The weird thing about speculative fiction is that a good number of writers in that school of thought tend to treat shapeshifting as separate from magic/witchcraft, even though these are quite closely connected in fiction that shapeshifting’s as much an aspect of witchcraft as having familiars and casting spells are. When you think about it, if somebody shapeshifts into a dog, this kind of violates the laws of physics as to be wholly supernatural in nature. Not to mention so suspicious that you can’t help but wonder if somebody disguises themselves as a dog to get away with something, or if that dog may not even be a real dog at all. So shapeshifting being a subset or aspect of witchcraft makes good sense really, especially regarding the intentions and true nature of something or someone.
Despite her own faults (whatever they may be), I wonder if JK Rowling’s own issues with fantasy fiction largely stem from her greater familiarity with and love of folklore. I’m pretty much projecting my feelings on her, but it’s feasible that the way magic’s depicted in Harry Potter may in fact be closer to its folkloric incarnation than it does in most fantasy fiction. It’s not just that the magical characters cast spells on people and have familiars, but a number of them also shapeshift. But this makes me wonder if Rowling might have stumbled upon facsimiles of early modern witchhunting books or at least those about that sort of matter, again I’m projecting here but this is highly plausible.
After all the character of Dobby the Elf has folkoric counterparts in some parts of England. And the Veela are based on the Polish Wila, to the extent that Rowling is this intimated with folklore. If you have witches and wizards turning themselves into animals, then this is closer to folklore than it is in some literary fantasy schools. It’s like in urban fantasy where shapeshifting is treated differently from witchcraft, where you have wolf-shifters, leopard-shifters and so on. I don’t know much about the Harry Potter stories and I haven’t read those myself, but I feel given Rowling’s greater sympathy towards folklore than with the literary fantasy school as popularised by JRR Tolkien, this gives the series a different but legitimate character.
Ever since JRR Tolkien unleashed Lord Of The Rings that fantasy writers are compelled to create elaborate worlds to justify and rationalise the existence of magic and supernatural creatures, this isn’t true for other literary fantasy schools like urban fantasy to an extent. But I feel a good number of fantasy stories since Tolkien and the like feel very detached from folklore in some regards, whereas in folklore fairies and their ilk seem more like omens than legitimately separate species from humanity. Where witchcraft feels realer than one realises, given the possibility of somebody casting spells on you. It seems the only people who genuinely see witchcraft as a legitimate problem are Christians, the ones who don’t just suspect witchcraft in literature.
But also suspect how and why witches cast spells on people to make them do something bad or wish ill on them in many more ways, that this is something fantasy literature usually doesn’t take into consideration. Maybe it does in a way, but I feel most fantasy writers have this mindset of having to create a fictional world as to rationalise or justify the fantastical. Like I said, many folkloric creatures were/are more like omens than separate species. Very odd and suspicious beings that could be used as warnings for something, or as augurs of what is to come. It’s possible Rowling’s own take still adheres to the literary fantasy school to a degree, but I feel some of her issues with fantasy fiction may partly stem from her greater understanding and love of folklore.
fynm 