In case you missed it, HBO Max has officially announced a Harry Potter reboot is in the works—a new adaptation after a mere twelve years since the release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows Part 2 finished the mega-hit series in an epic good-beats-evil finale. Twelve years doesn’t seem like a long enough time to build nostalgia, especially due to the waves of Wizarding World content that have flooded popular media in the past few years: the 2016 stage play of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, the Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them franchise, three Harry Potter theme parks, the Hogwarts Legacy video game, and the Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: Return to Hogwarts Reunion released on HBO Max last year. Harry Potter fans everywhere should be satiated, and the reunion special showcased the once-child stars as well adjusted, grateful for the franchise, but not necessarily eager to don the wizards robes once again.
It seems like the franchise is at a good conclusion, and new content at this point is not only superfluous but is doing little to hide its acquisitive, greedy motivation. The political and ethical climate surrounding the franchise also puts the decision to continue with this new adaptation at an interesting crossroad—as once fans are grappling with the transphobia of the creator of the series, is it really a good time to try and sell it again? People will still buy it because of the impact of this series both globally and culturally (it’s just so iconic, isn’t it?), and yet it hardly feels like good news even to fans. Harry Potter isn’t going anywhere in pop-culture, and with the promised release of a television adaptation in the next few years, it seems like the series is only on the rise. Whether or not this series will oversaturate the fandom is another question.
The reason for the adaptation is that the movies, although they spanned a decade, showcased child stars who transformed into the beloved book characters, and featured iconic British actors as our favorite professors (because let’s be real here, who could play Professor Snape other than the late Alan Rickman? Which actor could be Hagrid except the late Robbie Coltrane?) were not faithful adaptations of the books. The idea is that only a television series, with one season dedicated to each book, would give enough time to properly tell the story. Like the movies, the television show would have the cast grow up on the screen—little Ron, Harry, and Hermione fighting the dark lord and puberty with the usual Hogwarts hijinks.
Is 2023 really the time to announce a new Harry Potter adaptation? I think it is interesting, particularly given the climate surrounding JK Rowling as a public figure as well as the problematic place that Harry Potter has in the media. So, why are we getting an adaptation? The creators of the show will be working alongside JK Rowling as an executive producer, meaning that she will be able to play a fundamental role in the artistic vision of the show. Having JK Rowling as a producer of the show is a bold choice: fans and consumers everywhere have become increasingly disillusioned by the franchise because of her role in online debates regarding transgender individuals.
The conversation surrounding JK Rowling is one that requires nuance; however, the baseline evaluation of her online presence is clear—she is inspiring many people to take part in anti-transgender legislation, in transphobic hate speech, and in mocking the lives of real people all around the world. Again, these conversations are complex—Rowling is a survivor of domestic violence and therefore her beliefs about creating safe environments for women is a real concern. Her bigotry is what misguides this conversation—trans women are not a threat to the spaces of cis-gender women. An article by the Office of Justice Programs uploaded in June of 2014 details that transgender individuals are at an upsettingly high risk of experiencing sexual abuse or assault. The article states that “one in two transgender individuals are sexually abused or assaulted at some point in their lives… This indicates that the majority of transgender individuals are living with the aftermath of trauma and the fear of possible repeat victimization.” To therefore spew fear and hatred for a group that is marginalized and already at a shockingly high risk of abuse is dangerous and misinformed.
But the show must go on for money-hungry producers. Personally, I think that this show is unnecessary. I love Harry Potter, but I love it in the way that many young people today are grappling with the series—can you really separate art from the artist? How do I enjoy this media when the creator is inspiring fear in the hearts of bigots? How do we navigate these difficult conversations in a respectful way? This is all very complex, and the addition of this new television series is doing nothing in the way of genuine conversation and understanding but is rather further giving a platform to a creator who is already at a contentious place with her audience.
I think it will be interesting to see if this show eventually makes it to the screen. While the producers have said in interviews that they are moving forward with production, I can’t help but wonder if audience reaction and social media engagement will guide every step of this process—from concerns about representation in casting, to problematic issues within the books, and to efforts in keeping the integrity of the series. I really loved Harry Potter when I was younger and even now there is something about that snowy castle and friendship and magic that brings me back, and yet I don’t know if I will watch this series. I think the movies, while not flawless adaptations, did a serviceable job of managing over 4,000 pages of source material. To me, the story was wrapped up pretty well over a decade ago, and now I think it might be time to put down the wand.
