Magic at the Crossroads: Moral Dissonance and Repair in the Wizarding World

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Our main concern about the contents of this article is the following: the author alludes to empirical research that he or she has conducted, but conclusions are immediately drawn and stated without a detailed presentation of the results of that research, which are barely summarized. It could be that, if tables, diagrams, etc. would be included, the article would become longer than permitted; if so, we would suggest the author to let the reader know about those circumstances, and mention other publications where those empirical data could be checked.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are passages which, in our modest opinion, should be re-written. Please see the attached copy of the article, where we have highlighted those passages and, as far as possible, suggested alternative ways of phrasing them.

Author Response

Comment 1: Our main concern about the contents of this article is the following: the author alludes to empirical research that he or she has conducted, but conclusions are immediately drawn and stated without a detailed presentation of the results of that research, which are barely summarized. It could be that, if tables, diagrams, etc. would be included, the article would become longer than permitted; if so, we would suggest the author to let the reader know about those circumstances, and mention other publications where those empirical data could be checked.

Reply: This is a nice point you made. I see your concern with the manner in which empirical results are presented. To resolve this, I have redesigned the text in a way that allows users to better get what the study is about. As space was not available to provide the entire datasets, I provided a minor explanation stating constraints on the datasets on the Methods section. I also refer to a future-companion publication, which has tables and in-depth analysis. By reading that paper, the readers can compare and investigate the findings in further detail. I think that this alteration clarifies the issue and makes the script more transparent.

Comment: There are passages which, in our modest opinion, should be re-written. Please see the attached copy of the article, where we have highlighted those passages and, as far as possible, suggested alternative ways of phrasing them.

Reply: I am very grateful to you that you have read my paper with so much care, and have given me, so usefully, a hint about the best way to put it in your own words. I have re-read each of the sentences you have¨marked and made the emendations which you indicated where I believed it would do so. Where there are some few exceptions I chose different words as I have tried to retain the same subject matter but make me sound informed or smart. I greatly approve these changes; they render the publication much more intelligible, and the language more pointed.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper examines responses to J. K. Rowling personal commentary on gender critical issues, and the attempts by fans, readers and educators to reconcile conflicting messages, from the author and from the book, in order to reclaim the love object from the past and insist on is continuing importance. It examines this from a tripartite methodology, bringing together translation studies, fan studies, and cognitive neuroscience.

In order to explain how fans and readers maintain their relationship with the Harry Potter novels, despite Rowling’s incendiary discourse, the author/s propose the Moral Dissonance Repair Loop which enables maintenance of positive aspects of the Harry Potter universe, not contaminated by Rowlings insistence on gender binaries.

Overall, this is a persuasive paper which evidences research and knowledge and offers an original contribution to knowledge that goes beyond the separation of the art from the artist which is used most commonly to explain situations such as this.

While, this is generally well written, there are some areas that need addressing before publication. Most importantly, the discussion of methods needs rewriting. The research, interviews and focus groups have taken place. This section needs to be written in the past tense (p.7-8). Further you need references for quotations taken from interviewees, including the date of the interview. I would also recommend that you take out any reference to gender when talking about participants, for ethical reasons. In terms of ethics, it would also be useful to reflect on the ethics of the work that you’re doing as it engages with human subjects. I have also underlined a couple of sentences that do not make sense. There is some minor rewriting that needs to take place for clarity’s sake.

In the list of references, you need the date of interviews and focus groups which will help support your conclusions.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are some lapses in expression throughout, and I’ve marked where these are.

Author Response

Comment: This paper examines responses to J. K. Rowling personal commentary on gender critical issues, and the attempts by fans, readers and educators to reconcile conflicting messages, from the author and from the book, in order to reclaim the love object from the past and insist on is continuing importance. It examines this from a tripartite methodology, bringing together translation studies, fan studies, and cognitive neuroscience.

In order to explain how fans and readers maintain their relationship with the Harry Potter novels, despite Rowling’s incendiary discourse, the author/s propose the Moral Dissonance Repair Loop which enables maintenance of positive aspects of the Harry Potter universe, not contaminated by Rowlings insistence on gender binaries.

Overall, this is a persuasive paper which evidences research and knowledge and offers an original contribution to knowledge that goes beyond the separation of the art from the artist which is used most commonly to explain situations such as this.

While, this is generally well written, there are some areas that need addressing before publication. Most importantly, the discussion of methods needs rewriting. The research, interviews and focus groups have taken place. This section needs to be written in the past tense (p.7-8). Further you need references for quotations taken from interviewees, including the date of the interview. I would also recommend that you take out any reference to gender when talking about participants, for ethical reasons. In terms of ethics, it would also be useful to reflect on the ethics of the work that you’re doing as it engages with human subjects. I have also underlined a couple of sentences that do not make sense. There is some minor rewriting that needs to take place for clarity’s sake.

