Econstudentlog

The last Potter-book (no spoilers)

Got it yesterday and now I’ve finished it. So Pipes have had to wait a bit.

I agree on what has been stated here, as well as most of what has been stated here.

On the first part, I don’t necessarily think the book is too long, it’s just that too much unnecessary stuff has been included, that take up valuable space that could have been put to better use. Ockham’s razor and all that…

As to the “economics of magic” part, this has been a source of some annoyance to me throughout the series, even if I liked most of the books. I think the “magic” part of the series is too unstructured, it simply needs a firmer foundation in order to make the story (a little more) credible. Even when specific laws are spelled out, there are many places throughout the books where “the standard laws”, of which we are often not even told before they break down, conveniently enough do not apply. A “laws of magic” compendium would have been nice, but this alone would not solve the problem. As it is, the problem of scarcity and the influence and implications of magic on this very important subject is not convincingly addressed. For instance, how does convertibility between muggle-money and wizard-money work? Just think of the implications if there were no restrictions… Also, why do wizards have to buy cauldrons in a shop, when they can make one themselves with a wave of a wand? Even if it does not last, most of the time it needs only to work for one or two school-lessons at a time, right? There are other problems of course, many of them, like this one: If secrecy is paramount to the magic community, why aren’t students taught how to dress like muggles in school?

One other general problem I have had, though not directly related to the problem above still related to economic concepts, which I incidentally have found was a problem most peculiar, given the general setting, is also this: Is the supply of total spells fixed or not?

It probably is not (we are told that there were wizards a very, very long time ago, but ie. alohomora hardly came about before doors with locks, right?). But then how are new spells invented – Hogwarts-teachers do not seem to use much time (if any) developing new spells, they use most of the time reading old books, as everything seems already to have been written down? If top academics do not spend time developing new spells, who are? The point is, the magic part is supposed to be a flow-variable in order for us to believe in it as it works in the books, but it is at the same time to a very large extent treated as a stock-variable throughout the series.

I’d like it if more economists started writing fiction. That said, even if some parts of the last book are too long and there are obvious problems with the setting, it is all right. Rowling knows how to tell a good story, and on the whole this she does.

July 24, 2007 Posted by | books, harry potter | 4 Comments

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.