I call it demented to see someone stating that they see a threat (the HP sexual problem) as invalidating the threat of another thing (the Golden Compass problem) simply because they think that the first perceived threat as invalid.
In other words, assuming that I’m “crying wolf” in the HP case AUTOMATICALLY makes the actual wolf (the GC case) a non-threat is demented.
I had really hoped that you would apologize for the unwarranted verbal attack instead of digging in. There is nothing ‘demented’ about assessing a person’s credibility on a subject and extrapolating the same credibility w/ respect to a related topic.
Firstly, do you agree that I’ve been misrepresentational, distorting, untruthful, etc, about the HP situation?
In a word, yes. Your posts in this thread are the reason I added the hyperbole to my list of problems w/ critics of the novels. The novels are exactly the same as they were before JK Rowling answered that question. To suggest that her answer to the question renders Dumbledore ‘a bad guy’ (in your own words) despite the fact that there is
nothing in the novels which speaks to Dumbledore having had any sort of romantic relationships, and that the entire series ought to be chucked on the basis of potentially ‘becoming anti-Catholic literature’ … that just seems like an over-the-top reaction to something that isn’t even part of the text of the novels.
Secondly, shouldn’t the GC case be judged by the evidence of it’s case as opposed to the “reputation” of commentators on an entirely separate issue?
Entirely separate issue? Hardly. Both the Harry Potter & Golden Compass works are fiction. Critics of the first work criticize it on the basis of various distortions, misrepresentations. In other words, those who found Harry Potter novels acceptable reasonably conclude “They lied to us about the Harry Potter novels”. These same critics now criticize another fictional work. In what way is it reasonable to conclude ‘they lied about the Harry Potter novels, but they might be telling the truth this time’?
There’s an old saying: you never get a second chance to make a first impression. Critics of the Harry Potter novels who played fast and loose with truth have already made that first impression which follows them when they criticize another fictional work. Those who didn’t criticize the first work can be tarred, however, with the same brush ‘oh, it’s just another one of those religious fanatics who wouldn’t recognize truth if it bit them in the nose’. It’s not to say that they
are wrong about the Golden Compass, just that the credibility isn’t there
because of the previous dishonesty. Integrity is hard to regain once lost.
Do your own research, and come to your own conclusions.
But do those who have done the research that they’ve deemed sufficient not have the right to state their conclusions…!?
I already stated that I am not going to seek first-hand knowledge of the Golden Compass books. They are not something that my children have indicated any interest in, in which case I
WOULD have to read and come to my own conclusions. The only reason I have a ‘dog in the hunt’ w/ respect to the Harry Potter novels is that my oldest son was interested in reading them.
I’m not saying that those who have researched the books do not have a right to express the opinions derived from that research, only that
I am not going to repeat those opinions. I also will not give them particular credence (that is, I would not bother reading these opinions in evaluating the books if my children should indicate interest in them) because I am aware of the perils of relying on second-hand (or third-hand) information thanks to the dishonesty of the critics of the Harry Potter novels.
