Magic: Art or Science?

We typically refer to a magician as one steeped in the knowledge of the magical arts, not the magical sciences. Today, this seems oxymoronic at an educational institution. If we think of the subjects taken by Harry Potter and his classmates at Hogwarts, they sound rather science-y and applied-vocational – not at all what we would colloquially call the “arts” today.

The Arts sounds subjective, conjuring up notions of the fine arts – painting, dance, music, theatre, photography, and more. In many schools, these are sometimes grouped under the umbrella of the Humanities. Here you have literature, history, philosophy, religious studies, languages. With the exception of History of Magic and Ancient Runes, Hogwarts students do not seem to have any other formal coursework in the humanities. (Muggle Studies seems to be more of a social studies course, and Divination might be a pretend-science.) I’m sure there are extra-curricular activities that involve the arts; but that’s true in the Muggle world too – with funding cuts in education unfortunately resulting in the arts being slashed from the curriculum.

But perhaps it makes sense that a school of magic’s main purpose is to teach students how to control and use magic responsibly, thus the coursework has a strong applied slant. Since magic typically involves the manipulation of objects in the natural world, they have a science-y component as well. Care of Magical Creatures and Herbology intersect well with Zoology and Botany. Potions is clearly Chemistry. Astronomy is Astronomy. Arithmancy, I’ve argued is Physical Chemistry. Transfiguration, Charms and Defense against the Dark Arts sound like laboratory-exercises – practicum in a controlled environment. In medieval times, a budding art-isan learned the “secret art” or craft from a more experienced artisan through an apprenticeship. In contrast, a school with common formalized subjects and methodology might imply a transition from subjectivity to objectivity; Art to Science. After all, one of the so-called tenets of the scientific method is objective experimental repeatability.

The liberal arts are often misunderstood today because the words “liberal” and “arts” have changed colloquially in meaning over time. In ancient times, Art wasn’t just about art but more about craftsmanship. The Arts had a strong practical slant, differentiating themselves from the theorizing of philosophers. Yesterday’s Art is today’s Science. In medieval times, and certainly among the alchemists, there was a hiddenness associated with their art. The wizarding world of Harry Potter has its International Statute of Secrecy.

Should the Hogwarts curriculum have more of the Humanities and Social Sciences? I would think that (Magical) Ethics is important – but perhaps it is taught through the practical use-of-magic courses. We certainly see the theoretical slant of defensive magic when Umbridge teaches. How about Economics, if say you wanted to work at Gringotts? Or political science if you were interested in a career with the Ministry of Magic? Perhaps you were given on-the-job training as part of your career. Your schooling at Hogwarts was not meant for these purposes. As to other social aspects, perhaps the residential community played an important role in inculcating values – practically, rather than theoretically in a classroom.

In our world today, liberal arts education is fighting a rearguard action for relevance. Employers want skills, but want universities to supply majors trained in such skills. Perhaps we have something to learn from Hogwarts. It provides an education that is important, practical, and useful, yet not career-specific. It gives you the skills and the freedom to parlay your skillset into a variety of careers. That’s what the liberal arts means – learning the skills to live life fully and freely. It’s not about art or science, humanities versus STEM, subjective against objective, and many other false dichotomies.