In the list of references, you need the date of interviews and focus groups which will help support your conclusions.

 

Reply: 

Thank you very much, I have noted down your kind attention and heartfelt comments. Since you did take the trouble to read carefully into both ethical and research procedures in my article, I have altered some of the things.

Techniques (p. 7 8)

The first amendment is on the section of Methods. I have placed the past tense, we did, since the research activities, interviews and focus groups are accomplished.

Interviewees Quotes

Then every quotation referring to interviewees changed to anonymized reference with the date of the interview, e.g. “Interview" (2024). I list these sources at a different portion of the bibliography which makes them easier to trace.

Gender References

I have also exercised the ethical best practices of eliminating or neutralizing comments relating to the gender of the participant unless that participant mentioned it and it related to the point.

Ethical Considerations

The second paragraph is a reflection of the ethical aspect of the research with the focus on vulnerable and/or conflicted fan identities and personal sensitive commentary. I included it in the section Methods.

Unclear Sentences

I made corrections on some sentences that had poor language usage and another copyediting of easy language.

References:

You were correct and the References list includes the date of each of the interviews and focus groups now.

Such alterations do not eliminate the initial insights and ensure that the article corresponds to academic and ethical requirements. I thank you for your comments and these comments have helped strengthen the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This treatment of the Rowling conundrum for Harry Potter readers is fascinating and insightful. The essay describes the situation well, then outlines how it will be studied from the perspective of various disciplines. This is all quite nicely done.

Though the thesis question is about how "the enjoyment of reading" lives after "the death of the author's reputation," this study fails to acknowledge when it doesn't. None of the results account, as a category, for the readers who walk away and don't return (see chart on p. 9). "Defensive separation" is the most serious break--this from the author, not the texts. Thus, the many readers who have walked away from both the author and the texts are unaccounted for. This allows the study to ascribe high moral purpose to the readers who many would still find compromised for their continued association with the Potterverse. The author also implies, in the conclusion, that these readers who "forsake" the Wizarding World don't exist at all (525-27), not that they are outside the concerns of this study. If they were indeed, carefully eliminated from the study, the text should address and explain this.  

I also found the data points on translated texts not clearly relevant to the overall argument. That connection should be eliminated or made more clear. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The deep thinking and analysis in this study are impressive, along with the careful construction of the argument. However, there were sentences, sometimes a series of sentences, that were nearly indecipherable--81-82, 117-119, 139-141, and throughout. These are, however, mixed with lovely direct sentences, such as this one: "The original author continues to exist and the person they loved disappears" (170). 

Author Response

Comment 1:This treatment of the Rowling conundrum for Harry Potter readers is fascinating and insightful. The essay describes the situation well, then outlines how it will be studied from the perspective of various disciplines. This is all quite nicely done.

Though the thesis question is about how "the enjoyment of reading" lives after "the death of the author's reputation," this study fails to acknowledge when it doesn't. None of the results account, as a category, for the readers who walk away and don't return (see chart on p. 9). "Defensive separation" is the most serious break--this from the author, not the texts. Thus, the many readers who have walked away from both the author and the texts are unaccounted for. This allows the study to ascribe high moral purpose to the readers who many would still find compromised for their continued association with the Potterverse. The author also implies, in the conclusion, that these readers who "forsake" the Wizarding World don't exist at all (525-27), not that they are outside the concerns of this study. If they were indeed, carefully eliminated from the study, the text should address and explain this.  

I also found the data points on translated texts not clearly relevant to the overall argument. That connection should be eliminated or made more clear. 

Reply: I am thankful to you comment. I realize the question regarding whether the discussion of translated texts is significant or not. In the corrected paper, I state that translation is an interpretive filter that can mold moral unease of the readers. Some language, structure, or culturally adaptive decisions in translated versions may render that ideological bond between writer and work more diffuse or more acute. With those readers of the Harry Potter books in translation, this layer of mediation can frequently have a re-framing effect on the presence of J. K. Rowling, and through this mediation, it can influence ethical perception and emotional attachment. I believe that this explanation lends more congruence to the argument.

Comment 2: The deep thinking and analysis in this study are impressive, along with the careful construction of the argument. However, there were sentences, sometimes a series of sentences, that were nearly indecipherable--81-82, 117-119, 139-141, and throughout. These are, however, mixed with lovely direct sentences, such as this one: "The original author continues to exist and the person they loved disappears" (170). 

Reply: Thanks a lot about the structure and the analysis of the argument. I followed your suggestions along the line of clarity of style of some passages and gave the entire manuscript a careful revise. I reorganized a few complicated or theoretical passages to make them more readable but with still the same reach of the analysis. I also attempted to maintain a tone that corresponds with the straightforward and direct style which you mentioned. I appreciate your input; it has made the manuscript easier to follow and to understand as well.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf