Editing J. K. Rowling (section)

=== Gender and social division ===
<!-- This section heading is linked above in the Religion, wealth and remarriage section--><!--Rejigging to begin with Rowling – The ''Harry Potter'' series has been described as including complex and varied representations of female characters-->Rowling's portrayal of women in ''Harry Potter'' has been described as complex and varied, but nonetheless conforming to stereotypical and [[patriarchal]] depictions of gender.<ref>{{Harvnb|Heilman|Donaldson|2008|pp=139–141}}; {{Harvnb|Pugh|Wallace|2006}}; {{Harvnb|Eberhardt|2017}}.</ref> Gender divides are ostensibly absent in the books: Hogwarts is [[Mixed-sex education|coeducational]] and women hold positions of power in wizarding society. However, this setting obscures the typecasting of female characters and the general depiction of conventional gender roles.<ref>{{Harvnb|Pugh|Wallace|2006}}; {{Harvnb|Eccleshare|2002|pp=84–87}}; {{Harvnb|Gallardo|Smith|2003|p=191}}.</ref> According to the scholars Elizabeth Heilman and Trevor Donaldson, the subordination of female characters goes further early in the series. The final three books "showcase richer roles and more powerful females": for instance, the series' "most matriarchal character", Molly Weasley, engages substantially in the final battle of ''Deathly Hallows'', while other women are shown as leaders.{{sfn|Heilman|Donaldson|2008|pp=139–141}} Hermione Granger, in particular, becomes an active and independent character essential to the protagonists' battle against evil.{{sfn|Berents|2012|pp= 144–149}} Yet, even particularly capable female characters such as Hermione and [[Minerva McGonagall]] are placed in supporting roles,{{sfn|Heilman|Donaldson|2008|pp=142–147}} and Hermione's status as a feminist model is debated.{{sfn|Bell|Alexander|2012|pp=1–8}} Girls and women are frequently shown as emotional, defined by their appearance, and denied agency in family settings.<ref>{{Harvnb|Pugh|Wallace|2006}}; {{Harvnb|Heilman|Donaldson|2008|pp=149–155}}.</ref>

The social hierarchies in Rowling's magical world have been a matter of debate among scholars and critics.{{sfn|Horne|2010|pp=81–82}} The primary antagonists of ''Harry Potter'', Voldemort and his followers, believe blood purity is paramount, and that non-wizards, or "muggles", are subhuman.<ref>{{Harvnb|Barratt|2012|pp=63, 67}}; {{Harvnb|Nel|2001|p=44}}; {{Harvnb|Eccleshare|2002|p=78}}.</ref> Their ideology of racial difference is depicted as unambiguously evil.<ref>{{Harvnb|Gupta|2009|p=104}}; {{Harvnb|Guanio-Uluru|2015|p=121}}; {{Harvnb|Nel|2001|pp=43–45}}.</ref> However, the series cannot wholly reject racial division, according to several scholars, as it still depicts wizards as fundamentally superior to muggles.<ref>{{Harvnb|Ostry|2003|pp=95–98}}; {{Harvnb|Blake|2002|pp=104–106}}; {{Harvnb|Gupta|2009|pp=105–107}}; {{Harvnb|Mendlesohn|2002|pp=176–177}}; {{Harvnb|Nikolajeva|2008|pp=237–239}}.</ref> Blake and Zipes argue that numerous examples of wizardly superiority are depicted as "natural and comfortable".{{sfn|Gupta|2009|pp=105–107}} Thus, according to Gupta, ''Harry Potter'' depicts superior races as having a moral obligation of tolerance and altruism towards lesser races, rather than explicitly depicting equality.{{sfn|Gupta|2009|pp=108–110}}

Rowling's depictions of the status of magical non-humans is similarly debated.{{sfn|Horne|2010|pp=76–77}} Discussing the slavery of [[house-elves]] within ''Harry Potter'', scholars such as [[Brycchan Carey]] have praised the books' [[abolitionist]] sentiments, viewing Hermione's [[Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare]] as a model for younger readers' political engagement.<ref>{{Harvnb|Carey|2003|pp=105–107, 114}}; {{Harvnb|Horne|2010|p=76}}</ref> Other critics, including [[Farah Mendlesohn]], find the portrayal of house-elves extremely troublesome; they are written as happy in their slavery, and Hermione's efforts on their behalf are implied to be naïve.<ref>{{Harvnb|Mendlesohn|2002|pp=178–181}}; {{Harvnb|Horne|2010|p=81}}.</ref> Pharr terms the house-elves a disharmonious element in the series, writing that Rowling leaves their fate hanging;{{sfn|Pharr|2016|pp=12–13}} at the end of ''Deathly Hallows'', the elves remain enslaved and cheerful.{{sfn|Barratt|2012|p=52}} More generally, the subordination of magical non-humans remains in place, unchanged by the defeat of Voldemort.<ref>{{Harvnb|Dendle|2008|pp=171–173}}; {{Harvnb|Horne|2010|pp=96–97}}.</ref> Thus, scholars suggest, the series's message is essentially conservative; it sees no reason to transform social hierarchies, only being concerned with who holds positions of power.<ref>{{Harvnb|Ostry|2003|pp=95–98}}; {{Harvnb|Applebaum|2008|pp=92–93}}; {{Harvnb|Heilman|Donaldson|2008|pp=140–142}}; {{Harvnb|Horne|2010|pp=96–97}}; {{Harvnb|Mendlesohn|2002|pp=180–182}}.</ref>