Harry Potter and Zones of Shade: Using Contemporary Literature to Examine the Impacts of Social Control American Society of Criminology San Francisco, California November 20, 2014 Garrison A. Crews & Gordon A. Crews

Abstract Using the story of childhood wizard Harry Potter by J. K. Rowling to examine how “Zones of Shade” impact anti-social and criminal behavior in American society. This examination is conducted through the eyes of political theorist Michel Foucault (Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison, 1975). Examples from the Harry Potter series will be presented and examined to explain many current social ills in America. Special interest will be given to connections with political and social rhetoric about crime and justice.

Foucault’s Panopticon Based on Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon penitentiary Cells are arranged in a circle with a central watchtower While a single watchman could not observe every prisoner at all times, every prisoner must act as though they might be being observed at any time

The Panoptic Society Observation is a part of our daily lives CCTV Neighborhood Watch Programs Informants/Rewards/ Flipping Red light Cameras US Patriot Act/War on Terrorism This pervades our public lives, and influences how we act in public settings!

Tolerance/ Discretion Zones of Shade (any social mechanism by which an individual can be hidden from authoritarian observation) Individual Rights Tolerance/ Discretion are considered fundamental to a democratic society, they often function as our best check on governmental power “Zones of Shade”

The Institution of Hogwarts Umbridge’s Perfect Panopticon Dumbledore’s Imperfect Panopticon Umbridge attempts to create a perfect Panopticon by placing herself at the center of the infrastructure of observation She is met by resistance from both the students and the faculty Dumbledore consistently removes power from his own institution through zones of shade He garners control over others to the point that his plans are carried out even after his death

The Imperfect Panopticon While we think of “zones of shade” as checks on power, can they be used by an institution to garner more control over its constituent population? While straightforward observation may create reasonable and beneficial controls on deviance, can the provision of “zones of shade” go a step farther to remove the population’s agency, rather than establish an agreement between the government and the governed? Sometimes

Questions at the end? Thanks!