Dec 20, 2012

The Casual Vacancy

I was afraid I'd be disappointed with J.K. Rowling's new book, The Casual Vacancy.  After all, the vacancy Harry Potter left in my reading soul was anything but casual.  I was afraid my beloved Jo would be a one-hit wonder, capable of only masterfully painting one great world, unable to inhabit the real one with the same thoughtful care and attention.

And I was disappointed, but not by Jo Rowling.  If anybody else had written The Casual Vacancy, I'm not sure the critics would be quite so lukewarm about it.  I was excited when I finally finished reading it, after delaying for months due to school.  After I stayed up til three in the morning, enthralled by the ending (much in the fashion I've read many of my favorite books, including Harry Potter), I happily cued up the episode of Mugglecast where they talked about the book.

None of them even finished it.  I was dismayed.  But I understood, since it wasn't as immediately spellbinding captivating as Harry Potter.  I decided to give them a few more minutes to redeem themselves.  Then one of the hosts said "I just don't think this story is one that needs to be told."

THE STORY DIDN'T NEED TO BE TOLD?  I couldn't disagree more. First of all, these people clearly don't know how to read a book that isn't dressed up in wizarding robes or vampire fangs.  Second, they don't realize that when they're reading about magic, they're reading about disguised real life.  If you want to criticize Rowling for The Casual Vacancy, you could criticize her for writing a book with virtually the same themes!   If you don't think The Casual Vacancy is a story that needs to be told, then you don't think Harry Potter is either. 

Both books are divided into an (almost overly simplistic) world of class warfare.  The Mollisons and the Malfoys, the Wheedons and the Weasleys (look, Jo even set up that alliteration for me).  They're about the struggles of adolescence (we all know that Ron was thinking the same things Andrew Price thinks about Gaia while he's looking at Hermione, we just don't read that part of the story).  They're about doing what is right even if it's not the most convenient or appealing option for yourself.  Only this time, there's no magic to save anyone.   The Casual Vacancy really is Harry Potter all grown up.

And the fans don't like it.  We're grown up too, and everyone was hoping that Jo's new book would be a swift return back into the fantasy of childhood.  Instead, she delivered a sobering dose of reality.  The characters and problems in The Casual Vacancy are so real it's painful to read in parts.  Not painful like "how sad is it that Harry's an orphan?" but "how sad is it that I'm implicit in this world of gross injustice?"  The second is the more important, real, and adult question. 

Literature is supposed to make you squeam, tear your heart out, pierce your soul, call you to action.  If The Casual Vacancy did none of this for you, then you're not reading it right.  You're looking for an escape, not a good novel.  Jo wanted to grow up her image, and she definitely succeeded.  She did so not through the vulgar language and sex scenes in her new novel, but through stripping the magic away and unveiling the harsh reality of the real world.  Grow up, Harry Potter fans.  Hogwarts may always be there to welcome you home, but in the meantime, figure out what really matters.