege is getting in the way of her talking to people.

Tam: Yeah. Definitely.

Parinita: It’s sad, but you can only control what you can control. So we can leave her aside.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And maybe talk about other just explicitly nonbinary and trans representations in mainstream science fiction and fantasy. Have you come across any examples of these?

Tam: I have more examples than I can count.

Parinita: Oh brilliant!

Tam: I’ll always recommend Jay Y. Yang’s Tensorate series. They are some of the most varied and interesting books that I have ever read. They’re set in a world that doesn’t understand gender the same way our world does. So kids don’t have a gender. They choose one if they want one when they grow up.

Book covers from the four books in J. Y. Yang's Tensorate series

Parinita: That sounds really interesting! And also really unfortunately rare in speculative fiction.

Tam: Yeah. There’s four little novellas and they’re all completely different. So one’s a crime scene investigation, one’s spies and action-based. And one’s just someone recounting their memories of a relationship. And they’re all beautiful.

Parinita: Oh that’s awesome! So I have a couple of examples but mine are a little different just in terms of the framework of the world. The Lumberjanes – I don’t know if you’re familiar with that comic series.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: So that has a nonbinary character, Barney, as well as a trans girl character, Jo. But it’s incorporated in such a way that that’s not a big deal at all. That’s just “normal”. That’s just one of the many identities that you can be. And there’s never a coming out storyline at all. It’s just yeah this is what it is. You just accept it, which I love. And also there is a slightly different example. In the Magnus Chase series by Rick Riordan

Tam: Yes!

Barney and Jo from The Lumberjanes

Parinita: There’s a genderqueer character, Alex Fierro. They’re the child of Loki who, I think, in Norse mythology, has been known to vary across the gender spectrum – from what at least Rick Riordan tells me. [laughs] I don’t know much about Norse mythology.

Tam: Yeah.

Alex Fierro

Parinita: But I love that both these are a very mainstream series. And both of them are mainstream series for children. So you’re normalising it completely by making this a part of your story without making it a big deal as well. Which I love.

Tam: Yeah. I’ve heard a lot about the Rick Riordan series. I haven’t read any of them since I was a teenager. But I think he’s sort of the anti-J. K. Rowling in a lot of ways.

Parinita: Absolutely!

Tam: The fact that he uses his pull within the publishing industry to highlight marginalised writers who don’t necessarily have the kind of name recognition that he has.

Parinita: Yeah, he started a whole imprint just for people to write about their own mythologies which he wasn’t comfortable writing.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: He’s basically the status quo – old white man in the US. So he has all this privilege which he recognises and tries to include as many people and as many stories and experiences as possible. Which I love. And then, of course, there’s – so I know we’re going to be talking more about them later – but Double Trouble in She-Ra and the Princesses of Power. And She-Ra and the Princesses of Power is just one of my favourite shows ever. Just because they’ve created a world where queerness is the default, where they centre and normalise female and queer characters in the story. And Noelle Stevenson who is the creator of She-Ra in terms of the new adaptation, she has also written a graphic novel called Nimona which is excellent.

Tam: Nimona is so good!

Parinita: That was my first experience with her. And then she was also one of the founding teams of The Lumberjanes as well

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: So I love her.  

Tam: I really didn’t expect to love She-Ra as much as I do. I think I first heard about it because people on the internet were mad about it. [laughs]

Parinita: Oh really? So see I think I either have really giant blinkers on or I just manage to very carefully avoid the negativity because I’ve heard about this. I’ve heard about all the hate She-Ra got but only secondhand. I’ve never come across it myself.

Tam: Yeah. So I think when they shared some promotional images before the show came out, there was a whole bunch of the usual right-wing weirdos who were all mad that this animated child wasn’t feminine enough.

Parinita: [laughs]

Tam: And they were destroying culture by remaking something. And I just thought, well if they’re upset about it, it’s probably going to be good.

Parinita: [laughs] Yeah. I mean I’m a huge fan of animated things anyway.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: I read a lot of children’s books, I watch a lot of children’s programming as well. But this story is so refreshing. I know refreshing is an overused word.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: I am very guilty of this. I use this word a lot. But just because it’s so rare where they are so central. It starts off, of course, with a background lesbian couple – Netossa and Spinerella in the first season. But then that grows very organically, very in a not “this is a big deal!” kind of way to include Bow’s dads.

Tam: Yes.

Parinita: Then Double Trouble and finally – spoilers for those who haven’t watched the fifth season – Adora and Catra’s love story as well. And it includes characters of diverse body types and gender expressions and identities and it’s just so good!

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: I don’t know if you’ve come across this theory, there was a Twitter thread recently where trans fans read Scorpia, one of the princesses, as trans. They were basically inserting their own experiences into the character.

Tam: All right.

Parinita: Just in terms of how she’s this very uncomfortable but also really cuddly person and wants to be friends with people. But she’s also not very sure of how she would be accepted among the other princesses as well.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And one of the fans in this thread also actually said that looking at Scorpia and seeing her represented helped them come to terms with their own trans identity. Which I loved! And actually, one of the artists in the show had created Perfuma, another princess, as trans.

Tam: All right.

Parinita: Which Noelle loves; she loves the idea and actually she’s acknowledged all head canons as valid including reading Bow as a trans boy as well.

Tam: Yeah. That was the one I was always on board with from the beginning.

Parinita: Yeah because it’s very obvious right? You can see it … even for me who is very used to seeing very cis, straight characters in my media, I could see that immediately because that made complete sense to me. But Noelle, as much as she loves these head canons, in one of the things she said that she didn’t want to take credit for them because it wasn’t explicitly mentioned on the show. So they’re completely valid but she doesn’t want to pretend like she came up with this idea because she didn’t make it canon. With Double Trouble, there was a nonbinary actor portraying Double Trouble. So that was a very definite choice.

Tam: Oh and that’s so good as well. They cast a nonbinary voice actor to play Double Trouble.

Parinita: Yeah exactly! And the fact that Noelle Stevenson doesn’t want to say that yeah I thought of these characters as these diverse identities, because I didn’t. I love that you thought of it and it’s totally valid but because I didn’t do the homework and I didn’t cast a trans actress to play Perfuma, for example, so now I can’t claim Perfuma as trans. Which I love. That’s such a different perspective of diversity altogether, right?

Tam: Yeah. Again it’s kind of the anti-J. K. Rowling. She’s not taking credit for other people’s theories.

Parinita: [laughs] Oh my god you’re so right! Because I’ve spoken about this so much – about J. K. Rowling just co-opting everything. Like, “Black Hermione, oh yeah totally my idea!” And I also love that Noelle Stevenson will randomly tweet, “I love trans people!!!!!” with five exclamation marks.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And just devoid – no, not obviously devoid of context, she knows very much what the context is. But it won’t be in response to somebody; it’ll just be like yeah these are my feelings. This is out there.

Tam: Yeah. She’s honestly such a positive force on Twitter. She is absolutely delightful as a person.

Parinita: Yeah. I agree. Even just reading Nimona, I was like, “Okay the brain that made this, I want to be this person’s friend.” Because she also uses the correct amount of exclamations which is more than one.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: Which is how I talk. That’s that’s how I talk to people. But also Noelle and Jacob Tobia, who voices Double Trouble, they did talk about the overall absence of gender nonconforming characters in science fiction and media which causes fans to read themselves into their favourite worlds.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: Some of the examples that they said were Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings. And I was reading this essay today in a book which, of course, the name I’m completely blanking on because my memory is swiss cheese. But they were talking about how they have all these trans head canons while growing up. They read Luce – Luce?! – Luke Skywalker as both trans and ace – asexual. Just because you don’t see all these identities represented in your media so you have to write those identities in the media.

Tam: Yeah. I think I quite like the theory of Luke Skywalker as ace because he doesn’t show attraction to anyone.

Parinita: Um hmm.

Tam: He doesn’t seem to evidence any interest in the usual hero’s journey of kill the bad guy and get the girl kind of thing.

Parinita: I mean in the first movie, they sort of did that and then as soon as he realised [laughs] that Leia was his sister, he was like okay that’s enough. I tried it. It’s not for me. This is not the kind of relationship that I want to have.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: They also read Tintin as a trans guy and Frodo as trans and asexual. I love that because it’s also very similar to Luke Skywalker’s life as well. The book is called The Secret Loves of Geeks. I’ve looked it up.

Tam: Ah okay. I’ll have a look at that.

Parinita: I love that – I mean I don’t love that fans have to do this but I love how creative fans are that they do do this. Even with racebending and genderbending and queering characters and everything.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: But, at the same time, I love that queer people now are creating their own stories and they’re in charge. They’re queering mainstream media essentially so that there’s more representation than they had when they were growing up.

Tam: Absolutely.

Parinita: And another one I’ve seen was Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts.

Tam: Yes.

Parinita: Which I don’t think they have any gender nonconforming character. They have a gay protagonist but … I mean that’s also great but now She-Ra has set the bar so high that I expect more.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: I expect everything and everybody to be queer.

Tam: Yeah. I think it’s really quite astonishing what She-Ra has accomplished; what Noelle Stevenson and the people who worked on it have accomplished in terms of taking like a toy commercial from the 80s effectively –

Parinita: [laughs]

Tam: And turning it into this huge story about queer relationships.

Parinita: And also just like a different kind of heroism.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And a different kind of friendship. Well not a different kind of friendship but a different representation of the kinds of friendships that you have. There’s no individual notion of heroism. She-Ra is powerful but she’s not – if it was only up to her, Hordak would have won in Season 1. It’s such a communal notion of not only saving the world but also being good friends with each other. And they look at that so much in terms of not just focusing on romantic relationships but relationships of all kinds. Which I think is also so lacking in most media.

Tam: Definitely. I think that it does a really good job of showing that people don’t have to be in relationships as well. A lot of them are just really good friends.

Parinita: Absolutely. And they never make it a big deal. No aspect of identity in that world is ever commented upon. It’s just because queerness is the default. And also because there are so many female characters, that also seems to be the default. Usually science fiction and fantasy media is very male-dominated

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: Star Wars being the prime example.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: But here, because it has that as the default, there are so many more potentials and so many more ways of being. Not any one way feels like a trope or a stereotype. And none of it feels like you need to really make a big deal out of it.

Tam: Pause. Yeah. I think in any other show, a detail like … I can’t remember their names … Kyle and Rogelio from the Horde. Them having a crush on each other in the background. In another show, that would be kind of the Marvel thing where there’s some queer background characters and we can cut them out for edits in different countries kind of thing. But in this, it’s one among many.

Parinita: Yeah!

Tam: You can’t really accuse any of the characters of being bad queer representation because they’re not the only queer characters in the show.

Parinita: Yeah absolutely. And I think Jacob Tobia – Tobia? Is that how you pronounce it? I think. I should have checked, it’s terrible.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: Jacob Tobia, they mentioned in one of the interviews that we read about how it’s so important not just to have a queer cast but also have queer creators and crew.

Tam: Yeah, definitely.

Parinita: Because that has such a huge impact on the story. Like exactly what you were saying, this background and just the whole world. As someone coming in in the first season, they felt completely safe and supported and included. They didn’t feel like they had to hide any aspect of their identity which for them was so radical and so empowering.

Tam: Yeah I’ve got the quote here. They said, “I expected to feel like a rainbow thread in an otherwise pretty bland tapestry. But I found that I was a rainbow thread in just already most colourful, incredible queer trans garment I could want.”

Parinita: Oh yes I love that. I made a note of that quote as well. Imagine if all media was like this.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: Because that’s what we want to be, right? Not just in terms of queer representation but in terms of different races and ethnicities and religions and physical abilities and disabilities and mental abilities, age – everything. Basically all the intersectional identities. We want it to be a place where no one identity is the norm and there’s room for everybody. She-Ra is such a great example of showing how that world can be.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: So I know we’ve spoken about our love for She-Ra a lot. But also I know that you wanted to talk about Double Trouble specifically and their story arc in She-Ra.

Tam: Yeah. Obviously I love the character and their role in Season 4 specifically. But I felt a little bit betrayed by season 5 in terms of … I don’t know if it was just my overly high expectations but the fact that they were relegated to a background character almost. They show up for one episode and then a little moment in the ending montage. And I don’t know – I just wanted them to have more of a role in the story.

Parinita: Yeah because until you pointed this out, when we were talking about our episode, I didn’t even notice, unfortunately for me, like my own blind-spot. Because I was so caught up with the rest of it. And especially the Adora and Catra ship.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: I was shipping them right from day one. And that’s happened. And I was so taken aback [in a good way] by how much queerness was central in the story that I didn’t realise that Double Trouble was quite backgrounded in the end. And I think it would have been easy for Double Trouble to have a bigger part in the story.

Tam: Definitely. There’s so much of the fifth series that is effectively espionage. They’re sneaking around the planet trying to evade capture.

Parinita: And they’re so good at it!

Tam: Yeah. I think it would have been very easy to write them in as Horde or something. I think there was something said about the fact that they tried and then couldn’t ’cause of the hive mind thing. I don’t know. I think it would have been quite easy to write them into a bigger role. So I don’t know if there was something going on behind the scenes there that meant that they were sort of pushed towards the background or if it was just that they wanted to focus on Adora and Catra for the final series.

