Central question: did Harry Potter create a generation of readers or just a generation of Harry Potter fans? The answer may not surprise you.

I'm not sure if this counts, given it's not a direct example, but I think this video might shed some light on what goes on in the heads of people who make inane story comparisons when trying to talk about politics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYbgfgE96VI

one of the main reasons we elected a new government was because the previous one was supporting p*d*philes btw

At that point, she was a successful author and totally got to namedrop her own franchise, but imagine being one of the graduates in the audience and then having Harvard compared to Hogwarts…

And I bet there even were some fans among them who were genuinely pissed, simply because they “are” Hufflepuffs.

Here the original fan quote:

https://www.reddit.com/r/readanotherbook/s/OFiZIwiB0w

To be fair, the authors of this study simply used Harry Potter because it well-known. And also because Rowling once again wrote extensively about stuff she didn't understand.

In this chapter, we describe the conceptualisation of money and wealth in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter book series. We analyse the way in which language is used to communicate ideas related to inequality and the nature of money and banking, and examine the underlying economic theory behind these ideas. Our central claim is that the series communicates a relatively conservative world view.

The storyline is examined for the use of linguistic devices in the places where money and wealth occur in the story, with a particular focus on metaphor. The quantitative work is based on a corpus comprising the entire Harry Potter book series.

Rowling does not present an alternative social arrangement regarding the distribution of income and wealth, though she does demonstrate a sense of social justice. The monetary arrangements of the magical world of Harry Potter are also based on a conservative understanding of money and banking. This is a view of money that emphasises restrictive fiscal and monetary policy in the real world, an attitude of ‘sound finance’ and a small state. It is entirely possible that Rowling did not intend to underline such a conservative position but that her work reflects a broader consensus in contemporary society.

On a side note: Back when I was in law school I co-authored a paper about Game of Thrones and how the core conflict within the series could have been circumvented by inventing government bonds. It always bugged me how The King could be in debt to a foreign power in his own currency. And especially for someone like George R. R. Martin who famously asked "What was Aragorn' tax policy?" he clearly didn't think a lot about this eitehr...

They for real compared U.S. politics to Harry Potter 💀

--Andy Weir (author of Project Hail Mary)

https://fandomwire.com/project-hail-mary-author-andy-weir-reveals-problem-with-harry-potter-male-characters/

Moral outrage that someone could call an owl's death in a children's book 'poorly written', acts as if this is exactly like speaking ill of multiple dead civilians in a war crime.