Last Friday, the first part of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows opened at cinemas in the UK. Seven weeks earlier, Durham University students attended the opening lecture of Harry Potter and the Age of Illusion. The attention of the press and television on the former was expected; on the latter, not so. Therefore, it came as something of a surprise when details of the lecture were announced on national radio and television.

Why all the fuss? Was it simply another example of Pottermania in the run-up to the final film? On the other hand, there had been world-wide interest when the new optional module was approved by the University’s Learning and Teaching Committee some months earlier to be part of the Education Studies degree. All new modules have to go through this vetting process to make sure that they meet the required standards in terms of aims, learning outcomes, assessment arrangements and such like. One cannot imagine many other modules attracting so much attention. Still it gave newspaper editors an excuse for some catchy, punning headlines.

The magical module, as it has been dubbed by some, had been some years in the making; and grew out of increasing references to the Potterverse in allied modules on Identity, Culture and Citizenship education. The connection between the boy wizard and Durham is a strong one. Not only are the students members of the Harry Potter generation, but Durham was one of the locations used in the first two films. Indeed, some students appeared in the films as extras. It was appropriate that the first lecture took place in the Great Hall of the mediaeval castle which houses University College, for this was the original preferred location for the Great Hall at Hogwarts. Alas, the University was unable to guarantee enough shooting time for the film crew so Oxford was chosen instead.

In many ways the opening lecture stands testimony for much that has followed so far. The students were ceremonially sorted into their houses. However, this was not mere theatrics; for at the heart of the ceremony was one of the essential elements that makes the Potterverse so rich in potential and relevance. Are all the houses in Hogwarts the same? The Sorting Hat thinks not.

So, are all Ravenclaw students clever? Is Gryffindor just for the brave? Is Hufflepuff the friendly house? And are all Slytherins cunning and ambitious? If so, is it the same with Cambridge colleges: are they all the same? Which is the best college? Does it matter if you go to Emmanuel or Peterhouse? Where does Fitzwilliam fit in? Are we all sorted at birth? What about the sorting that goes on in schools, the workplace, in sports clubs? Back to Slytherin: is ambition a bad thing? The point of the Potterverse and by extension the magical module is that it has the potential to shine a light on our own world.

The Durham module sits in the School of Education, not in the English Department. Thus, the series is not looked at as literature per se. Though, on a personal level, I find the books well-constructed and eminently readable. Furthermore, I find the arguments of some who criticise the writing a little disingenuous.
Thus to paraphrase: someone said that they thought the first book was awful; the second was rubbish; the third was terrible; the fourth worse than the third; and so on. One must either admire their stamina to keep reading book after book when the previous ones were so bad; or conclude that they hadn’t actually read the books in the first place.

On the other hand, a lot of people have read them, for book sales cannot be far short of half a billion. Thus, whilst the films, merchandise and theme park continue to make a fortune for Warner Brothers, this is not just about media hype and clever marketing. In the final analysis, it is the written word that drives the Hogwarts Express.

It is curious that the more one studies the world created by J.K. Rowling, the less one focuses on the magic. Indeed, the story is not simply about spells and blast-ended skrewts, but at its heart it is about humanity and the human condition. The philosophy contained in the text has been criticised by some as home-spun and clichéd, but it is pretty powerful stuff nonetheless. When Dumbledore talks about it being our choices rather than our abilities that show us who we truly are; or when one is encouraged to do what is right rather than what is easy, these are discussion points that go well beyond the school classroom and the lecture theatre.

Why should one spend so much time investigating the mythical world of Harry Potter when there is so much in our own world to focus on? It is an important question that deserves greater consideration than I can give it here. Thus, why should one consider family values, or prejudice, or the moral universe of the school, or any number of other themes (and there are lots of them) in Harry Potter?
I think it is the universality of the Potterverse, and its global appeal. There can be no part of the world that is untouched by Harry Potter. There will be people in China, Chile and Cheshire who have a view on Severus Snape or on Neville Longbottom. Whilst I believe that this morality tale is quintessentially British in so many ways, it has a universal and unifying appeal. In the end right does triumph over might, but at a cost. Also, all of the characters are wonderfully flawed: like life, it is not a simple tale.

As a sort of postscript, it is not without irony that I am completing this on the day that the new Education Secretary, Michael Gove, has announced the Government’s intention to encourage schools to adopt traditional values. Thus he suggests a return to prefects, uniforms (with ties) and a house system. Let the sorting begin!

Dr Martin Richardson is Course Leader of Education Studies in the School of Education at Durham University. He is responsible for the creation of the ‘Harry Potter and the Age of Illusion’ module which forms part of a BA degree in Education Studies.