Parinita: But even though they did focus on Adora and Catra because they split up, I still feel like the other characters, the other princesses and even new characters like the clones – the new Horde Prime clone whose name I have forgotten –

Tam: Wrong Hordak.

Parinita: Yes! [laughs] Wrong Hordak. They did have a role. It felt like they were a part of the story even if they weren’t onscreen all the time, if that makes sense. And with Double Trouble, I didn’t even remember – I remembered the last glimpse of them that we saw when they’d changed themself into one of the clones. I didn’t even remember until you reminded me that we’d seen them earlier in the season because they’d spent most of it undercover which is fine because that’s what their character is for. But that would have been such a perfect opportunity to recruit them.

Tam: Yeah. That’s what I thought was happening. And then they just disappeared.

Parinita: Yeah. I mean like you said, it’s not a “bury your gays” kind of thing in this world because everybody mostly is gay or at least is queer. So you can’t accuse the show of doing that. But the good thing is about fans – that’s the part that I love most – is that you are able to critique things because you love them and you want them to be better.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: And you want them to represent your own interests and preferences and priorities more.

Tam: I haven’t looked but I’m sure there is a fanfic of Double Trouble going around sabotaging Horde operations behind the scenes.

Parinita: Oh! You’re so right.

Tam: That’d be good.

Parinita: Yeah.

Tam: I would watch a series of that. Like a spin-off show.

Parinita: Yeah, me too! I’m so sad that it’s ending – or it’s ended.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: I completely respect the fact that she’d written it to last over five seasons and her story is done. But there’s so much potential for a spin-off. I want to watch that rather than a new He-Man that they want to spitefully create.

Tam: Ugh.

Parinita: In response to She-Ra.

Tam: Well I think honestly they should give the He-Man reboot to Noelle Stevenson as well.

Parinita: [gasps] That would be amazing!

Tam: Just make it as gay as possible. That would be incredible.

Parinita: Oh yeah. That’s the only way I would accept He-Man. [laughs]

Tam: But instead Kevin Smith is doing it which is possibly just the worst choice.

Parinita: Oh no! I don’t think I know who Kevin Smith is. His name sounds familiar.

Tam: He’s done quite a lot of films. Clerks and Dogma I think are his two most famous ones.

Parinita: Oh, I watch next to no movies so.

Tam: [laughs]

Parinita: Yeah, I’m very bad at this. I think it was the same faction that thought Noelle Stevenson was ruining She-Ra that wants He-Man back?

Tam: I don’t know. But Kevin Smith specifically has a very crude juvenile sense of humour.

Parinita: Oh, that’s sad.

Tam: A lot of fart jokes and stuff.

Parinita: Oh right. So, it’s not going to be the queer paradise that we want it to be. [laughs]

Tam: [laughs] Unfortunately not.

Parinita: This diverse little world. It might be but I doubt it. We’ve spoken about what we love about nonbinary representations and the increasingly queer representations in media. But the video Aliens, Monsters, and Faceless Demons: The Dehumanisation of Nonbinary People In the Media spoke about … well exactly that.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: How nonbinary people aren’t as … I don’t want to say respected but treated as well as cis characters.

Tam: Yeah. I think the video does a really good job of bringing up the idea that nonbinary characters are inhuman as well like looking outlandish or demonic or just straight-up not having a face kind of thing. My wishful thinking theory about Double Trouble is that they’re not actually an inhuman lizard creature. They are human and they just choose to look like a lizard creature because that’s how they’re most comfortable.

Parinita: Oh! That’s a great theory.

Tam: That’s my personal wild theory there.

Parinita: [laughs]

Tam: I think in isolation it’s not an issue that a particular nonbinary character is depicted that way. But I think overall as a trend, like you’ll see books recommending lists of nonbinary characters in science fiction and fantasy and you have Martha Wells’ Murderbot series which are great books but they’re also explicitly about a character who is not human and does not want to be human.

Parinita: Yeah. And Janet as well, right? In The Good Place like the video brought up.

Tam: Janet’s an interesting one because she obviously does look human and she uses she/her pronouns and presents in quite a feminine way. And I think that’s in some ways quite an interesting bit of representation, the idea that nonbinary people don’t necessarily have to be androgynous or outlandish looking. And I think that is good. But I also think that the fact that the show didn’t necessarily intend Janet to be nonbinary, the fact that she says, “Not a girl” constantly is more, “I’m not human” than “I’m not a girl”.

Parinita: And it’s not something that is framed as something to be taken seriously.

Tam: That too, yeah. It’s a running joke.

Parinita: Yeah. It’s something that you can easily ignore or overlook.

Tam: I wish they had done that differently. I wish Janet was more explicitly nonbinary. Because I think even the fact that she’s a female-presenting character in a huge network sitcom that constantly says, “Not a girl” I think that’s in itself a little bit ground-breaking. But it also could have been better.

Parinita: No, absolutely. Because until I watched that video, I hadn’t even thought of Janet as nonbinary.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: Because of exactly some of the same things that you’ve said about how she presents, the pronouns that she uses. But also my own blind-spots you know?

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: Because for me, as a cisgender woman who’s used to seeing – maybe not in terms of race and things – but I’m used to seeing representations of women, even though male representations take precedence. But it’s still increasing in terms of women. But yeah nonbinary representations are so lacking. And I think you’re right. If it’s a trend, then it is really problematic. Like you said, with Kyle and Rogelio, it’s not a problem if it’s one amongst many.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: At the same, even with Double Trouble, because in that world, there’s like Rogelio, there’s Catra, there’s Mermista who go against that human-ness. There’s cat and mermaid and Double Trouble. So I think within that world, it’s still more acceptable than within the larger mediascape where it’s falling into a trend.

Tam: Yeah, that’s true.

Parinita: The book that I talked about, which is The Secret Loves of Geeks, it’s essentially an anthology of love stories.

Tam: All right.

Parinita: But also different kinds of love and across the gender spectrum as well as across the sexual orientation spectrum as well. And it’s also comics and it’s nonfiction and it’s different kinds of essays and things. So it’s really good. I would definitely recommend that.

Tam: Sounds good. I’ll have a look for it.

Parinita: Thank you so much, Tam, for being on the podcast.

Tam: That’s okay.

Parinita: One of the things that I love about this project is that I just get to chat about things that I love with people that I like.

Tam: Yeah.

Parinita: So it doesn’t feel like work at all. And thank you so much for not making it feel like work.

Tam: Thank you for having me. It’s been good fun.

[Outro music]

You’ve been listening to our episode on the representation of diverse gender identities in science fiction and fantasy media. Thank you so much Tam for being a part of this project and chatting with me about some of my favourite things. And thank you Jack for all the homemade memes which shame me for not replying to texts on time (and also for the editing).

[Outro music]

I’d love to hear from you and talk to you – so any feedback, comments or critiques are very welcome! Get in touch with me on social media, leave a comment on my blog, or email me at edps@leeds.ac.uk. If you’d like to follow the podcast or the PhD project, visit my website marginallyfannish.org. Here you’ll find the podcast episodes, transcripts, episode resources and links, and my research blog. You can also receive updates on Facebook or Instagram at Marginally Fannish or on Twitter where I’m @MarginalFannish. I share episode resources on social media so you can find a bunch of excellent fan podcasts and essays to look up. If you enjoyed this podcast, please share it with anyone you think will enjoy it too.

Thanks for listening! Tune in again next time for all things fannish and intersectional!

Episode 12 The International Imagination: Exploring World Politics in the Fantastic Beasts Films

Episode Resources:

1) Movie – Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them 

2) Movie – The Crimes of Grindelwald

3) Movie – Deleted scenes featuring Nagini from The Crimes of Grindelwald

3) Essay – Background Remarks: Grindelwald, Fantastic Beasts, and Gay Representation

4) Essay – Notes on Claudia Kim’s Nagini

5) Fan podcast – Women of Harry Potter: Angelina Johnson with Bayana Davis

6) Fan podcast – Women of Harry Potter: Parvati Patil with Proma Khosla

7) Fan podcast – Women of Harry Potter: Cho Chang With Kathy Tu

8) Fan podcast – #Wizard Team: Blood Purity and Mixed Race Identity

9) Fan podcast – Woke Doctor Who: Harry Potter and the People of Colour

 

Episode Transcript:

This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity. If you would prefer the original, unedited version, please let me know!

Lorrie and her Nagini funkopop

[Intro music]

Welcome to Marginally Fannish, a show where we aim an intersectional lens at some of our favourite media and their fandoms.

[Intro music]

My name is Parinita Shetty and you’re listening to the twelfth episode of Marginally Fannish. In this episode, I talk to Lorrie Kim about how people of colour are represented in the Potterverse and how much Lorrie loves and identifies with Nagini. We also discuss the real-world parallels in Crimes of Grindelwald. This includes mentions of rape, exploitation and human trafficking so please consider this a content warning. Lorrie proposes that the Harry Potter books – written for children – and the Fantastic Beasts movies – written for adults – deal with similar themes in very different ways. The allegory of fascism is ever-present but is less escapist. The international politics in Crimes of Grindelwald draw from historical as well as contemporary colonial, racial and sexual violence in the real world.

A book authored by a single creator reflects their cultural, social, and political limitations. However, in movies, the actors and crew become co-creators of the story, which can sometimes make up for the author’s blind-spots. Deleted scenes in movies marginalise female characters of colour whose stories are seen as expendable. Fans’ discomfort against how these characters are portrayed can end up erasing them from the story entirely. Many fans dislike the Fantastic Beasts movies and Nagini’s story arc for lots of different reasons. While fan interpretations often differ, mainstream fandom discourse isn’t always nuanced and inclusive of multiple perspectives. Fandom has tremendous potential to promote critical thinking, but fan opinions can also influence people in limiting ways.

Find our conversation about all this and more in today’s episode.

Happy listening!

[Intro music]

Parinita: Today I’m so thrilled to be able to talk to Lorrie Kim about our shared love of the Potterverse. Lorrie is a second-generation Korean-American, bisexual woman, three years younger than J. K. Rowling. She’s married with two kids. She’s also the author of Snape: A Definitive Reading. She has enjoyed speaking at Harry Potter conferences since 2008. I’m especially excited to have Lorrie on the episode because in our brief conversations while planning the episode, she’s shown me such a different perspective of some of the critiques which are really popular in the Potter fandom. Like me, Lorrie is able to balance love and critique when it comes to Harry Potter, but some of her opinions are quite different from what I’ve encountered in mainstream fandom. So I’m really happy that Lorrie is here to expand my mind some more. Before we get to those bits though, I wanted to discuss how your initial opinions about the books are influenced by how old you were when you first read them. That’s something that you mentioned while we were planning the episode. So I read The Philosopher’s Stone when I was ten and grew up with the book series and I only came to consider and understand the more problematic aspects of the series as an adult through my engagement in fandom. Lorrie, you mentioned that you first read the series as an adult so that impacted your experience in a different way.

Lorrie: Yeah, because I’m almost the same age as J. K. Rowling, and I think I was maybe 32-33 when I first read the first five books ’cause six and seven hadn’t been written yet. I was identifying with the author somewhat because I knew her life experiences were generationally similar to mine. I’ve noticed that people who grew up with the series, as their perspectives changed into adult perspectives, they’ve re-visited them and what they remembered from the series is not necessarily what they see now when they read it as adults. And there’s a lot less of that for me because I was already an adult reading.

Parinita: So you already saw the problematic aspects when you first read them. [laughs]

Lorrie: Well when I first read them, it was very much very clear to me that I was reading something written by a white, British, heterosexual, married woman, a Christian mother. I didn’t have kids when I read the first five books, I had a kid by the time the sixth book came out. And then I was pregnant when the seventh book came out. And re-reading them as a mother changed my perspective a lot, especially around issues of pregnancy and being connected to small infants and infant development.

Parinita: Oh interesting! Did your kids grow up with the books as well?

Lorrie: They did. And what I didn’t expect – they were small children during the time that we switched over from Harry Potter books being written to all of them being written and all of the movies being finished. So I had a couple years when I wondered how old they would be before I let them read the books, not realising that by the time kids are in kindergarten and they run around together playing in the playground, they’re shouting spells at each other.

Parinita: [laughs]

Lorrie: So you know they’re spoiled for the series. So all of these concerns I had as a reader, I wasn’t taking into account what the reality was going to be for them. So by the time kids entered kindergarten, they’ve heard of something or other from Harry Potter.

Parinita: Yeah that’s a really interesting generational difference as well for people – for kids who had the entire canon. Well not the Fantastic Beasts canon but the entire Harry Potter canon that does not include the new tweets and the Pottermore stuff. But you’re so right. For me, growing up, reading this it was so different from what you picked up on in the books because none of that is anything that I’d noticed. I didn’t even notice how white the books were, just because I was growing up in India when I was reading this so I couldn’t really articulate those sort of conversations. Because I grew up reading a lot of British children’s books anyway and American children’s literature. So most of my reading diet consisted of Western books where most of the characters – where whiteness is default essentially. So I didn’t really question that in Harry Potter as much. Now, of course, when I moved to the UK, I see that the UK, even in the early 90s, would have been much more diverse than what the books show.

Lorrie: Yes.

Parinita: In The Prisoner of Azkaban, just the brief clip that I watched, there is so much more diversity within the classroom. And I was really surprised because that’s not something I had noticed when I was watching the movies because I was very much focused on the trio because that’s what the books focus on as well. So even as an audience member, that’s what I was watching. But now I was like, “Oh wait! There are a lot more people of colour in the movies!” I know with Lavender Brown’s casting, that’s had a bit of an issue where she was a black girl in the beginning.

