Content Warning: discussions of transphobia and anti-Semitism.

I loved the Harry Potter books. I read The Sorcerer’s Stone in first grade, and once I’d finished, I had to get my hands on every other book in the series. I frequently reread the novels, I watched all the movies, I even still have Harry Potter LEGOs around my house. I believe the Harry Potter series was an important part of building my love of reading. 

When I returned to the series in the spring of 2020, I expected to find comfort and relief from pandemic-related stress. However, during that time, J.K. Rowling, the author of the series, began tweeting harmful and untrue statements about transgender people. 

On Twitter she mocked transgender and non-binary individuals who menstruate, and used her platform to spread the idea that trans identities pose a threat to women. Rowling also lent her influence and support to many other anti-trans activists seeking to limit the rights of transgender people in the UK.

This forced me to approach my reread of the Harry Potter series with a new question in mind. Could I separate the art from the artist?

While reading with this new perspective, one of the first things I noticed was Rowling’s depiction of the goblins. In the Harry Potter universe, goblins are the stingy and disloyal creatures who run the wizarding banks. They are described as having wiry black hair and big noses.

All of these traits are associated with long standing, harmful depictions of Jewish people. These depictions were particularly prominent in Nazi Germany, where the exact characteristics Rowling describes were used by Hitler to dehumanize Jewish people. Today, alt-right groups and anti-Semitic individuals continue to deploy these damaging stereotypes. If that’s not egregious enough, in the movies, the Star of David—a symbol that is representative of Judaism—is worked into the tiles in the goblins’ bank floor.

This barely scratches the surface of the harmful tropes J.K. Rowling utilizes throughout the Harry Potter books. From additional reductive stereotypes to offensive naming conventions, the series is riddled with problematic portrayals.

Meanwhile, her adult crime novels, written under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith, incorporate transphobic rhetoric similar to what she spews on Twitter. In her most recent book, The Ink Black Heart, the protagonist is an author who comes under fire for spreading transphobic beliefs on social media. Sound familiar?

This leads me to two conclusions. One: J.K. Rowling’s recent books have clearly been influenced by her bigoted opinions about trans people. The offensive tropes in Harry Potter aren’t coincidences but are examples of Rowling injecting her harmful beliefs into her writing. Two: Rowling has been granted a platform due to the success of the Harry Potter series, and she is using it to spread hatred and false information.

The answer to my original question is clear: I cannot separate art and artist.

So what? What can I do? What can others do? One step I’ve taken is to stop supporting the Harry Potter series’ continued pop-culture relevance. I don’t stream the movies, buy merchandise, or recommend the series. 

In general, I want to avoid actions that would contribute to the success of Rowling, both financially and in terms of her public influence. As long as Harry Potter is popular, J.K. Rowling maintains a platform from which she attacks innocent people simply trying to live their lives. •