Discourses on Friendship in Popular Fiction:

A Philosophical Reading of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter

By Marc Rambo D. Rondera

This paper is a philosophical reading of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter. The author
would like to present how the phenomenon of friendship and its philosophical
implications as presented in the Harry Potter series. This paper will, in some
ways, be a discourse on the popular culture, through the use of popular fiction,
as it unravels philosophical viewpoints in the fictions used. Using the
philosophical concept of friendship, this paper hopes to provide sufficient
justification on the use of popular fiction in philosophical discussions.

Death is but crossing the world, as friends do the seas; they live in one another still. For they must needs be present,
that love and live in that which is omnipresent. In this divine glass they see face to face; and their converse is free, as
well as pure. This is the comfort of friends, that though they may be said to die, yet their friendship and society are,
in the best sense, ever present, because immortal.
William Penn, More Fruits of Solitude

A Discourse on Popular Fiction

The academic study of popular culture allows us to examine society through the transgression of
ideas and norms instilled in our society. It also shows us the theories behind ordinary day phenomena
and the development of thought through the use of cultural artifacts: Fashion, Technology, Architecture,
Performing Arts, Visual Arts, and Literature. Among the list, literature could be considered the most
pervasive form of cultural artifact. We can get a lot of information about a certain culture when we
analyze its literature. We can say that literature is the language where culture can communicate.

Literature, especially fiction, is rich of meaning and controversies. It challenges our rationality
and creativity in interpreting the metaphors and symbols that the authors use. It is now our task to
decipher these codes to have a clearer picture of what our culture really is; how we should act in
accordance to this picture of popular culture.

Popular fiction intensifies the situation of this discourse. In popular fiction, literature is not only
a means of communicating what popular culture might say, literature becomes a phenomena embedded
in our culture. Popular fiction is not just being written; it happens, and it becomes a part of our
consciousness. Society adapts to popular fiction and uses them to an extent that it would be beneficial for
them. This could be the main reason why we should take a look on popular fiction as it changes and/or
challenges our consciousness regarding social phenomena. Popular fiction depicts certain qualities of
people and projects it to society (through commercialization) in order for us to adapt to this new
‘awareness’.

In the book Popular Fiction: An Anthology (1998) by Gary Hoppenstand, the author suggests that
popular fiction may take any forms: romance, suspense, science fiction, etc. However, the underlying
factor that encapsulates the whole idea of popular fiction is its ability to entertain the reader in various
degrees. This characteristic of popular fiction changes the culture’s aesthetics and the way people
appreciate literature. The concept of beauty becomes entertainment. There is a shift from art for art’s
sake to art for entertainment’s sake. Hoppenstand suggests that this characteristic of popular fiction can
be construed as a form of escapism wherein we use popular fiction as a means to get away to the world of
the fiction itself. This is why literary critics are having problems with popular fiction. They tend to think
of popular fiction as inferior to other literary works. That it lacks style and sophistication when it is
compared to canonical and classical works of fiction.

It is not enough to look at popular fiction in its appeal to the masses. We must also look at the
culture that entertains it. Hoppenstand (1998) says that:

“If so many similarities exist between fiction read for fun and fiction
read for ideas, study, and discussion, what is the difference between
popular fiction and other literature? Mere popularity is not enough—it
is as important to understand the reasons why a particular work, author,
or category of fiction is commercially successful. Popular fiction reflects
the needs and interests of the readers” (Hoppenstand 1998: 3)

In this paper, I will try to philosophically decipher the symbols found in popular fiction and how
it changes our awareness regarding our ideas of friendship. I will use J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter in
deciphering our awareness towards friendship. Certainly, this fictional work did have an effect on our
society and culture that is why it became popular. This means that the concepts of friendship in this
fictional work challenged the normal view of society towards it. This fictional work caught the interest of
society and thus became a social phenomenon, representing the consciousness of the people of a certain
culture.