Lorrie: Yeah.

Parinita: And then in Half-Blood Prince, suddenly when she was a main character – well not a main character but she was adjacent to a protagonist, she was suddenly a white character. But then you picked up on these themes and that didn’t dampen your enthusiasm for the books, right?

The changing faces of Lavender Brown. Image courtesy Reddit

Lorrie: Any book from authors of any culture will show the perspectives of the author and their limitations. It’s not like there’s some other country or racial identity people can come from where everything is automatically superior and they know how to write every kind of person. [laughs]

Parinita: Yeah. I feel like now with the internet and social media when these conversations are so mainstream – because for me, that’s what really made me decolonise my own mind a little bit. Growing up in India – and India still has quite a colonised mindset because we still think what the West does is better. At least in urban India and certain parts of rural and small-town India. So we would think that the US or the UK would have it all figured out. It’s just because of colonisation obviously that we still think this. Although now with the politics and the way the situation is going on both in the US and the UK, that may not be as true anymore. But in India, we have a fascist leader as well so we can’t really complain. Speaking of fascism, I’m turning to Fantastic Beasts now. One of the mainstream fandom opinions I’ve encountered before – and you came in and smashed this perception to pieces – is that most Harry Potter fans, at least the ones I’ve read and listened to on podcasts, don’t seem to think too highly of the movies. And I have to admit that these really strong opinions unfairly influenced me and put me off watching Crimes of Grindelwald for the longest time what with the critiques of the movie itself but also the whole Nagini controversy, which we’ll talk about a bit more later. But just to introduce your own thoughts about the movies, I know that unlike most fans I’ve encountered, you love the new films, right?

Lorrie: I love them! Crimes of Grindelwald is my favourite of the Potterverse films.

Parinita: I watched Crimes of Grindelwald a few days ago after consciously not watching it because of all the negativity in the fandom. And I was so surprised by how invested I was in the movie just because of how much everyone seems to dislike the movie, I thought that I would as well – which is obviously really silly now that I think about it. But yeah, I really enjoyed the film, more than the first Fantastic Beasts movie.

Lorrie: I’m curious – can you tell me what some of the things that were most compelling to you in the Crimes of Grindelwald movie?

Parinita: So I loved the characters.

Lorrie: Yeah.

Parinita: I loved Leta Lestrange, I loved her whole story. I also loved Newt right from the first movie. I loved the way that he treats other people as well as other animals. I loved his cross-cultural friendship with Jacob and how respectfully and empathetically he not only treats him but just the world in general. And I also loved the glimpses into the French Ministry of Magic. We’re used to the British magical system because that’s what we’ve grown up with. And then we saw a little bit about the American magical system in Fantastic Beasts. And I’m loving these glimpses of how different countries do it differently. Of course, it’s still very Western currently. It might change in the three other films. But I’m loving this exploration of new worlds but also the return to old ones. They came to Hogwarts and there was McGonagall for the briefest of instances in the scene and I was like, “Aaaah McGonagall! I love you!” So I liked the balance. The more alarming bit of it was I could recognise Grindelwald’s speeches – the way that he couched his bigotry and prejudice in more politically correct terms, I was like, “Oh yeah this is what happened in India. This is what’s happening in many parts of the world. This is not scary at all!” You’d mentioned that it is a film for adults as opposed to Harry Potter which is for children. And I think I really appreciated that.

Lorrie: Yeah I felt like I’m the audience for this. And that many times as an adult reading or watching the Harry Potter stories, I had to tell myself, well I’m not the audience. As an adult, this isn’t the story that I wanted. I have to remember that she’s speaking to young people between ages six and seventeen.

Parinita: Yeah. But you did say that you’d noticed some similar themes in Harry Potter – even though it’s for children – and Fantastic Beasts which is for adults. Could you tell us some of the themes you picked up on?

Lorrie: Yeah. In my opinion, it’s actually the same story. It’s just that Harry Potter is a fairy tale and that’s why when Harry goes looking for his own story, he always finds something. He wants to find his mother and father, he finds them. He finds the people who give them back to him. When children are angry and murderous in Harry Potter, an adult comes and saves them from becoming murderers. They don’t actually kill, they get stopped in time because adults are there to do their jobs. In Fantastic Beasts it’s the same but the children actually commit murder and adults are just as ineffective as we know them to be in real life. [laughs]

Parinita: [laughs] Yeah.

Lorrie: And the sexual assault in Harry Potter is often coded or softened in some way. And especially when it’s sexual assault of men on women or girls, Rowling very carefully wrote it so you can read it as sexual assault or not. She did very careful word choice so what you see there is something you need to read according to your experience and to your age. For example, there is a child of coercion in Harry Potter who is Voldemort.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: And she carefully made it so that it was a female character coercing a male character. I think she was trying to get away from the over-emotional tones of making it statistically what’s more common of men coercing women. So it’s very careful. And it’s not the common story that we encounter in real life. And in Fantastic Beasts, we have a child of coercion but oh there’s no cushioning this. What we see is some of the grossest, starkest ways that this is common in real life. Both with race and national, colonial violence as well as gender.

Parinita: Spoilers for those who haven’t watched Crimes of Grindelwald, but until you pointed that out to me that this is what happens with Leta Lestrange’s family as well as – I’ve forgotten her half-brother’s name …

Lorrie: Yusuf.

Parinita: Yusuf. Yeah!

Lorrie: Cama.

Parinita: Yeah Yusuf Cama’s family, it is rape where a white man essentially stole a black woman or kidnapped or enchanted – I think it was an enchantment.

Lorrie: It is the Imperius curse.

Parinita: Oh yeah. And essentially raped her and I think she died in childbirth? From what I remember.

Lorrie: Yes.

Parinita: Yeah. And it’s not something that you might catch on first watch, because so much happens after that scene. That revelation happens towards the end of the movie and then after that, there’s a lot of action and drama and everything. It’s like you were saying, you had to watch the movie three times to unpack all the things that are happening in that movie. I don’t know why this is – but maybe that’ll change now because academia is such a long process –  but there doesn’t seem to be as much critical analysis of these movies in academic publishing or even on the internet as much as the books have received. And I don’t know if it’s because a lot of people don’t like the movies. I have no idea why I haven’t seen so much critical analysis. Because otherwise the internet is full of Harry Potter critical analysis. The smallest of scenes is unpacked so much. Whereas the movies I don’t seem to have encountered that so much.

Lorrie: I think part of it is that with the stories we’ve had a long time to get used to the starkness and the appalling parts of the Harry Potter story, that there’s a baby that was almost killed. Some of that is really hard to deal with but it’s been awhile so we’ve accepted that part of the story, I think. The even harsher realities shown in these movies, it’s going to take a while for them to settle in. There are a lot of parts of the Fantastic Beasts and Crimes of Grindelwald movies that people rejected just ’cause the stories which are true you know [laughs] accurate stories about the world.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: They take a while to accept especially because and this was [laughs] obviously not planned but those movies came out in 2016 and 2018 during times that really fascist politics were happening in the US and the UK. And in fact the first Fantastic Beasts movie premiered during the week that Donald Trump was elected. So when you see the interviews that Rowling and the cast do in Carnegie Hall in New York to open the film, they all look really stunned and sickened.

Parinita: [laughs] Oh no.

Lorrie: I actually have a friend who had tickets to go see them talk in Carnegie Hall. And when she walked there, she had to walk past Trump Tower and there were huge police barricades all over a block of Trump Tower because there were so many protesters. So it had been less than a week. And if you look at the interviews and you see the faces of the actors, they all look like they don’t even know what to say because they had thought that this would be allegorical – an allegory about fascism. And it’s a lot less escapist. There are parts of the world where Harry Potter was never escapist. But in the US and the UK, the Harry Potter stories were for a while more stark than a lot of people were living. And now they’re not escapist at all. [laughs]

Parinita: No. And what you were saying about the difference between writing for adults versus writing for children, so in one of the podcast episodes I think they propose that witches and wizards in England must have profited off the slave trade and off colonisation – that was their reading into it. Because families like the Malfoys must have become rich like that – exploring how intertwined the Muggle world and the witching world is. And now it seems to be much more explicitly there in terms of the Lestrange family and in terms of even Nagini where these different ethnicities in the US and in the UK have – well I don’t know if Fantastic Beasts explores the UK as much. The Lestranges – they were French right?

Lorrie: Yeah.

Parinita: Yeah so then it’s much more explicit. And I wonder then if what you were saying about fans who’ve grown up with this and there’s a lot more metaphorical racism in the Harry Potter series rather than the more overt racism here. It’s all couched under house-elves and goblins and Muggle-borns. Whereas here … well I suppose here things like the magical president in the US is black. One of the critiques in the movies was that in 1920s, having a black leader when there weren’t many black people within the Ministry itself would have been strange, right?

Lorrie: That was a major … [sighs] that was one of those cases where it’s tokenism. If you’re going to have a black woman as the president but you don’t show an established structure of black wizarding culture, if she’s going to be the only black woman in high office and she’s the president, it feels a little amateur. Like okay I want to have a person of colour but without doing the enormous work of having to delve into accurately portraying all of the tensions there so I’ll make her president. That’s a strong independent position but it’s not supported.

Parinita: Especially if she was out in the Muggle world, her experiences would have been so different from her role and position in the wizarding world in the US. And that tension I think was glossed over like, “No, no let’s not think about it. She’s the leader. That’s all.”

Lorrie: And there is a place for that kind of symbolism in fantasy. Because there’s also very much a tradition in fantasy literature of, “Well if we think about real life in the 1920s for certain kinds of people, it’s heavy. But people were just as inspired and brilliant then as anywhere any time. Let’s imagine a fantasy where this is how it would have looked.” The problem is who’s writing that and how much do they know about what they’re portraying?

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: And it’s tokenism because … this is where I think some of the criticism of J. K. Rowling is a little out of context. It’s true that I don’t trust her to write people of colour. It’s a very ambitious project to take this deeply imagined white British magic system that she’s invented and then try to expand that to be an international story. But I couldn’t do that. If I were gonna write a story that went to other countries that I’ve never lived in, I wouldn’t do any better. And I’m not sure how many people would. And if that means that that nobody should ever try, that doesn’t seem like the right answer to me either.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: But this is where I think the movies deserve a little more credit than they’re getting because what happens then is you go from a novel format where it’s a single author creating everything in the Harry Potter books to the Fantastic Beasts stories which only exist as films. And therefore there cannot be a single creator. And even though the stories are definitely still created from this white US-UK perspective, even so the actors in their bodies and their faces and everything that they bring to their roles, their experiences, become much greater co-creators of the characters than the actors were when they were bringing Harry Potter novels to the screen.

Parinita: Yeah. One of the things I personally saw related to that was Newt. I know that this is a theory within fandom, I don’t know if he was written like that, but he can be read as neurodiverse.

Lorrie: He has confirmed that.

Parinita: Oh he has?

Lorrie: Eddie Redmayne, yes.

Parinita: Yeah. I didn’t know if it was just the actor’s choice to portray himself like that or whether it was intentionally written into the script. I think he’s one of my favourite characters in the Potterverse, not just in the Fantastic Beasts films. With the second movie, it’s so much starker – the focus on fascism like you were saying, the fascist framework of these movies. And Grindelwald is such a symptom. He is evil and he uses all this propaganda and everything, but he’s just a symptom. Whereas so many people in the wizarding community, they will happily be fascists themselves and rule both the Muggle and magical world, as we saw in the French system. I’m sure that’s the same in the US and in the UK and wherever else they head to next. That was so scary because that was so true. And it so reflects real life. If we get rid of Trump, if we get rid of Modi, that’s not going to stop what’s happening in the US or in India, right?

Lorrie: Yes and no because also what those kinds of leaders are exploiting is fear and prejudice and tendencies that humans always have within us. And that’s overpowering empathy and generosity that we also always have within us. So partly if there’s encouragement of certain elements in human nature backed up by politics, backed up by the law and enforcement, humans we can be manipulated [laughs] in a number of different directions. We have a lot of that in us already. But the same people that can be manipulated to be very, very bigoted could also in other contexts or just through peer pressure be made to be much more accepting.

Parinita: Yeah, that’s true. What you said about stoking fears and preying on hopes is something I thought was very interesting. Again, spoilers for Crimes of Grindelwald but what happens with Queenie and how Grindelwald uses her fears of not being able to marry Jacob because the society that she comes from doesn’t allow relationships with people who are not witches and wizards. Queenie is supposed to be this really empathetic and generous and open-hearted person. And the reason that she joins Grindelwald turns that against her. I know there’s a theory that she’s a double agent. And maybe she’ll come back. But I find it more fascinating that she would have joined him because she’s doing it for what for her are the correct reasons.

Lorrie: Oh, I have so many theories about Queenie. [laughs]

Parinita: Oh really? What are some of your theories?

Lorrie: Well I think she was drugged.

Parinita: Hmm. With the tea that she had in the house? Yeah maybe.

Lorrie: And also just because she’s neurodiverse, she can’t control her Legilimency and it causes her daily discomfort. It causes discomfort in her closest relationships and she can get overwhelmed. I think she’s vulnerable. When we see her first meeting Grindelwald, the moment he walks into the room, she is trembling. She leaps to self defense and she says, “I know what you are, stay away.” And just through sheer power, he overpowers her during that scene. He just keeps walking toward her, she lowers her wand. By the time he’s done talking, he’s won her over. He’s just more powerful than she is.

Parinita: Yeah. And Grindelwald is really good at manipulating and overpowering even someone like Credence, of course, who is much younger – there’s that age dynamic there. But he was the same with Dumbledore. And that was one of Dumbledore’s origin stories where he fell for … what was the phrase? I’ve forgotten that very fascist phrase that he used.

Lorrie: Oh, for the greater good.

Parinita: For the greater good, that’s right. So I mean if Dumbledore can fall for this – which from the narrative, Dumbledore is supposed to be wise and critical and everything but yeah he fell for this as well. So why wouldn’t other people?

Lorrie: Well what we see about Dumbledore is that he already had those wishes in him and Grindelwald just allowed him to suppress his conscience so that he could give in to those wishes. And that’s why Dumbledore says it has to be Newt to fight against Grindelwald because the kind of personality Newt has, he doesn’t have the kind of vulnerabilities that Grindelwald is used to exploiting.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: Even middle-aged Dumbledore, when he looks in the Mirror of Erised, his deepest desire is to go back to being melded with this man who is his equal even if he is also the most evil person. [laughs]

Parinita: Yeah. Grindelwald seems to be just as if not more terrible and powerful and evil as Voldemort. Okay you defeated a fascist forty years ago and here comes another which again, no parallels with real life at all! [laughs] Which was again much starker in the movies – maybe it’s also the visual component and maybe it’s deliberate, but the parallels with the real world and the magical world were much starker. You mentioned that you really liked the internationally political aspect of the movies where it explores both real-world racial and fictional world Pureblood politics and prejudices? Something that you’d mentioned which I found really interesting was the Korean perspective and Korean history.

Lorrie: Oh boy yeah. I think you can’t have an international story without delving right into the middle of the huge upheavals in racial and colonial violence that have shaped world history. I don’t think you can have an international story without that. And especially because this film series is about the international tensions that gave rise to World War II. So it has to be about race, about fascism, about genocide. That’s the story that she’s taking on. And then what I love what she’s doing with the Fantastic Beasts films so far based on our sample of two movies. [laughs]

Parinita: [laughs] Yeah.

Lorrie: She goes to a place and she tells you the story that that place does not want to talk about. So when she takes you to New York, there’s American capital punishment, there’s puritanism and witch hunts. And then she takes you to France and there’s this horrendous colonial violence, racial violence. When a culture feels guilty about a story, it wants to put it away or suppress it and that’s the theme of the Fantastic Beasts stories – other creatures, are they beings or are they monsters? And Grindelwald says they’re not inferior, they’re other. Nagini and Credence are both perfect examples – how would you classify them? Newt and his textbooks explore that question perfectly. Do you classify this being as a beast or as a person? You have the centaurs who say, “Oh we could be classified as people but we don’t want that. We reject that. Put us with the beasts.” And in the first movie especially when we saw people talk about Credence, some people said “it” and some people said “he”.

Parinita: Oh yeah, that’s right.

Lorrie: And that’s the difference between Newt and the executioner Grimmson. Grimmson is all excited to go hunting. And Newt is horrified. [laughs] So when we see the circus, which is another beautiful melding of fantasy and real history because the circus of course is a place where humans who are or were freaks find a life that is both better and worse than a mainstream life. And definitely a culture where people who are freaks bond together. And put up with some really frightening, exploitative conditions. So Skender, who’s the circus master, talks about them as his freaks and as his under-beings. And he’s exploiting Nagini as a freak and as an under-being. Even though there are a number of reasons why this isn’t true, but for my feelings Nagini is the first Korean woman in Potterverse. And one way in which that might not be true is because we’re not sure if Cho Chang may have been meant to be Korean.

Parinita: Right, yeah.

Lorrie: And the thing about Cho Chang, of course, is she’s written so that she’s of no race. You could put any race on her and she’s –

Parinita: Generically East Asian.

Lorrie: Yeah.

Parinita: She’s just an East Asian name.

Lorrie: It’s an amateur move from a writer who’s not familiar with a culture and trying to portray it and it comes off as strange tokenism.

Parinita: I mean Parvati and Padma Patil were similar as well. They could have been white. There was nothing there.

Lorrie: And that’s why when we say that Hermione is black, Hermione is a beautifully written character of colour because she’s a full human. [laughs]

Parinita: Yeah. [laughs]

Fan art of black Hermione

Fan art of black Hermione

Lorrie: And her story has elements of being a minority. But when Rowling sets out from the top to write somebody who is signalled to be a person of colour, then that’s not something that you trust as being confident and full.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: So to me, Cho Chang is not of any particular race. And I’m not angry about it either. I’m just like, well that’s as much as that author can do. And I’m not going to waste my time expecting her to do any better because I don’t think she can. And I have seen improvements in Rowling’s ability to write people of colour and the improvements are so slow [laughs] and incremental and small and not a direct line of improvement either that it [sighs] it’s … you know be realistic. [laughs]

Parinita: Yeah. And I suppose again that reflects maybe just the maturity that you had as a reader and as an adult when you first read the series versus say someone like me and a lot of fans who are younger than me who demand instant change. Maybe not instant change but we want her to be better sooner than or maybe even more than she’s capable of. I would be happier if she hired a research assistant or a co-writer or someone who is from the culture to write with her. Just so that there would be more authenticity. On the other hand, with fandom discourse, I get a lot of my ideas from fandom because – I’ve mentioned this on the podcast before. So in India, mainstream education isn’t really equipped to teach you how to think critically. That’s not something that’s in the curriculum. So I didn’t grow up learning how to think; I grew up in school learning what to think and parroted those answers in exams.  And it’s only fandom that through its multiple perspectives and diverse opinions and questioning of canon and expanding canon and exploring all those missing gaps, it allowed me to imagine differently. And that’s another reason I’m doing this PhD project. But thanks to you I realised, which is why I’m so excited to have you on board here as a participant, is that fan discourse isn’t always as nuanced and inclusive of multiple perspectives as I give it credit for. And one of the things that you’ve completely given me a different perspective from mainstream fandom is of the character of Nagini. And I know that you were uncomfortable about the hostility exhibited by some of the fan podcasts that I’d suggested which made me think that even though I credit fan discussions to expanding my mind in many ways, it’s still quite limited. And sometimes one narrative takes over and you might not get a chance to explore other opinions. With Nagini I think the controversy was that she represents a stereotype and a trope of Eastern Asian women in Western media, if I’m not wrong.

Lorrie: Oh. [sighs] It’s hard to represent what the objection to Nagini was because it’s not the same as what I think I saw on the screen. As I was saying, I didn’t think there was a Korean woman in Potterverse. So then when it was in 2017 when they announced that a Korean woman is going to be playing Nagini, I was so thrilled. And so from that day I have a tweet.

Parinita: Yeah. [laughs]

Lorrie: “A Korean woman in Potterverse. *instant identification.* 1) Neville killed me, oh noes 2) [gasps] “milk Nagini” GROSSSSSS 3) Impersonating Bathilda Bagshot’s corpse? That was a lot to ask of a snake! 4) Ugh, I had to eat Charity Burbage! 5) OH MY GOD I ATE SNAPE”

Parinita: [laughs]

Lorrie: And I just started laughing and laughing and laughing. And it was so much fun. I followed Claudia Kim on Instagram and she posted a screencap. The movie of Chamber of Secrets was on her TV and she showed herself running to watch like “Oooh oooh oooh!” And then she showed a picture of little twelve-year-old Neville and her caption was, “Oh no Neville! Aaaaah!”

Parinita: [laughs]

Lorrie: [laughs] And when she wrote about Nagini, she would write, “Nagini, I love you.” And I was so excited. I had seen her before so I was so interested to see where this would go. And then it was like being punched repeatedly in the stomach when there was this huge outcry like, “Oh no this is terrible. If we have a Korean actress in Potterverse, then the story has to be about stereotypes and it’s racist and get the Korean woman out of there.” People were writing that her casting had ruined the franchise. [sighs] And they hadn’t even seen the movie yet.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: The more nuanced issue which I understand is that Nagini the character was written to be from Indonesia. And there had been a famous Indonesian actress cast and she couldn’t play the role ’cause she was pregnant. So they had to find another actress and eventually the one they found happened to be Korean. That’s partly like, “Oh well you know any Asian will do.” And that I understand. But what was not intended and yet happened in my mind that this makes Nagini Korean to me. And she’s not Korean-American. She’s Korean. She has a career at home and a following. And so it’s exciting that a Korean actress is going to become a part of this enormous international franchise. Let’s see how this happens. And the thing is if you think about Korean women in the time leading up to World War II, there was no Korea. Korea was colonised by Japan and you do not want to be colonised by Japan. Oh my god!

Parinita: [laughs] Yup.

Lorrie: So this is a political issue that is actually very divisive between Japan and Korea currently. And is responsible for major diplomatic conflicts and trade wars between Korea and Japan right now – that as part of the colonisation, the Japanese military plundered Korean female populations for human trafficking. And this is actually something that the Japanese military did with a number of Asian countries leading up to and during World War II including Indonesia. But really the bulk of it was huge numbers of Koreans. And there are a couple of those women that are still alive. And the degree of human trafficking obviously is something that a lot of Koreans don’t want as the thing to represent the country in the international imagination.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: Because it’s just too incredibly painful. But there’s a problem with that which is that it can go into shame and silencing the actual people who went through that. And wanting to hide their stories. I don’t want to single out anybody on social media because there is a whole lot of outcry against the whole concept of Nagini being played by a Korean woman. But some of the kinds of critiques that I saw said things like, “Oh yeah sure great what a positive, strong, independent woman!” And to me what that said is okay then you tell me then how do you want us to be shown in the story for your satisfaction? You make up the character that you can tell me, okay now you can come be in the story. And then people said something that is absolutely not true, absolutely not supported. Which is that they said, “Oh Nagini was his lover” No. There was nothing like that with Voldemort and Nagini. “This is his slave. She served a white man.” Okay I don’t actually think that race was the major component of the Nagini-Voldemort relationship. [laughs] First of all species, not race.

Parinita: Yeah. [laughs] And presumably she only met Voldemort after she got trapped in her body as a snake. This is just conjecture, I don’t know.

Lorrie: Yeah, we don’t know. Because at the time that this movie Crimes of Grindelwald was taking place, Voldemort has just been born. And we know that in Goblet of Fire, he shows that Nagini is his mother figure. So we don’t know if there’s some sort of substitution in Voldemort’s story. We have no idea where this is going to go. But it made me think [sighs] we don’t actually know a lot of the Nagini story but people have images in their minds of Asian women stereotypes that they’re uncomfortable with and they don’t want them. And to me that came down to this role should have gone to a white woman so that viewers wouldn’t be uncomfortable. And people are saying, “Well this is a terrible story. She dies in captivity. And this is racist.” And I thought how is that different from like half the Potteverse characters who have the same kind of death?

Parinita: Yeah. Because you’d written that in your blog post. Your blog post was really so illuminating. I watched the movie and then I watched Nagini’s deleted scenes. For me, Nagini was just one of the several characters that I was really interested in. I was actually interested in all of the characters in Crimes of Grindelwald just because they all added something different to the story in a very different way than what I was used to from the Harry Potter movies. Because obviously I’ve always read the books first. So I know exactly what’s going to happen in the movies. Whereas here, like you said, they’ve only ever been movies so I don’t know what’s going to happen in the new movies. It’s almost like being a teenager again when we were waiting for the new books to come out. In Crimes of Grindelwald I loved the last scene – I don’t know if it was the last scene – where there’s Nagini, and I think Yusuf and Newt and this whole ragtag bunch of people at Hogwarts. And presumably they are going to go on further adventures in the other three movies which I’m really waiting for. I like that they’re from different backgrounds magical, non-magical, Obscurial – well, Credence is not there anymore in that ragtag team but he will play a role. I’m just interested in how they manage to pull all of that together and I’m excited to see that. But getting back to your blog post, it was so illuminating to me because it included this perspective about especially how there are so many characters who are used and abused by Voldemort. And all these other tragedies that exist in canon in Harry Potter. But just focusing on this one character to almost erase her out of the story where they would rather not have her than have her in what they think is a problematic way.

Lorrie: Well I mean if considering the story and the era it’s – you know history was problematic. [laughs]

Parinita: [laughs] Yeah.

