Quack research is not only confined to the realm of science. Since the closure of the Harry Potter series, literary criticism, academic analysis and unfortunately also quack research has jumped on the creation by J.K. Rowling.
Professor Stephen Brown of Ulster University, marketing expert, has conducted research among readers ages 7 and over. The results showed Harry Potter readers divided into four groups that corresponded to the four houses of Hogwarts. From the Telegraph;
His research found ‘Hufflepuff’ readers take the tales at a slow, steady and systematic pace and enjoy re-reading the books over and over.
‘Gryffindor’ readers are eager and energetic and will devour the latest Potter book in one sitting, but quickly move on to new things.
‘Ravenclaws’ are subversive and take the stories with a pinch of salt, while ‘Slytherin’ readers are not fussed about the books. They prefer the films but pretend to have read the books when it suits them.
The interesting thing that Prof. Brown says is that ‘[t]he less committed types will now begin deserting Harry Potter, jeopardising sales. It is an interesting time in the development of the Potter brand because a lot of people have moved on. It will only be people who revel in his world who will continue with their admiration of the brand’.
While first of all I question the validity of the research and would like to know how large the group of interviewees was and how the research was conducted, there are some very well-worded opinions on the topic over at The Hog’s Head, like this one by Red Rocker;
What does that mean exactly “deserting Harry Potter”? Not buying any more of his books? Although there are some extremists out there who might buy more than one copy of a book, most readers only need to buy one copy and re-read that if they feel the need. Books are not like boxes of cereal, which need to be replaced once consumed. So what is he talking about when he talks about the HP brand? The movies? the hats and cards and costumes and wands and Hallowe’en costumes? The books about HP? The merchandising stuff has nothing to do with the staying power of a book.
(…) As for equating the four kinds of readers with the four houses of Hogwarts, there are is a big problem with his logic. As explained above, brand loyalty doesn’t apply to books, even to a series, because most series end. (And this series has definitely ended). There could be loyalty to the author. But Brown doesn’t talk about that. So being a “Hufflepuff” vs being a “Gryffindor” or “Ravenclaw” or even “Slytherin” has no meaning in terms of buying behaviour. In terms of marketing, a “Slytherin” who buys but does not read a HP book is no different than a “Hufflepuff” who buys a book and is eternally loyal to it ever after.
So readers of Harry beware, according to this research you should first do an online check of the Hogwarts house that you’d most likely be in, so that you know whether you should be rereading to book or not.