A Discourse on Friendship: Friendship as a Philosophy

Friendship is an important issue to discuss in a philosophical level. The issue of friendship

becomes important when we look at our attitudes toward our friends and to our concept of friendship
itself because we might have conflicting views regarding friendship. We might have preconceptions on
this issue that needs clarifications. Though it has been neglected in the realm of contemporary
philosophy, it is but necessary to highlight its meaning so as to clarify our concepts regarding the subject
matter. Having a concrete definition on our use of the word friend and friendship can give us a better
understanding on how we view ourselves in relation to our ‘friends’; the relationship towards them, and
our appreciation of their existence in the context of our own existence. Leoncini, in his article On the
Ethics of Friendship (1997), explained why the issue of friendship is important. He states that:

I personally believe that discussions and written works on the nature of

friendship such as this one are significant. Aside from serving as a
guide for those of us who are involved or about to be involved in
friendships, they expose us to different viewpoints as to how we may
see and consider ourselves and our friends as friends. In other words,
discussions and written works on the nature of friendship offer us an
opportunity to ask ourselves whether we and our friends are good
friends or not. Works on Friendship encourage us to clarify and reflect
upon certain issues that have to do with friendship, such as: what is
friendship? Or, what does the term friend mean and how can one tell a
true friend from one who is not? Does friendship have any attributes?
(Leoncini 1997: 21)
 There are many ways in defining friendship. Our understanding of what friendship is depends
on our on hand experience of our relationship with our friends. Leoncini (1997) used the definition of
friendship found in Robert Cummins work, Friendship (1971). His definition of friendship is important in
our understanding because it depicts a framework that can be used in our philosophical discussion on the
subject matter. He defines friendship as an experience. He writes:

Friendship is an experience all of us have enjoyed to some degree. The

memory of friendship includes gratitude for moments shared, feelings
understood, anxieties lifted. And a feeling of self worth is involved—
knowing that something of oneself was given and found valuable by a
friend. Perhaps it happens mainly when we are lost in our friendships
or alone—away from them—that we question friendship or are critical
of its meaning. We ask ourselves about the quality of our friendships,
about the limitations imposed on them by culture or habit; we may
begin to suspect that what we called friendship was just a near miss on
love. And yet, at the same time, we believe in it so deeply (Cummins
1971: 1)

The enjoyment and the memories offered in a friendly relationship show us our emotions
towards our friends. Though we do not notice it blatantly, our attitudes adapt to our experience of
friendship. We change and adapt because of friendship, and we also get confused with what friendship
is that is why it is critical to formulate a meaning of friendship in the way Cummins formulated his. He
continues by defining what friends are. This definition of Cummins gives us a holistic approach in our
understanding of friends. Cummins (1971) writes:

I mean something that is almost too much to be looked for in this world,
I mean whose nature is so large that it will understand and sympathise
with all my myriad varied moods. I mean a man who, when he finds
me mean and nasty will not despise me; when he sees me harsh and
critical, will not condemn my harshness of heart; when I am cruel in
judgment, or in word, or in action, will bear with me until I recover my
senses... I mean by a friend one who will give as well as take. I mean
one who, when he in turn is in trouble, will not hide from me. I mean
one who will not give me the everlasting feeling that weakness is all
mine, while he is in possession of unending peace and calm... he must
trust me thus far even as I trust him. (Cummins 1971: 9)

Friends have a deeper meaning in our existence, and understanding what their meanings are will
create a special kind of bond between us and our friends. We will have a basis of who to call friends
because we already have a deeper understanding of what friendship is. Friends are those who see the
best in us in our worst times, those people who understand our faults, and accept us for who we really
are despite of our imperfections. This definition of friends clarifies our understanding of what friendship
meant. Friendship now becomes an important concept in assessing our relationships with other people.
The bond that is created by this friendship transcends the usual definition of friends in the written form.
Friends become part of our lives. The establishment of emotions and memories in our friendly
relationship with others become our link in accepting other people as friends. We now start to become
loyal to our friends; we remain faithful even if we have knowledge of their fault. Friends become, not just
mere acquaintances, but a loved one that we share our loves with. It is because of a certain kind of bond
that exists in friendship. Cummins (1971) continues to describe this bond in friendship. He writes:
 Friendship establishes a bond between two persons which can be
broken if one wishes to break it. This ever present possibility of it being
broken along with the fact that it isn’t broken, is what creates the
peculiar faithfulness which is typical of all authentic friendships
(Cummins 1971: 2)

The bond that we are discussing can be thought of a vow, promise, or a social contract that we
created an agreement on. The identities of our friends stand out when we talk about this vow because
this is how we have knowledge of our friends. Cummins said that “friendship, like marriage, implies a
vow which is indicated by Abel Bonnard’s definition: Friendship is the positive unalterable choice of a
person whom we have singled out for qualities that we most admire” (Cummins 1971: 17).