Lorrie: There were some critiques of her storyline that I think are willfully untrue. Simply false. If people are saying well she doesn’t have agency, when you look at the actual plot line of Nagini in this movie, it’s amazing. So she is exploited. And just like your classic Harry Potter message, she joins forces with someone else who is powerless. And through their bond of affection and resistance, they escape their imprisonment. And we don’t have a lot of people in the Potterverse who are able to manage their own prison break.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: But these two do it. And neither one of them could have done it alone. They plot together, they make a strategy and there’s a moment when Skender is trying to get her to perform and she’s just making him look stupid. She’s not responding because she’s having eye contact with Credence like, “Is this going to happen? Are we going to bond? Are we going to go from being two captives to being free? Is our bond strong enough?” And to me that was a huge wish fulfillment because she’s being sexually exploited obviously with all the emphasis on how beautiful she is. But she’s in a way protected by the bars – the audience can’t touch her. And she can turn into a snake that can attack Skender and her best friend is an Obscurial.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: And I thought oh this is a good fantasy. And then they escape together. And then the two deleted scenes – I had a sorrow and anger when I eventually saw the deleted scenes because to me that’s a classic example of when a woman of colour’s story is marginalised. These scenes were written and filmed and they were taken out of the main movie. Fortunately, we got them in the deleted scenes but the fact that they were edited out is marginalisation.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: And her story is so much more full. This happens with Leta also. So in one deleted scene with Nagini, she and Credence are stealing food. They’re caring for each other. And she’s trying to hide from him that her skin is becoming more and more scaly. Because the Maledictus curse is in women through the female line, where there’s a curse on your family and eventually you turn into an animal. Which is as strong a human trafficking metaphor as any. So she doesn’t want him to see the scaliness because she’s afraid and ashamed and he makes her stop hiding it and he kisses it. And it’s so much like, beast or being, I see you’re a person, I love you.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: And then there’s a parallel to that in the other deleted scene which to me is so beautiful. I wish they had kept it. We see them waking up in the morning and Credence is sleeping in Nagini’s arms and you realise this is the most closeness he’s ever had in his life. He’s found peace, he’s found something. But then also every time Nagini sleeps, she has to turn into a snake. And every time she turns into a snake, she has a harder and harder time turning back. So there’s a close-up on her eyes. She hasn’t been sleeping. She has lain with Credence and comforted him so he could sleep. But she has stayed awake because she wants to be with him as a human. And that’s such a feeling of oppression – that hyper alertness.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: And then she tells him, “Make it happen because we’re free.” So he’s clearly told her about the Obscurus. And he’s never brought it forth voluntarily before. And then she does something that is so beautiful I can’t even stand it. It’s so beautiful where she lets it pass through her. At first it flies around in a way that you’re like you know what, this is beautiful too. The Obscurus has beauty in it. And then it passes right through her body showing, “What you are, this thing that’s the worst of you, it can’t hurt me. I can take it. I can take all of you.” And that acceptance to me. Their relationship is so powerful. And then she goes with him to look for his mother, which is such an emotional scene.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: And she can sense that there’s something wrong the whole time and that hyper-alertness. There’s a Korean word [says Korean word] and I thought this is one of the reasons why Nagini as acted, Nagini the character as co-created by the script writers and the actress reads to me as so Korean, is that she acts out the character so much non-verbally with micro-expressions that I recognise from Korean culture. And this is something you can’t get in a novel. Or you can if the author is really in tune with that deep, nuanced identification with that kind of character, which we know J. K. Rowling can’t do with a lot of people of colour. But if you hire an actress, who’s a really good actress, she’ll do it for you.

Parinita: I love that you’ve shared this nuanced analysis and exploration of Nagini because I wouldn’t have been able to pick up on any of this. Just as someone who isn’t familiar with Korean culture. You are so you could pick out on these micro-expressions and things that Claudia Kim acted. And just even the minute details, you’re right, it fleshes out the character so much and it’s such a tragedy that it didn’t make its way into the actual film. And of course, there are three more films that are going to be coming out so hopefully she will have a bigger role to play. I think she will especially since Credence has now gone over to the dark side as we saw in the second movie. It’s quite sad that he didn’t choose Nagini’s better influence and fell prey to Grindelwald, but I have hope that will change. It’s such a refreshing perspective to be able to see things in a different light. That’s why I started this podcast and that’s why I love fandom and fan discussions and fan criticisms. Just because it allows me to see the same text in so many different ways based on who’s the one who’s interpreting it. Viewing it from different cultures. And I love that you have this really detailed and nuanced analysis of Nagini, which makes me like her so much more as well.

Lorrie: I love her. And she gets a line that shows she has the same beliefs as Dumbledore. When Credence is leaving her, he says, “He knows who I am.” And Nagini says, “He knows what you were born, not who you are.” And that is exactly what Dumbledore teaches Harry.

Parinita: Yeah.

Lorrie: And with J. K. Rowling, there are times when she gives characters lines to say that let you the reader or viewer know okay this is where the real message is. It’s important that this line comes from somebody who really is enslaved or trafficked or powerless. Because that’s actually the core message of both Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts – listening to the truth in each being no matter how powerless or how much of a freak or under-being they are.

Parinita: Oh, I love that.

Lorrie: You know something that I didn’t ever think until just now when we were talking, is that when you talk about the ending group shot of all of these ragtag people after most of them have lost something or someone – that division that happens when some people join Grindelwald and others don’t, it’s very much South and North Korea after the Korean war situation.

Parinita: Oh!

Lorrie: Which I’m sure happened in so many different countries, in so many parts of history where there’s a conflict that goes right down the middle. And I think you can go to any war and find that. Where there’s individual families, siblings – sometimes it’s because their beliefs are different. Other times it’s just plain chance or tragedy. You know I have relatives that I’ve never met. And just you were so close and the next day you’ll never see each other again and there’s no telling – you don’t know if they’re alive or dead.

Parinita: I mean we had something similar. It’s not as drastic as North Korea where you can’t get in and you don’t know what’s going on but with Independence, we had the Partition in India where India was divided into India and Pakistan.

Lorrie: Yup.

Parinita: And that had this same kind of thing where overnight people, depending on their religion or just which side of the border they fell on, it didn’t matter where they felt home or where they felt was the most comfortable place to be. They had to move, they had to upend their lives and we are seeing the impact of this still today. Where now of course politicians are taking advantage of this and making those lines much starker between Hindu and Muslim and Pakistan and India which all goes back to things that you didn’t really have control over. Or some people had more control over others. And ugh just the violence of colonisation

Lorrie: Yeah.

Parinita: Which yeah you see in this movie as well. And you wouldn’t see it perhaps so starkly like you said in the books. And I’m really excited to see what happens next. Well, there might be a lot of tragedy coming so excited might not be the correct emotion but I’m looking forward anyway.

Lorrie: I want the story. The reason that Credence leaves even the greatest, the only nurturing affection he’s ever known, he has the same greatest driving force as Harry Potter did. He wants to know his story. He doesn’t care about anything compared to that. And Harry too, the one thing that was the most powerful driver for him was, I want to know my own story. That was even more powerful than his saving people thing. [laughs]

Parinita: Yeah. [laughs]

Lorrie: He wants his birth-right back. And Credence will give up anything – even though he knows that this is the worst person in the world who’s already betrayed him. And at one point he says, just give me my story, then you can kill me. He doesn’t even care about being alive as much as he cares about his story.

Parinita: Oh, I love that parallel between Credence and Harry. And it’s not something that I thought of but yeah such different directions. And such different origins as well.

Lorrie: Yeah. I think it is the same story but for adults because one of the critiques of Harry Potter the character was like oh well for someone who was treated that badly, he sure seems normal and healthy. And well, it’s a fairy tale. But in real life, you go through what Harry went through, you’re much more likely to find Credence. [laughs]

Parinita: Yeah that’s true. Oh now I really want the story as well. I want to know what happens next.

Lorrie: I can’t wait for it.

Parinita: Crimes of Grindelwald was such a surprisingly good movie. Surprising based purely on my own sort of preconceived notions that were influenced by fandom. But I loved that movie and I want to know more. Lorrie thank you so much for being a part of the project and just even for the conversation and expanding my mind in so many different ways. Thank you so much for being here!

Lorrie: Thank you. Thank you for giving me something so fun to think about during this time that we’re all locked up at home [laughs] during a plague!

Parinita: Yeah, I mean Harry Potter is something that I’m returning to right now just because it’s something that’s given me so much comfort while I was growing up. It’s also giving me comfort now during the pandemic. As much as I criticise all the problematic elements of it, I’ll still do that, but I still love the books.

Lorrie: I think the reason why people including me feel so bitter and heartbroken and enraged when Rowling shows prejudice or shortcomings is because when she knows what she’s talking about, when she’s confident and she’s on target, the glory of the truths in her stories feel so satisfying. That thrill. And then when that resounding satisfaction stops in such a rude and shocking way, it’s heart-breaking. Why can you do this for some parts of the world and not others? We want you to keep providing it. And that’s a very harsh distinction between the satisfaction of feeling the story and the recognition that one person churning out stories is going to have one person’s limitations.

Parinita: Yeah but just following up on that – I’m also glad that she seems to have raised fans that are willing to stand up to her bigotry. When she tweets out something transphobic, as she did in December.

Lorrie: Oh boy.

Parinita: I know we didn’t have time to go into that but we did talk about it during our planning and just for those listening, both Lorrie and I are very stridently against transphobia of any kind and against J. K. Rowling’s transphobia specifically. I don’t think I’ve encountered any part of the fan community that hasn’t stood up to her blatant transphobia. I might just inhabit some really nice spaces, I guess, but I love seeing that everybody took the fact that Harry Potter was so important to us and we keep that but J. K. Rowling’s transphobia and her prejudice and bigotry, yeah, we can do without that.

Lorrie: Yeah. She can’t live up to the ideals. That doesn’t make the ideals untrue.

Parinita: Ah I love that! That’s a great way to end this episode. Again, thank you so much for being here.

Lorrie: Thank you!

[Outro music]

You’ve been listening to our episode on how women of colour are represented in the Potterverse in general and in Crimes of Grindelwald in particular. Thank you so much Lorrie for helping me see things in a different light and for reiterating how important multiple and nuanced perspectives remain in conversations and critiques. You should definitely check out her blog at lorriekimcom.wordpress.com. And thank you Jack for helping me climb a tree for the first time in my 30-year-old life (and also for the editing).

[Outro music]

You can now listen to Marginally Fannish on SpotifyAppleGoogle, or SoundCloud. I’d love to hear from you and talk to you – so any feedback, comments or critiques are very welcome! Get in touch with me on social media, leave a comment on my blog, or email me at edps@leeds.ac.uk. If you’d like to follow the podcast or the PhD project, visit my website marginallyfannish.org where you’ll find both the podcast episodes and the blog. You can also receive updates on Facebook or Instagram at Marginally Fannish or on Twitter where I’m @MarginalFannish. If you enjoyed the podcast, please share it with anyone you think will enjoy it too.

Thanks for listening! Tune in again next time for all things fannish and intersectional!

Episode 3 Just Let Me Hug a Tree in the Woods: Wicca, Paganism, and Religion in Fantasy Media

Episode Resources: 

For this episode we looked at the following texts:

Blog post – Harry Potter: “Making Evil Look Innocent”

The Guardian article – JK Rowling confirms that there were Jewish wizards at Hogwarts

The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina episode – Chapter Seventeen: The Missionaries

Fan podcast – Woke Doctor Who “Faith in the Whoniverse”

Fan podcast – Witch, Please “Special Bonus Episode: Secret Feminist Agenda 1.7”

Fan podcast – Harry Potter and the Sacred Text “Halloween Edition: On Witches and Brett Kavanaugh”

Fan podcast – Breaking The Glass Slipper “Cultural Traditions of Magic – with Zen Cho”

Paper on Tolkien spirituality – “Honouring the Valar, Finding the Elf Within: The Curious History of Tolkien Spirituality and the Religious Affordance of Tolkien’s Literary Mythology”

Fan podcast – Imaginary Worlds “Faith in Fantasy” 

Fan podcast – Harry Potter and the Sacred Text “Special Edition: Owl Post and Broderick Greer”

Fan podcast – Harry Potter and the Sacred Text “Special Edition: Owl Post and Rabbi Scott Perlo (Again!)”

Fan podcast – Harry Potter and the Sacred Text “Owl Post and Other Journeys with Professor Stephanie Paulsell”

Fan podcast – Harry Potter and the Sacred Text “Owl Post Edition: Reclaiming Tradition with Professor Matt Potts”

Fan podcast – Harry Potter and the Sacred Text “Owl Post Edition: How to Be in Community with Burns Stanfield”

Fan podcast – Harry Potter and the Sacred Text “Faith: The House-Elf Liberation Front”

 

Episode Transcript: 

This is a clean transcript of the episode. If you would prefer the original, unedited version, please let me know!

Photograph of Anna Milon

[Intro music]

Welcome to Marginally Fannish, a show where we aim an intersectional lens at some of our favourite media and their fandoms.

[Intro music]

My name is Parinita Shetty and you’re listening to the third episode of Marginally Fannish. In this episode, I chat with Anna Milon about the representations of Wicca, paganism, and religion in media. We discuss how Christianity forms the framework of most Western fantasy. As a practising pagan and scholar, Anna outlines how the word witch means different things to different people. We chat about faith as both a religious and a political identity. Anna shares her frustration about the inaccurate representations of Wicca in mainstream media and culture which further marginalises the religion. I learn more about Wicca’s attempts to make the religion more inclusive for diverse groups of people.

We also talk about the different kinds of faith in fantasy and faith inspired by fantasy. We discuss how popular culture stories are replacing religious stories and how this influences the ways in which people make sense of the world. We draw parallels between religion and fandom and discuss the importance of inclusivity and intersectionality in both. We’re excited about how canon – both religious and fannish – is increasingly being interpreted in ways which highlight previously marginalised voices. We love that people are making canon which was written dozens or even thousands of years ago (depending on which canon you’re talking about) more relevant to contemporary social, cultural, and political contexts. Finally, we discuss how fandom offers the space to question the dominant religious framework as well as read a text through multiple spiritual lenses.

Happy listening!

[Intro music]

Anna Milon is a Russian-born London-bred doctoral researcher who has a tentative hope never to leave academia.  She has edited two Tolkien collections – Tolkien the Pagan? Reading Middle-earth through a Spiritual Lens and Poetry and Song in the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. Her written works have appeared in Beyond Realities 2015Gender Identity and Sexuality in Current Fantasy and Science Fiction, and most recently, A Shadow Within: Evil in Fantasy and Science Fiction, all of which have been published by Luna Press. She juggles all this writing, editing, and researching with the not-at-all-unlikely hobby of Medieval Swordsmanship. She will be presenting a paper on were-foxes called “Sexy Fox: Female Sexualisation in Modern Retellings of the East Asian Were-fox Tale” at the upcoming GIFCon i.e. Glasgow International Fantasy Conversations which will take place on the 28th and 29th of May this year at the University of Glasgow. I’ll be there too presenting my paper on intersectionality and fan podcasts, so if you’re nearby, come say hi!

Parinita: Hello! Today with me, I have Anna and we’re going to be talking about religion and faith in fandom and in media and in the real world. So Anna, would you like to introduce yourself and tell us about your experiences with religion?

Anna: So I am a second year PhD at the University of Exeter, studying very broadly speaking paganism and pagan representation in fantasy. And I started my application letter with, “As a witch!”

Parinita: [laughs]

Anna: So I am an eclectic solitary pagan and what that means is I do not have a coven or a group that I regularly work with. I mostly work alone. And rather than being a follower of a specific pagan movement like Wicca or Druidry, I pick and mix. And I’m inspired by a lot of different spiritual movements and a lot of different settings and ways of practicing. So yeah, that’s me.

Parinita: Wow, I didn’t know about this background and I find it really fascinating and I’m so excited to know more about it. Because I knew we were going to be talking about paganism and Wicca but like all religious people, you’d have different experiences as well within paganism, within eclectic paganism, within Wicca. There’s no monolithic experience, right, so I’m really excited to hear about yours. Well, as for me, I’m not really a religious person at all. I went to a Catholic school in India, in Mumbai, and I grew up in a Hindu household. So I’ve been at close quarters with a lot of religion but I don’t really know details about it except what I know through the people in my life and through media and through just conversations, I guess. I’m curious about religion but not because I think I want to find religion for myself, but because I find it really interesting how people engage with religion and how it helps them. And their view of the world through a religious lens. So yeah that’s –

Anna: Yeah.

Parinita: That’s my experience or lack of experience with religion, I guess.

Anna: And I guess fantasy and fandom is an excellent space to do that. Because it allows for a lot of speculation and for a lot of expression of both the religion of the author or the content creator, but also of reading the work through a specific religious lens by the reader or the consumer.

Parinita: Yeah, absolutely. And I think growing up in India, there are so many different religions that personally I’ve been acquainted with. And I grew up reading a lot of British literature and some American literature. And I never thought of looking at it in a religious lens, really. Not until – like I know Narnia is now the sort of urtext of Christian parables and allegory. And I only discovered that a few years ago. So when I first read Narnia, I didn’t realise it was supposed to stand for anything. Even though I did grow up in a Catholic school, so I knew the tales and I knew the narratives. But that connection never made itself clear to me, I guess.

Anna: Me too, me too. I remember reading Narnia when I was about eight maybe and just completely missing all of the religious analogies. Even though I come from a non-religious household, but my mother was very invested in a classical education for me. So I did know a lot of the Bible stories, as kind of points of references rather than from a religious perspective. And even so I didn’t notice C. S. Lewis employing them. And the same really with all fandom texts that I’ve encountered. For instance, I wasn’t really aware of Tolkien’s Christianity until I became a teenager, an older teenager. I think I first heard of J. K. Rowling referring to herself as Christian in a documentary and I think it was the twentieth anniversary of Harry Potter documentary, so it’s quite recent.

Parinita: So I discovered fandom as a teenager and the first fan space that I discovered was this website called Mugglenet which was this Harry Potter dedicated resource. And I was so excited that there were other people who loved Harry Potter as much as me. And this was before all the books had been out. So I was still a teenager and I think only the four books had been out by then. Four or five. And I remember that there was an interview with J. K. Rowling. And the interviewer wanted to know what religion she followed because I think there were a lot of controversies, as one of the texts that we read outlined, about her books promoting Satanism and Wicca. And so I suppose that’s why the interviewer was curious. And she said that I don’t want to reveal my religion because if I do, then the plot of the final book will be really evident to readers – to really astute readers. It’ll be really clear to them what’s going to happen. Which I thought was very curious because it led to so many theories. You know when you don’t have the canon there, there were so many theories. And everyone had all these sorts of interpretations from all sorts of lenses, including atheism. Now that I’m more familiar with Christian theology and stories and narratives, I know that Harry stood for, like Aslan, stood for Jesus. Yeah so her Christianity was only evident to me through her conversations and not through the text itself. Since I did mention the controversies with Wicca and paganism and Satanism that Harry Potter had, how would you, in your life or your scholarship or whatever, how would you define Wicca? And witches? And paganism?

Anna: The term witch is incredibly loaded. Which makes it very rewarding and also frustrating to study. Where you have people who in the late medieval and early modern period prosecuted as witches for being allied with the devil, for being evil. Then witches as a female, feminist identity that’s reclaiming an independent, self-sufficient and powerful and intelligent woman. You have witches who are Wiccans. Who are followers of one of the first neo-pagan religions promoted by Gerald Gardner in the 1950s. And you’ve got witches who are spiritual individuals but who do not necessarily align themselves with Wicca strictly.

Parinita: Um hmm.

Anna: And I find that in Harry Potter, being a witch or a wizard very much doesn’t fit into any of those terms.

Parinita: Um hmm.

Anna: Because you don’t get any sense of pagan leanings within the books at all. In fact, one of J. K. Rowling’s tweets about religious diversity in Hogwarts explicitly mentions how the only religion she didn’t envisage as being part of the Hogwarts student body was Wicca. Which puzzled me at the time. But equally you don’t get a sense that these people who go to Hogwarts are heirs of the persecuted community of historical witches.

Screenshot of J. K. Rowling's tweets about religious diversity in Hogwarts. Text says: To everyone asking whether their religion/belief/non-belief system is represented at Hogwarts: the only people I never imagined there are Wiccans.

Parinita: Um hmm.

Anna: Neither do you get the sense that they have particular leanings towards activism or towards social movements.

Parinita: Or even a sense of community really. Because even within the witches and wizards in Hogwarts, there are so many different social, cultural, all these sorts of hierarchies. Not only within the humans but also you know like house elves, giants and … so even in terms of having a community of like-minded followers or adherents to a particular belief, that doesn’t really seem to be there.

Anna: Yeah so I was very surprised to see that Rowling’s books sparked this controversy around promoting Wicca as a bad thing, promoting Satanism as a bad thing. Because there’s really nothing there, apart from the word witch or wizard and apart from the idea of magic which is condemned by some fundamentalist Christian groups. And in terms of the internal religion of Hogwarts, that’s very, very Christian. They celebrate Christmas, they’ve got very Christian ethics. So not just the external religion in the context of which Rowling writes is Christianity, but also the wizards themselves can be conceived to be Christian.

Parinita: Yeah absolutely. And again, this is something that as someone who’s not familiar with these conversations and these contexts, it comes as such a surprise to me because when I was a kid and even later as a teenager, I knew that in the US, there were these groups that wanted to burn Harry Potter and were banning Harry Potter just because it promoted Wicca. Because of the word witch in it. And all the articles in India were really bemused because it was so alien to us. Of course we have book bannings as well but they’re for not the same reasons. And we would never think of banning Harry Potter for promoting Wicca. And then on your recommendation, I did watch “The Missionaries” episode of The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina just this afternoon actually. And how starkly Christianity was shown in opposition to Wicca there – again, that connection between the two was so evident to me only then. Because I’d heard about witch burning and stuff, of course, in the US and I think in the UK and Europe? I’m not sure. But I had heard about it through media, entirely through media. And for me, it had a much more gendered connotation than a religious one. Even though I knew that it was … well I suppose I vaguely knew that it was Christians burning witches as heretics. But because of the media that I consumed, to me it felt like it was because powerful women who live in this society that oppressed women. Which is why people were afraid of witches. Not because of their religious leanings but because of their gender and what they could do to someone who’d been oppressing them all their lives essentially. So yeah just in terms of Christianity versus Wicca, it was really interesting just because it’s something that I’d never thought of. Like in terms of where I’ve grown up.

Anna: Yeah I think there are sort of two things happening here. First of all there’s definitely this uneasy relationship between Christianity today and Wicca today based on the persecution of witches in the past who were not Wiccan because Wicca  didn’t exist. But –

Parinita: Yes.

Anna: Who are seen as ancestors of modern pagans. And then there is the reclamation of the term witch by second-wave feminists to mean this intelligent woman who’s being oppressed. And there is an interesting movement with the use of the acronym WITCH which expands to Women’s International Terrorist Conspiracy from Hell.

Parinita: [laughs]

Anna: Created in the late 1960s and for them, their motto is, “You are a witch by being female, untamed, angry, joyous and immoral. Immortal, sorry.” So it has very little to do with paganism and a lot to do with female agency.

Parinita: Hmm.

Anna: And I guess there’s this perception that both things – both paganism and female independence sit uneasily with traditional Christianity.

Parinita: So is Wicca a Western faith tradition then, would you say? Since I watched that episode, that’s really fresh in my mind. I was really interested in how it stands in contrast to other religions. Not just Christianity but other Western and Eastern religions. Because I don’t know, in India we have our own what would I guess be considered pagan. Again, I don’t know a lot of details about religion and I haven’t researched enough. But I suppose from a Western lens, it would be considered pagan or, like you were saying yesterday, indigenous. So you know things that probably, in Christianity, would be considered really not acceptable. So is Wicca then just Western based?

Anna: Yes. I absolutely would agree that Wicca is Western. Ronald Hutton says that Wicca is the only religion that England gave the world.

Parinita: [laughs]

Anna: Which I think is pretty accurate. Yes, it has grown and developed beyond England but the crux sort of seems to be in the UK. And at the moment, there seems to be a sort of divide between eclectic pagans who very much create new traditions and reimagine the past, and who tend to be Western or Anglo-centric or Euro-centric. And sort of revivalists who are people who are getting back in touch with their native or indigenous faith. They tend to be from colonised countries and cultures that are rediscovering a native faith that has been repressed by either Christian missionaries or by a colonising force. So they are in conversation with one another but they are sort of two poles of a spectrum.

Parinita: So then for a group of Wiccans, or for a group of pagans, would it be then like a political identity as well as a religious one? One of the texts that we looked at this time was the Woke Doctor Who episode of “Faith in the Whoniverse”. And one of the hosts, who’s a black American woman, spoke about how she didn’t recognise herself in Christianity. But she still had faith and she converted, I guess, or found the Orisha tradition from Africa which she really identified with politically as well as religiously because they were nature-based deities who looked like her. And so it was a very actively activist decision on her part.

Anna: I feel that yes, a lot of choices that pagans make are political as well as religious. It seems to be getting more prominent especially in relation to environmental activism and intersectionality. People see paganism as a more viable spirituality for a modern society.

Parinita: Hmm.

Anna: And as a more accepting spirituality. And indeed it is a lot more malleable than, for instance, Christianity which has just been around for a long period of time and has fossilized somewhat.

Parinita: Right. So we listened to two podcast episodes that dealt with Wicca, very personal interpretations of Wicca. Which was the Witch, Please episode as well as the Harry Potter and the Sacred Text episode. And that was my first introduction to proper Wicca, I suppose, just proper perspectives from people who were either familiar with it or who were non-practicing Wiccans. And I was unsure whether there was an intersectional analysis in Wicca. Because I know that in one of the episodes, in the Witch, Please one, they did say that the whole focus on menstruation – they didn’t want to make it transphobic, which is why they were trying not to have the focus so much on that. But then as somebody else said, it’s such a personal engagement with the faith that everyone has different engagements with it. So you know there’s no one catchall religion, I guess.

Anna: There is absolutely no one catchall religion. And in a way that’s a good thing because at the moment, since sort of the 90s, there are a lot of conversations around how a lot of the pagan traditions are very gender essentialist because of this view of nature and nature’s fertility as being very much binary with a union of the male and the female principle. And with the main worship deities being the god and the goddess. Which are not just socially masculine and feminine but are also very physically male and female. And as you mentioned, the focus on the female reproductive cycle or the stages of the female life – the triple goddess is represented as the maiden, the mother, and the crone. So where does that put women who are unable to have children or who have chosen not to? Luckily enough, certain Wiccan groups and communities and certain other pagan communities are finding ways to work around that by working with different deities or by viewing the male and female aspects as inherent in every individual.

Parinita: Hmm.

Anna: And it is the balance of the two or the intersection of the two that creates a harmonious person. As opposed to you representing one or the other.

Parinita: Ah. So another thing that I was thinking of just in terms of intersectionality … I know one of the people on the podcast, I think it was on the Witch, Please podcast, said that in terms of their belief and their perspective of Wicca, there is no fundamentally bad way to be a woman. And I understand that in terms of like they were, I think, talking about frivolousness versus femininity and like all ways of being a woman are acceptable. But then if I analysed it a bit further, it almost seemed to suggest that just by virtue of being a woman, you are … I mean you can’t be a bad woman I suppose. And I was thinking there are hierarchies even within women, right? Like just in terms of class and disability and which part of the world that you come from, what race you are, what … I suppose trans and non-binary folk as well. But like you said the gender essentialism is being countered. But even within the environmentalism movement, just because a lot of the Wiccan and pagan like not a lot – but a group of them do seem to be really actively trying to protect the environment as well. And with the environment movement as well, Extinction Rebellion was something that I was really fascinated with when it first started coming up and I was reading up about them and I was researching them and joined the group and everything. And I started getting this uncomfortable feeling. And then there were more articles about it and critiques about it later that it was very exclusionary to – not actively, they weren’t meaning to be – but they weren’t very inclusive to people who were not middle class, not white, not privileged in some way.

Anna: That’s ooof – there’s a lot to unpack there. Thank you for asking the challenging question. I think with what you said about is there a right and a wrong way of being a woman. I think we can bring that back to fandom and whether there’s a right and a wrong way for being a fan.

Parinita: Yeah that’s a very good point.

Anna: Yeah. We see the core idea be it feminism or being a fan or environmentalism as the defining trait of the people within the community.

Parinita: Hmm.

Anna: Often overlooking other areas of their beliefs, of their attitudes that might not be as positive or as palatable. And I also feel that we as a society really don’t take kindly to people’s complexity. That you can’t be all good. There will always be, unfortunately, a side of your life where you’re not as educated, not as aware and not as considerate as you perhaps could have been. But that need not condemn you entirely. And especially I feel with Extinction Rebellion, I also am very much interested in their work. But to give an example, their push for civil disobedience and their push for arrests, a lot of people can’t afford to be arrested, especially –

Parinita: Exactly.

Anna: Ethnic minorities, especially if they’re from less privileged backgrounds. However, this can be slightly flipped on its head by saying well only people who are considered privileged in this society are going to take that risk.

Parinita: Um hmm.

Anna: And those are the voices that we are putting up there and making them heard. The importance here I feel is to give a different platform and a different way of activism to people who are unable to get arrested or uncomfortable doing it.

Parinita: No, I absolutely agree. I think that the conversation is what’s more important than just – first of all the awareness that this is a problem. But I think that awareness is there now and it’s … with everything like with fandom as well. There was a huge conversation in fandom about the race blindness of fandom and the racism within some parts of fandom as well. Which again, people may not, like you were saying, they may not be educated enough or they don’t know enough. For me, it’s an ongoing process of learning and unlearning social conditioning in different aspects of my identity. And also unlearning the colonised brain that I have thanks to growing up in India and consuming largely Western media. But yeah for sure, I think the conversations are important. And do you think these conversations are happening on the Wiccan side as well? Or on the pagan side as well?

Anna: I think they are but there can always be more that’s done.

Parinita: Yeah.

Anna: And I wish that these conversations had a slightly more far-reaching platform. Because a lot of the times from what I’ve encountered, they happen at conventions and at meetings. But so many pagans don’t have a community and so much interaction happens online.

Parinita: Hmm.

Anna: And I feel that it’s online in spaces that slip under the radar –

Parinita: Yeah.

Anna: That you can have a lot of these problematic discourses still circulating.

Parinita: Hmm.

Anna: And I feel that it’s the same with fandom.

Parinita: Absolutely.

Anna: With things like Comic Con, everyone is lovely for the most part and people try to be considerate and people try to raise awareness. And then you go to a Reddit thread and –

Parinita: [laughs] Yeah.

Anna: It’s a lot of weird creatures.

Parinita: But also I suppose you do have – at least I have the tendency of creating my bubble, like safe space within everywhere that I go online. Because I know that even on places like The Guardian’s Facebook articles, if I go read the comments, I’ll just spiral into this “Why am I doing this to myself?!” Because you would think even with a space like that, it would be fairly okay, but nope! Nope! It’s not okay; you shouldn’t go there unless you want to, I don’t know, fight with random strangers. But fandom is the same. And I guess with religion and faith and Wicca, it would be the same. That you don’t actively seek out negativity, I guess. Or antagonism. And the conversations would be more fruitful if there was, like you were saying, a larger platform for the community.

Anna: It’s difficult to know when your safe space becomes an echo chamber.

Parinita: Um hmm.

Anna: And where that boundary lies. A couple of years back, I pitched a topic for the Tolkien Society Seminar in Leeds. And my topic was Tolkien the Pagan? Question mark. Reading Middle-earth through a spiritual lens. And I was trying to promote a conversation about non-Christian interpretations of Tolkien’s work. Because the Christian view is so prevalent that there seems to be no space for much else and I was trying to create that space. And the Call for Papers was accepted and I was warned whether I was prepared for the consequences

Parinita: [laughs]

Anna: And I sort of laughed it off at the time.

Parinita: Oh dear.

Anna: And within the first couple of days, on Facebook, that post had over two hundred comments. Most of them very aggressively denouncing the choice of topic saying that Tolkien’s texts are Christian only. That if you are a non-Christian reader, you can’t possibly understand what he is getting at and what Middle-earth is all about.

Parinita: Wow.

Anna: Which, to me, was quite jarring. And I was quite taken aback at the vehemence with which these people defended or claimed the texts for a specific group of people. But, on the other hand, if I didn’t encounter that, I wouldn’t have known that such a large percentage of people who consider themselves fans have this sort of reaction.

Parinita: No, absolutely. And it’s just I suppose this perceived assault against – not only in fandom, in religion as well – like when you are the dominant group but there’ll be one lone voice, like in your case your Call for Papers, that offers another interpretation of either the religion or just another religion or a fan theory or whatever. And how this creates this really uncomfortable feeling, I guess, among the dominant group. And it leads to so many different kinds of violence and oppression. In your case, it wasn’t physical violence and it wasn’t oppression I guess; but it was trying to silence any dissent or any interpretation that doesn’t match your own. And it was something that like with Harry Potter and the whole fundamentalist Christian furore against it, it’s the fact that in the US, Christianity forms the structure of a lot of their country and media and culture. And in India, it would be Hinduism. But just like in the US, in other parts of the world, and in India currently, the majority religion is feeling this threat by religions that are so much smaller in their countries. But the way that they’re responding to it is really – that’s what I find really scary. And it’s really dangerous. And in your case luckily there’s been no – I mean you know the two hundred comments I hope were –

Anna: No, I got off lightly.

Parinita: Yeah. Not to diminish the feelings that you must have had. But I’m reading this book about the alt-right culture online and I have a very nice, optimistic view of the internet because that’s been my experience so far. Again, my safe space is very much constructed and deliberate. So I have a really nice experience online. But I know that a lot of women online don’t. And in your case, I wonder if it was … I suppose with the CFP, they wouldn’t know who put out the CFP – the Call for Papers.

Anna: Yeah, luckily they didn’t.

Parinita: Yeah. Because –

Anna: They mostly pinned it on the Society which was that one step removed and that was helpful.

Parinita: Yeah but that’s another thing – it’s not just oppression of one, if you’re a woman, it’s so much worse for everything.

Anna: Yeah. And in fandom, especially, you can see how arbitrary these distinctions and these prejudices sometimes are. Because sometimes people will defend the canon until the cows come home. And sometimes people will defend their own idea of what the show is supposed to be like against the actual showrunners and the cast. And I’m thinking here about the announcement of Jodie Whitaker as the … Thirteenth Doctor? [asks hesitantly]

Parinita: Uh huh yeah. [laughs]

Anna: Got the numbers right.

Parinita: [laughs]

Anna: And the backlash that she got. Whereas that’s canon. That is a showrunner decision. Therefore, surely all of us canon-loving people should make peace with that as a natural progression of the show. But unfortunately it seems that people are very, very fixed in what they want to be the truth.

Parinita: But also fixed in a very certain way that only privileges their group of people, I guess. So speaking of, just because something that you’d mentioned earlier, the religious diversity in Hogwarts where one of the things that we read was The Guardian article about J. K. Rowling’s tweets about the “very evident”, according to her, religious diversity in Hogwarts. But as she mentioned and as others have mentioned since, Anthony Goldstein, I think, is the only Jewish character. And it’s like his presence doesn’t really – it’s the exception that proves the rule, right? Christianity, as you said, is the framework of Hogwarts too. And Anthony Goldstein’s Jewishness has nothing – there’s no mention of it in the text. It’s like Dumbledore being gay, there’s no mention of that in the text itself. So I feel like there were so many – I suppose not missed opportunities … but there was a lot of room for exploration in terms of the religious diversity in Hogwarts. Which I think fandom could be doing but it’s not something that is evident in the series at all.

Anna: Yeah. Perhaps it’s a bit too late for the series because I feel that the majority of backlash against J. K. Rowling was because she refused to acknowledge that the texts were done and the texts were fallible. But when she wrote them, diversity – whether it be sexual, ethnic or religious diversity – wasn’t really on the forefront of everyone’s minds as it is now. And that’s all right in a way. She could not have written different books being who she was and who she is now.

Parinita: Um hmm.

Anna: But adaptations of the Harry Potter series can be different, can be diverse. And that’s very much the conversation currently happening against the upcoming Lord of the Rings on Prime adaptation where the announced cast is very racially diverse. And the question is how the showrunners are going to deal with that and interpret that. And how will it differ from what we suppose Tolkien’s own vision of Middle-earth was. Which presumably, based on the time when he was writing, was white and straight. To come back to your question about the lack of exploration of religious diversity in fandom, I’m quite surprised by how little people engage with that as far as I’ve seen. I haven’t really seen a lot of fanfiction or fan art that provides meaningful interpretations of characters as religious. Maybe because of this stigma in some young social groups in some corners of fandom, of religions – any kind of religion – being very oppressive and very anti-fantasy.

Parinita: Hmm.

Anna: Um so yeah.

Parinita: Which actually that reminds me. I had I think come across a Tumblr post about how Muslim students would celebrate Ramzan in Hogwarts. In terms of when they celebrate Eid, the fasting, and how they’d have to talk to the house elves and you know have arrangements for –

Anna: I’ve seen that. It’s a good post.

Screenshot of Tumblr post by bertiebottsbigbean. Text says: why don't we talk about muslim kids in hogwarts during ramadan? imagine waking up at 3 every morning and walking down for suhoor, to find the house elves have prepared a feast for them. imagine the kids having an extended curfew, so they can go and eat iftar at 10, where the house elves once again provide a ten course meal, topped with dates and traditional delicacies from around the world. imagine the kids being allowed to go into the kitchens in the middle of the night if they were still in the mood to eat. imagine the kids being allowed to leave class to do their prayers, and sending lunch times to read the quran. we need to talk more about muslim kids in hogwarts.

Parinita: Yeah, yeah. So you’re right, it’s very limited. But I think in fandom, there is an opportunity – and I haven’t gone looking for religiously diverse texts really. But I just think that the diversity, especially in a text like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings or Doctor Who which has such a global appeal, which has fans from so many different parts of the world and cultures and religions and everything, there is so much more room for exploring diverse aspects. And even in Doctor Who, in the Woke Doctor Who episode, they mentioned that ever since Jodie’s run, there have been more episodes that have focused on different faiths. And they wonder whether it is not only because there’s a diverse cast now, but there’s also more diverse creators in the writing room. And that’s what leads to more diversity. Like the other text that we looked at the interview with the Malaysian British writer Zen Cho, and how she was saying that – which is true and it’s something that I hadn’t really until someone pointed it out, I hadn’t realised it – that a lot of Western fantasy is very Christian and it’s the sort of fantasy that is global now. We all have our brains shaped by Western fantasy traditions. So like Game of Thrones, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter. And everything else is othered and everything else is exoticised or even denigrated depending on who’s doing the writing. And the fact that there are now more diverse voices – because diversity is so interesting, right? Not just for people from marginalised religions who see their practices there and feel this sense of recognition but also for people from dominant religions who have always been seeing the same kind of texts. And now they have an opportunity to read something different and to learn something different, I guess.

Anna: Yeah. I absolutely agree with you there. And I think that the othering of the non-Judeo-Christian framework is doing more harm than the texts themselves that are written within a dominant Christian context. Because that episode that you’re referring to, it’s Breaking the Glass Slipper non-Western magic episode. And the crux of the discussion there is that the texts even when written through a Christian lens, when written well enough, do offer other ways of interpreting them. Do offer other spiritual reference points that don’t necessarily require an explicit mention of, oh that character is Muslim or creation of an internal magic or spiritual system that actively references a non-Western religion. But we are not used to reading them that way.

Parinita: Um hmm.

Anna: And I think that fandom spaces are a good place to introduce the habit of reading texts through multiple spiritual lenses.

Parinita: No, absolutely. Currently in fandom, a lot of conversation about diversity seems to be focused on race. So currently for me, it’s me unlearning seeing white as normative and trying to see … make my brain more diverse, I guess. Trying to accept more diversity within the characters that I read. But you’re so right in terms of religion as well. Now if I go back to a lot of the media that I watch as well, Christianity is so much the framework. And it’s something that I just took for granted really. I didn’t stop to consider because, like you’re saying, I don’t know how to read it through a different spiritual tradition even though I come from a different religious – not personally religious but culturally, I come from such a different tradition. Another one of the episodes that we were listening to, the Imaginary Worlds episode about “Faith in Fantasy”, featured different religious leaders. So there was a Rabbi, there was a Minister and there was an Alwaez – a Muslim leader. And they talked about how they read similar science fiction and fantasy texts, the really popular ones, based on their own faith traditions. So they read it through a Muslim lens or a Jewish lens or a Christian lens and I found that fascinating. Because I’ve never read anything through a Hindu lens, not really. And is that something you find that you do? Your Call for Papers was about Tolkien and paganism so you did actively look or try to look for paganism in Tolkien. Is that something you find that you have to do or something that comes really easily to you?

Anna: I try to. I think I fail more than I’m comfortable admitting. Because a lot of very Christian concepts that I have internalised, I don’t necessarily recognise as Christian. For instance, I have a very strong sense of sin and virtue as these two opposing forces. And human characters in fantasy are necessarily sinful and the sort of benevolent elves, supernatural creatures, magician characters are necessarily virtuous. Which again, is a very, very Christian divide. But through hard work and self-abasement, you can achieve a modicum of virtue and atone for your sin. And that needs to be challenged as much as the more overt links to Christianity. When trying to read things explicitly through a pagan lens, I often get frustrated because I find a lot of the references that are thought to be pagan are to this witchcraft-light social movement that has very little to do with spirituality and has a fairly little understanding of what being Wiccan or being pagan actually entails. For instance, the Chilling Adventures of Sabrina are an endless fount of frustration for me.

Parinita: [laughs]

Anna: Because they’re not witches! They’re Satanists!

Parinita: That’s what I –! I mean when I was watching this episode – I’ve had this show on my radar for quite awhile and this episode was quite an episode to begin with, to introduce yourself to, [laughs] because it was very much Christianity versus Satanism. Because they’re following Lucifer, I believe. I don’t know … they called him the Dark Lord. But yeah they’re following Lucifer, and they consider god – the Christian god – to be the false god? Like it’s a very binary opposition. So yeah.

Anna: First of all, I don’t see anything wrong with Satanism. It’s its own thing with interesting ideas.

Parinita: Yeah.

Anna: But I feel that by calling a religion that is so explicitly against Christianity witchcraft, as they do in the show, they’re promoting some quite entrenched and quite erroneous ideas about what witchcraft, Wicca, paganism actually is. I know people who identify as both pagan and Christian, specifically Roman Catholic. And there seems to be a way to enmesh those two religions. Plus [sighs] really I don’t think I’ve ever met a pagan who was actively dismissive of Christianity as a fake or false religion. Sure as a social structure, it has its own problems but so do all religious and spiritual movements. And also the attributes that the Church of Night in The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina uses are often very misogynistic, often very aggressive. No, we do not actually eat children.

Parinita: [laughs]

Anna: No, there are no blood sacrifices. Just let me hug a tree in the woods somewhere.

Parinita: [laughs]

Anna: And I understand that it makes for a nice, visually compelling show. But unfortunately it is a very inaccurate representation of paganism as a group of faiths.

Parinita: Again, that’s something I would not have thought of until you just said it. Because it is like not taking Wicca or Wiccans or witches seriously as their own faith and as their own religion. Because like you’re saying, it makes for a good show and it makes for a good story-line. But you would not have Muslims, for example, or Hindus or you know any other non-Western religion or even a Western one. Like Jewish people. You wouldn’t have them the way that Wiccans are presented on the TV show. So it’s almost like you’re using another religion just as set dressing, as just this sort of fun cultural anomaly. For the people who are writing and for the mainstream who’s watching, it’s just fantasy. And it’s not a real religion that a lot of people follow.

Anna: Yes. And it’s interesting where that divide lies between scare quotes “real religions” and “made-up religions”.

Parinita: Um hmm.

Anna: Because fantasy is quite rich in both. And paganism seems to be somewhere in the middle where in Harry Potter you use the language of witchcraft without any kind of spiritual underpinning. They perform spells, they make potions, but there’s no sense that it’s an act of worship or an act of spiritual transaction. And in shows like Supernatural, you have a Christian framework with angels and demons and god is somewhere out there. But I feel it’s a lot less willing to cross certain boundaries. Like you wouldn’t have … Dean and … Sam and Dean, there we go!

Parinita: [laughs]

Anna: Sam and Dean walk up to heaven and sort of have a chat with god over a beer.

Parinita: Hmm.

Anna: Because it’s not that kind of show. There are some boundaries there that prevent them from doing that. Whereas I feel that with paganism, because it isn’t counted as a real religion in many cases, there are no boundaries like that. There’s nothing protecting the sacred aspects of paganism.

Parinita: Hmm. And when you said made-up religion, it made me think – I always have this vague … not daydream, I guess, but vague thought. If we have the apocalypse, we have a lot of reasons for that like the climate, religion, I don’t know so many different things. And far into the future, if there are descendants of humans or whoever or aliens or whatever, they find our – whatever texts that they do, and whatever media, paraphernalia whatever – and what will they think that our beliefs and our religions and our worldview was based on what they find? Because currently popular culture seems to have such a grip on a lot of people. In fact in the Imaginary Worlds episode that we listened to, the Rabbi, she did say that popular culture stories almost seem to have replaced religion for a lot of people in terms of the stories that we tell each other. And a lot of mainstream religions that we see today like Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, they’re thousands of years old. And they were at some point made up. Like someone did make the texts that we see now. And two thousand years from now, we don’t know what religions are going to survive, what is going to replace the religions that are so mainstream now. Like that fascinating paper that you sent me about Tolkien spirituality which – I’d never heard of it. But when I was reading the paper, there are so many parallels with religion that already exists now in terms of … they have a canon, they have the book that they read, they have a lot of metaphors, they have a lot of faith that they place on some elements and some aspects of the books. And like you were saying, there are some people who believe that their reading of the books is the only correct reading. And everyone who doesn’t follow the religion is not understanding the books correctly. Right?

Anna: Yeah, absolutely. And you’ve got things like people being inspired by Tolkien. Especially The Silmarillion and the creation of Middle-earth and the Valar to have their own religious groups. And things like Jedis and people seeing philosophies portrayed in Star Wars as religions. I think that even without these explicit examples of adapting fantasy into faith, we already believe in fantasy much more than we think we do. Firstly because fantasy leads us to faith. If you think about Doctor Who and how much faith his companions – his or her companions place in the Doctor. If you think about the trope of the Chosen One, who is infallible, and we as readers place our faith in that character. Because we know the formula. We know that in the end, they are going to overcome whatever difficulties are thrown their way. Is that enough to supplant more conventional religions? I don’t know. But it’s an interesting question.

Parinita: Yeah for sure. And so Harry Potter and the Sacred Text, it has a lot of engagements with spiritual leaders. So some of the episodes that we listened to, there were Reverends and Rabbis and just even scholars of religious studies. And a lot of the things they were saying, I found so many similarities between religion and fandom. Because for me as a non-religious person, a lot of the things that religious people seem to find in religion, I found in fandom. And just people who like the same things that I do. So that finding that sense of community, and you know even having rituals based around your favourite things and going on pilgrimages as well. It’s something that I never thought of as – I know religious people go on pilgrimages but then if I go to something that’s Harry Potter related or if I go to something that’s related to the movies or something that I like, a TV show, that is a pilgrimage in a way. It is me going there because I love this thing so much. Canon as well. All these debates about what counts as canon. Like in Judaism, Rabbi Scott Perlo I believe, he was talking about how there is a debate between some people what they consider to be canon. So that made me think of fandom as well. The more conservative fans and adherents who think that the original text is the only canon that’s acceptable. And there can be no deviation to it. So like what you said with Lord of the Rings and the Christian interpretation. Or with Doctor Who even with just the white, male Doctor being the only acceptable Doctor. Whereas on the other side, you have the more progressive sort of believers, I guess, who are open to canon being disrupted and expanded and just who like there being more of the thing they love. And have more to look at.

Anna: Yeah, absolutely. And fandom not only functions very much as a spiritual movement, it also inherits a lot of the language of one. You mentioned pilgrimages. A lot of fans will have shrines of their favourite book or show paraphernalia. Canon can also be interpreted as a religious term.

Parinita: Metaphors as well. Like you know in terms of metaphors for real-world social and political issues. So fandom does that with texts, like Harry Potter or Doctor Who. But also with religion, like even though these texts were written two thousand years or more ago, you’re still trying to make it relevant to today’s contexts. Or at least I think at least successful religion, that’s what they should be doing. Like I was telling you about this article that I read about this radical church in the US. And they made social justice the framework of their church. I’m going to link to that in the transcript of this episode. But they just meet together and they read things like Marx and feminist theory and also religion, like extracts from the Bible. And they all connect it together. It’s almost like getting an education, right? For me, that’s what fandom is. Just learning to look at things through different lenses that I wouldn’t have otherwise. Community, just coming together, and meeting people that you wouldn’t otherwise have met and they might not be … like you were saying the echo chamber. It’s a way for me to get out of my echo chamber a bit because we’re coming around a community because we all love this thing. But we’re coming from so many different backgrounds and so many different perspectives. And perhaps even political leanings. And it makes it more interesting, I think.

 

Photograph of a church pamphlet. Cover text says: Jubilee Baptist Church. Love as if a different world is possible.

Picture from the Jubilee Baptist Church referenced above. Image courtesy BuzzFeed

Anna: Absolutely. And I think it’s very valuable to have a community that is so diverse both nationally, ethnically, religiously but also in terms of education and lifestyle and professional careers. Where those things also greatly impact outlooks on the world and ways we see current knowledge. And fandom is this unifying force that allows us to explore new ways of finding information while also always being able to bring it back to that community, bring it back to that thing that’s familiar and that’s safe and that we love. Which is why it’s so important that we protect the fandom space and maintain it as accessible and as welcoming to everyone.

Parinita: Yeah, absolutely. I agree. And I think that that’s what to me currently is most exciting with fandom. So, like I said, I discovered fandom first as a thirteen-year-old with Mugglenet. And I used to read Harry Potter fanfiction and I used to write Harry Potter fanfiction. But now what really excites me is all the critical commentary and the fan works that are around it. In the Harry Potter and the Sacred Text episode with Reverend Broderick Greer, he said, “Who in our culture is imagined out of stories? And who needs to reimagine themselves back into them?” He was talking about religion but he was also talking about fandom. Because in religion as well, with Christianity, with all religions I think, Hinduism as well. They are written in a very patriarchal way and Hinduism is very upper caste. So a specific group of privileged people. With Christianity I don’t know if it was white men because it was in the Middle East but privileged people nonetheless. Or at least now they’ve gained a sense of status. And now it is mostly white men who are adherents to the religion [Editor’s note: I meant in control]. But it was written to privilege just a certain group of people but there were so many other voices that were not – like of women, of different races, classes, you know even religions. And now there is more of an effort within both religion and within fandom to highlight these marginalised voices and to actively look for these voices so that even if the canon itself has a lot of blind spots and it has a lot of missing gaps, fans and followers are now working to fix these gaps. And I love that.

Anna: Yeah. And this notion of reading certain groups of people back into stories speaks to the idea of re-enchantment of the world that’s been loosely going on since the 70s. And is this drive to see the world as more intersectional, as more holistic, acknowledging that no group of people has primacy over others. That humanity as a species does not have primacy over non-human animals, over the natural world in general. And a more magical view of the world that allows us to maintain our identity while also entertaining all of these other ways of being in the world.

Parinita: Yeah and just even with science fiction and fantasy, I completely agree with you. It allows us to imagine a different world; allows us to question, really, things, the way that they are and allows us then to imagine possibilities as well. Which I think in religion, in fandom, in fantasy, that’s a really good thing for me to take from them.

Anna: Yeah, absolutely.

Parinita: Thank you so much, Anna, for talking to me about your faith and about religion. I have learned so much from our conversation. My brain is so full of ideas and I just want to go back to Harry Potter and now read it through a religious lens and find out all the ways that – maybe I can write more fanfiction now. Maybe I can go back to my thirteen-year-old [laughs] skills and you know write fanfiction from a religious lens.

Anna: Thank you so much. It’s been an incredible pleasure. And good luck with your project!

Parinita: Thank you!

[Outro music]

You’ve been listening to our episode on representations of religion in media. You can listen to the first two episodes of Marginally Fannish wherever you find your podcasts. Thanks again Anna for being a part of this project and for expanding my brain in so many different ways. Religion is not something I think about too often and you had such a refreshing and illuminating perspective to share. And thanks as always to Jack for helping me with the editing.

You can now listen to Marginally Fannish on SpotifyAppleGoogle, or SoundCloud. I’d love to hear from you and talk to you – so any feedback, comments or critiques are very welcome! Get in touch with me on social media, leave a comment on my blog, or email me at edps@leeds.ac.uk. If you’d like to follow the podcast or the PhD project, visit my website marginallyfannish.org where you’ll find both the podcast episodes and the blog. You can also receive updates on Facebook or Instagram at Marginally Fannish or on Twitter where I’m @MarginalFannish. If you enjoyed the podcast, please share it with anyone you think will enjoy it too.

Thanks for listening! Tune in again next time for all things fannish and intersectional!

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén