Exploring Harry Potter and Peter Pan and the Ties Between Them. A Study of Mothers and Motherless Heroes in J. K. Rowling‘s Harry Potter series and J. M. Barrie‘s Peter and Wendy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among Carl Jung’s twelve archetypes adapted to literary analysis is the Orphan, who for centuries has remained an endearing and relatable character in literature. The archetype’s popularity has grown over time, particularly in children’s and young adult fantasy fiction, with some of the genre’s most famous and beloved stories having orphaned protagonists. An archetype that is arguably not as famous or celebrated in children’s literature is that of the Mother. Despite being a crucial figure in many orphan tales who carry strong themes regarding mothers, the archetype’s influence remains relatively underrated. In this thesis, the role of the Mother in J. K. Rowling’s fantasy book series Harry Potter (1997-2007) and J. M. Barrie’s Peter and Wendy (1911) is examined. It also explores the ties between the protagonists of these novels in the context of the two being motherless heroes to establish the archetype’s influence in their stories. In order to properly examine the impact the role of the Mother has on these novels, the essay first explores the archetype’s history and its importance in the genre of children’s literature. Secondly, it analyses the recurring topics and themes amongst motherless heroes, that is to say, orphaned protagonists whose stories have strong themes regarding mothers. This is to establish the characteristics in tales where the protagonist is an orphan, and the archetype of the Mother is prevalent. Thirdly, the essay analyses and compares the Harry Potter series to Peter and Wendy to establish similarities between the two in the relevant context. By exploring these two novels and mothers in children’s literature, it is evident that the Mother archetype is influential in shaping the orphaned protagonist and their tale.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".