How can we now verify if the friendship that we are into is authentic? People may appear to be
friendly, but they are not what they seem to be. Some people are using friendship to cloak a certain
personal motives. And being a victim of a corrupted friendship can lead you to despair and fear with
your so-called friends. You do not see people as authentic friends, but you see them as a person with an
agenda, a motive in making such bonds. True friendship makes more meaning than being in a corrupted
friendship where hate and fear is being cultivated. This is why it is important to have a clear meaning of
what an authentic friendship is so as to have an awareness of a corrupted friendship and defend us in
being a victim of this kind of friendship. Cummins (1971) gives his depiction of true friendship. He says
that:

True friendship implies full confidence, which may only be completely

given or completely withdrawn. If friendship has continually to be
analyzed, mused, and cured, it will cause more anguish than love itself,
without having love’s strength and its remedies. And if this confidence
is ill-placed? Well—I would rather be betrayed by a false friend than
deceive a true one. (Cummins 1971: 14)

Now that we have an understanding of what friends and friendship meant, it is time for us to
look into the people that we become friends with. Is it necessary to be friends with people close to us,
and people who are akin to us? Do we have a say on choosing our friends? Being related to people does
not imply an automatic ’friendship’ with them. We might be relatives, but our level of interest with our
relatives is of great difference with our friends. Leoncini (1997) explains the difference of kinship and
friendship. He writes:

Relatives are born as such and simply there whether we like them or
not. We have no choice but to consider them as people who are related
to us. We cannot choose our relatives but we can choose our friends.
Friendly love is earned and not asked for; and in return, it is voluntarily
given. Love of kin is ingrained in our character but learned in some
cases. However, we do not wish to say that it is impossible for us to
befriend our relatives or for them to befriend us. In the case of
friendship, we can choose and be selective as to who we wish to
accompany and identify ourselves with; whereas, in the case of kinship
we simply have no choice but to do so. (Leoncini 1997: 33)
 Now that we’ve discussed the issue of friends and friendship, it is also necessary to discuss the
issue of keeping friendship. When we create friendship, it is necessary for us to maintain that
relationship. Since friends become a part of us, losing them will be painful for us as well. Keeping
friends allow us to be responsible with our actions toward our friends, and in turn, we provide them with
their need of affection from a friend. We do not gain friends in an instant, but we can lose one in a split of
a second. Our actions determine how our friendship will last, and they too are responsible for keeping a
bond with our friends. Thus, it is important for us to understand the implications of keeping friends so
as to affirm our understanding toward friendship itself. It may still be a mystery for some on how to
keep friendly relationship; therefore, we need to understand the things that make friendship stronger.
Cummins (1971) said that:

Disinterestedness is a necessary attribute to real friendship and it is the

duty of one friend to guess another’s problems and render assistance
before it is asked. If our friends have needs that we can satisfy, we
should relieve them of the necessity of seeking our help (Cummins
1971: 14)

Michael Grant (1971) in his translation of Cicero’s On Friendship, can give us a summary of an
ideal friendship that can be both contemporary and abruptly show the true essence and characteristics of
friendship. Grant enumerates the steps in having and maintaining friendship. Grant (1971) says that:

First, there must not be the slightest element of pretense or hypocrisy.

Any decent person would rather hate openly than conceal his true
thoughts behind an insincere expression... Secondly, a friend should be
pleasant in conversation and manner, since these are things which add
spice to any relationship. To be solemn and austere on all occasions
may be impressive, but friendship ought to be something freer and
more relaxed and more agreeable, paying greater attention to pleasant
and amiable behavior (Grant 1971: 210)

A Discourse on Harry Potter: A Tale of Magical Friendship

J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series provide us a number of good examples about the issue of
friendship: what makes friendship admirable, and determining the different kinds of friendship that
existed in this series of novels. We are going to look into the friendships that existed in the world of
Harry Potter through an analysis of some of the lines found in the novels. Apparently, magic is not the
only entertaining about these novels, but the ideas about friendship can also be elicited from this fictional
work which can be the main theme of the entire series.

We start by analyzing the views regarding friendship implied in the fictional world of Harry
Potter. In the Chamber of Secrets (1999), Arthur Weasley, the father of one of the main characters of the
series, provides us a very good advice in choosing friends. He said that "never trust anything that can
think for itself, if you can't see where it keeps its brain" (Rowling 1999: 329). He is referring to the diary of
Tom Riddle that appeared to be a friend of his daughter, Ginny Weasley, which turned out to be a cursed
diary that controlled anyone who possesses the book itself. The diary, being a Horcrux (a part of the soul
of Lord Voldemort, the main antagonist of the series, which makes him immortal), contains all the
memories of Lord Voldemort when he was in his teens. This diary fulfilled the role of a friend to Ginny,
not until she realized that she was being controlled by it.
 In the Sorcerer’s Stone (1997), Harry Potter was faced with the dilemma of choosing his friends.
He sure made a wise decision in choosing who his friends should be, for he already realized that he was
being led to a corrupted kind of friendship. Even though Harry was offered a kind of friendship, he still
has the freedom to choose whether to accept it or not, but he suffered the consequences of having an arch-
rival by the character of Draco Malfoy. Rowling (1997) writes:

He turned back to Harry. “You’ll soon find out some wizarding families
are much better than others, Potter. You don’t want to go making
friends with the wrong sort. I can help you there.”

He held out his hand to shake Harry’s, but Harry didn’t take it.

“I think I can tell who the wrong sort are for myself, thanks,” he said
coolly. Draco Malfoy didn’t go red, but a pink tinge appeared in his pale
cheeks. “I’d be careful if I were you, Potter,” he said slowly. “Unless
you’re a bit politer you’ll go the same way as your parents. They didn’t
know what was good for them, either. You hang around with riffraff
like the Weasleys and that Hagrid, and it’ll rub off on you.”
(Rowling 1997: 108-109)

Harald Thorsrud (2004) wrote an article entitled Voldemort's Agents, Malfoy's Cronies, and Hagrid's
Chums: Friendship in Harry Potter, in the book Harry Potter and Philosophy: If Aristotle Ran Hogwarts edited
by David Baggett and Shawn Klein. In this article, we can find an example of a corrupt form of
friendship between Lord Voldemort and his agents. Thorsrud looked into and analyzed the friendship
that existed between Voldemort and the Professor of Defense Against the Dark Arts, Professor Quirrell.
Loyalty and courage could ba a great element of friendship, but when it is used by a corrupted
individual, these virtues become worthless for the sole purpose of these virtues lead one to do an evil act.
Thorsrud (2004) writes:

Towards the end of Philosopher's Stone we learn that Voldemort, in his

weakened state, had to share another's body to survive. If ever he
needed a friend, this would be the time. Enter Quirrell, who was kind
enough to let Voldemort into his heart, his mind, and literally into the
back of his head where the Dark Lord began recouping his
strength. Quirrell's loyalty and devotion to Voldemort was undeniable.
Going about with a foul-smelling turban wrapped around your head to
cover a grotesque companion is a bit inconvenient after all. And you
wouldn't kill a unicorn and drink its blood for just anybody! Should we
admire Quirrell's loyalty and courage? At best we might admit a
grudging admiration, but we would be right to see his friendship
with Voldemort as corrupt. (Thorsrud 2004: 39)

Another form of friendship that existed in the fictional world of Harry Potter is the friendship
between Draco Malfoy and his cronies, Crabbe and Goyle. Malfoy may not share the same intellectual
prowess with Crabbe and Goyle, but Malfoy is being amused by their presence and unwitting actions.
The three may be sharing a different kind of friendship that appreciates the use-value of an individual in
a relationship. Thorsrud also gave an analysis of the kind of friendship that they share. Thorsrud (2004)
writes that:
 It's not quite fair to offer the same account of Malfoy's friends. The
three of them are more or less on an equal footing.
Crabbe and Goyle certainly don't have Malfoy's brains, but they,
like Malfoy, are from aristocratic, well-to-do families. Although we may
not find much to admire about Crabbe and Goyle, they do stick by their
friend. Unlike most of Voldemort's agents, Malfoy's cronies aren't
motivated by greed or fear. They're not in it for the rewards, but rather
for the pleasure of hanging out with the sharp-tongued Malfoy. They
obviously enjoy Malfoy's malicious humor, and it seems that they really
like him for who he is. No accounting for taste, we might say, but there
it is. What should we think of Malfoy's friendships? The easy answer is
to say they aren't worth admiring simply because Malfoy is a nasty
piece of work. But that may be too easy. Malfoy is not (yet) a hardened
criminal. We may think of him, along with Crabbe and Goyle, as young
lads gone wrong. Although they have had plenty of material benefits,
something has gone wrong with their moral development. But in spite
of this they have formed the best friendships of which they are capable.
(Thorsrud 2004: 40)

Thorsrud used Aristotle’s concept of friendship in order to categorize the different kinds of
friendship that existed within the series of novels. He explains that an admirable friendship lies in our
appreciation of the individual that we rest our friendship on. Thorsrud (2004) explains that:

To determine what is admirable about friendship, Aristotle starts with

the claim that whenever we love someone or something, we do so
because the object appears to be useful, pleasant, or good. This suggests
that love is a very expansive concept covering lots of different sorts of
relationships. No surprise there. We can begin to narrow down the
kinds of love we experience in friendship by noticing that it occurs only
in relation to living things. When we say that we just love ice cream,
everyone understands what we really mean is that we love to eat ice
cream. It would be a bit odd if we were constantly checking the
temperature of the freezer to make sure my ice cream is comfortable.
We don't wish good things for the sake of inanimate objects. But with
friends, Aristotle remarks, we do wish good things for their sake, and
not just for our own. (Thorsrud 2004: 42)

Aristotle categorized friendship in three levels: Useful friendship, pleasant friendship, and
admirable friendship. We can see this in the relationship that existed in the fictional world of Harry
Potter. The relationship of Voldemort to his agents is a corrupted form of useful friendship. He
maintains relationship with them because he gets what he wants from them. This kind of friendship may
be, in some ways true, because we have an expectation that our friends will satisfy our needs in a certain
degree. Friends exert their effort to keep the relationship intact by providing their friends with what they
want so as to keep the friendship alive.

Pleasant friendship can be elicited from the relationship that Draco Malfoy have with his cronies,
Crabbe and Goyle. Draco is pleased with the two because he affirms his superiority with them. He
becomes amused with their stupidity, and they maintain friendship with each other because they
entertain themselves. This form of friendship exists in order for us to share fun memories with our
friends which is a requirement in our understanding the concept of friendship. Pleasant friendship
allows us to restore what we have with our friends and commemorate them as part of the friendship’s
history.

The admirable friendship is the one that can be elicited from the three main characters of the
series: Harry Potter, Ron Weasley, and Hermione Granger. The friendship that they have is admirable
because the kind of useful and pleasant friendship that they share is not tainted with greed and cruelty.
The friendship that they share utilizes the virtues of loyalty and courage in such a way that it would
promote the betterment of each other. These three shows a perfect example of admirable friendship
because in all of the adventures that they have been into, they have exactly fitted into the descriptions
made by Cummins regarding his view of an authentic form of friendship.

Conclusion

Friendships exist in the world we live in, and it is because of this friendship that we start to
explore the differences and talents that we have as individuals. Our friends reflect our personalities in
such a way that they become an integral part in the affirmation of our existence. We have defined
different types of friendships in our discourses and this will allow us to evaluate our friendship with our
authentic friends.

The concept of friendship found in Harry Potter allowed us to re-examine our views regarding
friendship. Magic may be the reason why Harry Potter became a hit, but the lessons of friendship and the
story of loyalty and courage cannot be discounted from this form of popular fiction. It may be a product
of commercialism, but the philosophy embedded in this artifact of popular culture cannot surpass any
literary classic. Harry Potter is not only popular, but it became philosophical with his friends and their
relationship with one another in their fictional world.

Indeed, Harry Potter is a literary work, but in its fictional reality, his friendship becomes a
philosophy.

References

Leoncini, Dante Luis. 1997. On the ethics of friendship. Sophia vol.27, no.1. De La Salle University Press, Inc., Manila
Cicero, Marcus Tullius. 1971. On friendship. In On the good life. Trans. Michael Grant. Penguin Books, England
Cummins, Robert. 1971. Friendship. St. Mary’s College Press: Winona, Minnesota.
Thorsrud, Harald. 2004. Voldemort's agents, Malfoy's cronies, and Hagrid's chums: friendship in Harry Potter. Harry
Potter and philosophy: if Aristotle ran Hogwarts. Ed. David Baggett and Shawn Klein. Open Court Publishing Co.,
London
Rowling, J.K. 1997. Harry Potter and the sorcerer’s stone. Scholastic Inc. New York
____________. 1999. Harry Potter and the chambers of secrets. Scholastic Inc. New York
____________. 1999. Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban. Scholastic Inc. New York
____________. 2000. Harry Potter and the goblet of fire. Scholastic Inc. New York
____________. 2003. Harry Potter and the order of the phoenix. Scholastic Inc. New York
____________. 2005. Harry Potter and the half-blood prince. Scholastic Inc. New York
____________. 2007. Harry Potter and the deathly hallows. Scholastic Inc. New York