proof about negative views on Harry Potter

  • Thread starter Thread starter rocklobster
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think I’d be more concerned about children reading pro-homosexual relationship stories then Harry Potter.

I have no proof to perpetrate the negative view on Harry Potter. I have read all the books and all I saw in those books was fantasy, fiction, and some moral ideas that were both good and questionable.

I didn’t care for the blatant disrespect for authority that the main characters had BUT don’t most teenagers hate authority?
What the heck is “authority,” anyway? Let me list a few people who fought against proclaimed “authorities”:

Jesus Christ.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Gandhi.
Harriet Tubman.
George Washington.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
Thomas Jefferson.
John Brown.
William Lloyd Garrison.
Oskar Schindler.
Patrick Henry.
The Tank Man. (China)
Rosa Parks.
Nelson Mandela.
William Wallace.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. (Google him.)
Lech Walesa.

Lots more… 😃
 
I’m nearly convinced that no such proof exists. This subject has been hashed out again and again and I’ve not seen anyone present a negative view on Harry Potter that is based in actual fact. The closest thing to a reasonable arguement I’ve read is that reading about pretend magic might make people decide to persue real occult magic. Personally, I think that’s pretty unlikely and until I see some substantial evidence that this is indeed the case, I’m not convinced.
However, if a person decides that they don’t want to risk it, then more power to them. It’s not as if Harry Potter is an anyone’s list of things to read before you die.
The thing that bothers me is when people accuse those who have read to books of not being good Catholics, going against the church, or even promoting the occult themselves.
I also have a low tolerance for BS and it annoys me when people make statements about the books that are not true and then get upset when people who have read the books themselves call “BS”. For example, there’s the contantly used arguement that the books contain actual spells and instructions for how one might obtain unholy powers. This isn’t an issue of opinion. That information is either in the book or it isn’t. (by the way, it isn’t.)

A person may believe that the evil of Harry Potter is 100% true, but that does not justify telling falsehoods to support one’s belief. I’ve seen HP opponants resort to this in several threads.
 
What the heck is “authority,” anyway? Let me list a few people who fought against proclaimed “authorities”:

Jesus Christ.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Gandhi.
Harriet Tubman.
George Washington.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
Thomas Jefferson.
John Brown.
William Lloyd Garrison.
Oskar Schindler.
Patrick Henry.
The Tank Man. (China)
Rosa Parks.
Nelson Mandela.
William Wallace.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. (Google him.)
Lech Walesa.

Lots more… 😃
I would add JFK to that list… Because of his legacy, Neil Armstrong put a foot on the Moon.

Tank man was just doing his shopping that day, till he saw the steel beasts lumbering down the road and though “no more!”.

On Harry Potter, I think my criticism is that Rowling starts the series with a good idea of right and wrong, but something changed in Books 5-7 and the last chapters of 4. I think she began drifting to this idea of exploring what makes evil tick, and I grew tired of it. My favorite book was once the 3rd or 4th, but now reflecting on it years later, the one. I enjoyed the most was Philosophers Stone… and I loved the film adaptation the most also.
 
While I still won’t post my own thoughts about HP (I see no reason to get into a fruitless arguement), I do find the following excerpt to be interesting (from Rowling during a interview with Newsweek in 2000):

JONES: *Do you actually answer your fan mail? ***

ROWLING**: [Reluctantly] *Yeah. I have help now. But letters get – I don’t know if I should actually say this in Newsweek. I have a set of criteria for letters I want to see personally, so they will get filtered, and they will get handwritten replies.

I get letters from children addressed to Professor Dumbledore [headmaster at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, the books’ setting],** and it’s not a joke, begging to be let into Hogwarts, and some of them are really sad. Because they want it to be true so badly they’ve convinced themselves it’s true. So those are some that get pulled. ***
 
What the heck is “authority,” anyway? Let me list a few people who fought against proclaimed “authorities”:

Jesus Christ.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Gandhi.
Harriet Tubman.
George Washington.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
Thomas Jefferson.
John Brown.
William Lloyd Garrison.
Oskar Schindler.
Patrick Henry.
The Tank Man. (China)
Rosa Parks.
Nelson Mandela.
William Wallace.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. (Google him.)
Lech Walesa.

Lots more… 😃
John Paul II
 
What the heck is “authority,” anyway? Let me list a few people who fought against proclaimed “authorities”:

Jesus Christ.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Gandhi.
Harriet Tubman.
George Washington.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton.
Thomas Jefferson.
John Brown.
William Lloyd Garrison.
Oskar Schindler.
Patrick Henry.
The Tank Man. (China)
Rosa Parks.
Nelson Mandela.
William Wallace.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. (Google him.)
Lech Walesa.

Lots more… 😃
For children the only authorities that matter are their parents. And while Harry had no parents he had absolutely no respect for Dumbledore or any other adult who was trying to take care of him.

As for the others, they sometimes listened to their parents but most of the time what parents wanted was immaterial. After all, the adults were all too fuddy duddy to figure out what was going on and fix it. :rolleyes:

That’s what I meant by authority and the children in the book are constantly bucking authority. They aren’t exactly great role models BUT they are realistic depictions of children because that’s what children do - they see adults as stupid and want to go their own way.
 
For children the only authorities that matter are their parents. And while Harry had no parents he had absolutely no respect for Dumbledore or any other adult who was trying to take care of him.
WHAT?! Harry had every respect for Dumbledore. He was so loyal of him that when he was forced to leave Hogwarts he created a group called “Dumbledore’s Army” to defend Hogwarts against the sadistic new headmistress who campaigned against Dumbledore.
As for the others, they sometimes listened to their parents but most of the time what parents wanted was immaterial.
A common theme in children’s books is the children knowing things that adults don’t and being mature enough to save the day. Same for films. Home Alone is a good example. And that’s not true to Harry Potter either. His friend Ron’s parents were a constant presense in Harry’s life, giving him advice, shelter, and family support.
After all, the adults were all too fuddy duddy to figure out what was going on and fix it. :rolleyes:
The adults get pretty involed. The young’uns tend to be meddling in things they shouldn’t against the advice of adults (with bad consequences, yet they make it through) until eventually the adults except they’re mature enough now to be activily involved. So you’re wrong again.
That’s what I meant by authority and the children in the book are constantly bucking authority. They aren’t exactly great role models BUT they are realistic depictions of children because that’s what children do - they see adults as stupid and want to go their own way.
They’re “bucking” authority for the greater good if they do it at all. For example, in the first book they break the rules because no one believes them when they say there’s danger so they feel forced to try and save the day themselves, and again, that’s a common theme.
 
WHAT?! Harry had every respect for Dumbledore. He was so loyal of him that when he was forced to leave Hogwarts he created a group called “Dumbledore’s Army” to defend Hogwarts against the sadistic new headmistress who campaigned against Dumbledore.

They’re “bucking” authority for the greater good if they do it at all. For example, in the first book they break the rules because no one believes them when they say there’s danger so they feel forced to try and save the day themselves, and again, that’s a common theme.
He had respect for Dumbledore but he didn’t tend to listen to Dumbledore. Unless I’m remembering the books wrong or something? Harry did what Harry wanted, regardless what the adults wanted (IF he could get away with it, that is).

See… that’s what I have a problem with. The idea that the children somehow were privy to knowledge and wisdom that the adults lacked and because they did they were able to save the day. How often does this happen in real life? Usually when kids are ignoring the voice of their parents or teachers bad things follow.

But then I figure the adults knew a hell of a lot more then they were telling the kids and could have handled the problems quite well on their own but the kids just refused to trust the adults. That common theme irritated me a bit. 🤷 But it’s a children’s book so if they weren’t like this the plot wouldn’t have gone anywhere.

Anyway, I know the kids saved the day over and over in every book. I realize this is just fictional… but these are the points I saw that were far more worrisome then the magic.
 
To answer the OP, there is no real proof on negative views of Harry Potter. I know a few good, solid Priests who like it (as entertainment). It’s jolly good entertainment, the books are well-written. It’s a bit of good fun, and no different from a fairy tale.
 
I’m in my early 20s.

Potter came out when I was in Middle School. I was never interested in it.

I did watch a lot of Dark Shadows (on VHS) when I was small.

I loved it. I do not think it did me any damage.

It was fun entertainment.

🤷
 
He had respect for Dumbledore but he didn’t tend to listen to Dumbledore. Unless I’m remembering the books wrong or something? Harry did what Harry wanted, regardless what the adults wanted (IF he could get away with it, that is).

See… that’s what I have a problem with. The idea that the children somehow were privy to knowledge and wisdom that the adults lacked and because they did they were able to save the day. How often does this happen in real life? Usually when kids are ignoring the voice of their parents or teachers bad things follow.

But then I figure the adults knew a hell of a lot more then they were telling the kids and could have handled the problems quite well on their own but the kids just refused to trust the adults. That common theme irritated me a bit. 🤷 But it’s a children’s book so if they weren’t like this the plot wouldn’t have gone anywhere.

Anyway, I know the kids saved the day over and over in every book. I realize this is just fictional… but these are the points I saw that were far more worrisome then the magic.
The idea that children know things that adults don’t know is a very common theme in hundreds of childrens books and films. As I have said before. It’s nothing new to HP. Think of the Famous Five for example.

Also Harry always did what Dumbledore told him to do. You seem to be very vague and I don’t think you’ve remembered the books well at all.
 
The idea that children know things that adults don’t know is a very common theme in hundreds of childrens books and films. As I have said before. It’s nothing new to HP. Think of the Famous Five for example.

Also Harry always did what Dumbledore told him to do. You seem to be very vague and I don’t think you’ve remembered the books well at all.
I disagree. I don’t think he always did what Dumbledore said at all. He disobeyed school rules, by doing so he was disobeying Dumbledore. 🤷 It is shown that the Headmaster makes school rules, after all.

Pardon me for not being a walking Encyclopedia of Harry Potter, I am just pointing out the only thing in the books that was objectionable (that I could think of), as that IS the topic of the thread. No need to get defensive. I’m not actually bashing the books, just pointing out the only objectionable thing in the books I could think of.
 
I disagree. I don’t think he always did what Dumbledore said at all.
Example?
He disobeyed school rules, by doing so he was disobeying Dumbledore.
Dumbledore broke school rules. He even broke magical law. He escaped when the Ministry of Magic attempted to arrest and forcibly remove him from Hogwarts.
🤷 It is shown that the Headmaster makes school rules, after all.
So he breaks them.
Pardon me for not being a walking Encyclopedia of Harry Potter, I am just pointing out the only thing in the books that was objectionable (that I could think of), as that IS the topic of the thread. No need to get defensive. I’m not actually bashing the books, just pointing out the only objectionable thing in the books I could think of.
It just seems obvious to me that you don’t really know much about what you’re arguing against. Your lack of examples from the books and constant sweeping statements you’re not changing give you away a little.
 
For children the only authorities that matter are their parents. And while Harry had no parents he had absolutely no respect for Dumbledore or any other adult who was trying to take care of him.
Harry always has immense respect for Dumbledore. In fact, it is that respect which saves his life in Chamber of Secrets. The only time I can recall his disobeying or dismissing Dumbledore’s instructions is when he doesn’t work to get the real memory from Slughorn in Half-Blood Prince, and when Dumbledore rebukes him for it, Harry feels really bad and realizes he was wrong. He also respects Professor McGonagall a lot, and indeed most of the Hogwarts teachers.
As for the others, they sometimes listened to their parents but most of the time what parents wanted was immaterial. After all, the adults were all too fuddy duddy to figure out what was going on and fix it. :rolleyes:
Are Mr. and Mrs. Weasley “fuddy duddies” or dumb? What about Neville’s grandmother? Or the Hogwarts faculty?

The only time I can think of when the students choose to act as though the adults can’t help them is the climax of Order of the Phoenix, and we quickly find out they were wrong to make that assumption: the children cause the mess, and the proper authority figures (Dumbledore, the Order of the Phoenix) have to come in and save the day.
That’s what I meant by authority and the children in the book are constantly bucking authority. They aren’t exactly great role models BUT they are realistic depictions of children because that’s what children do - they see adults as stupid and want to go their own way.
Fair enough. Honestly, I think Harry Potter rightfully inculcates in children a realization that there are principles higher than earthly authorities, and that those principles should govern our lives. When earthly authorities act in conformance with these principles, they are to be obeyed; if they command contravention of these principles, they should not be.

And good authority figures in the series - like Dumbledore - do inspire devotion and submission from the kids. Even with Snape, the children’s lack of trust in him in Order of the Phoenix ultimately gets Sirius killed.

As for the bad authority figures… well, they’re bad. They ought to be disobeyed, just as the Nazis ought to have been disobeyed. Can anyone seriously maintain that the children had some kind of moral obligation to obey Dolores Umbridge? The magic of Dumbledore’s office indicates that her status as headmistress of Hogwarts was not even legally valid.
He had respect for Dumbledore but he didn’t tend to listen to Dumbledore. Unless I’m remembering the books wrong or something? Harry did what Harry wanted, regardless what the adults wanted (IF he could get away with it, that is).

See… that’s what I have a problem with. The idea that the children somehow were privy to knowledge and wisdom that the adults lacked and because they did they were able to save the day. How often does this happen in real life? Usually when kids are ignoring the voice of their parents or teachers bad things follow.
This is true in Harry Potter, too. For instance, Harry and his friends start “Dumbledore’s Army,” and the net result of it is that Dumbledore is forced to flee into exile. They feel really stupid and bad about that, and it wouldn’t have happened if they had listened to Dumbledore and McGonagall by not antagonizing or resisting the Umbridge regime.
Anyway, I know the kids saved the day over and over in every book. I realize this is just fictional… but these are the points I saw that were far more worrisome then the magic.
Sometimes it’s the children’s loyalty to proper authority that saves the day. For instance:
  • in Philosopher’s Stone they attempt to alert Dumbledore (even sending him an owl) before getting involved, and Dumbledore does indeed save the day by returning and defeating Quirrell; in fact, he figures out on his own that he needs to come back without the assistance of the children’s owl.
  • in Chamber of Secrets Harry’s loyalty to Dumbledore allows Fawkes to come to his assistance, which saves his life
  • in the climax of Half-Blood Prince Harry listens to and obeys everything Dumbledore asks of him
 
The idea that children know things that adults don’t know is a very common theme in hundreds of children’s books and films. As I have said before. It’s nothing new to HP. Think of the Famous Five for example.

Also Harry always did what Dumbledore told him to do. You seem to be very vague and I don’t think you’ve remembered the books well at all.
I disagree. I don’t think he always did what Dumbledore said at all. He disobeyed school rules, by doing so he was disobeying Dumbledore. 🤷 It is shown that the Headmaster makes school rules, after all.

Pardon me for not being a walking Encyclopedia of Harry Potter, I am just pointing out the only thing in the books that was objectionable (that I could think of), as that IS the topic of the thread. No need to get defensive. I’m not actually bashing the books, just pointing out the only objectionable thing in the books I could think of.
Just to offer an outsiders opinion (outside from the two of you I mean), I don’t believe LemonAndLime was being defensive at all.

I can agree with you nickybr that by not obeying all of the school rules, he disobeyed Dumbledore. However, as LemonAndLime said, he always did what Dumbledore explicitly told him to do. It’s even a huge part of the final book that Harry “blindly” followed Dumbledore without knowing the man hardly at all.

As LemonAndLime said, in children’s literature, it’s almost a running theme that the children don’t listen to the adults. It’s not unique to HP at all and doesn’t take away from the morals behind it at all. I highly doubt that most children would disobey their parents because book “XYZ” said it was okay.
 
Example?

Dumbledore broke school rules. He even broke magical law. He escaped when the Ministry of Magic attempted to arrest and forcibly remove him from Hogwarts.

So he breaks them.

[qupte]Pardon me for not being a walking Encyclopedia of Harry Potter, I am just pointing out the only thing in the books that was objectionable (that I could think of), as that IS the topic of the thread. No need to get defensive. I’m not actually bashing the books, just pointing out the only objectionable thing in the books I could think of.
I don’t care really if you don’t know everything about the books, and I don’t care if you dislike them. That’s all up to you. It just seems obvious to me that you don’t really know much about what you’re arguing against. Your lack of examples from the books and constant sweeping statements you’re not changing give you away a little.

Sorry. I don’t analyze books or memorize them. I just remember what I took away from them. Fine. I don’t have examples that Harry disobeyed Dumbledore directly (it’s been long enough since I read them and I really don’t care enough to go and do research for the sake of an internet discussion) that doesn’t change the fact that the children were constantly disobeying the adults in their lives.

sigh

But I’m not willing to get into a contest with you about whether or not I know the subject matter well enough to discuss it. Here I thought having read the book was enough to engage in a discussion about it but no, apparently I must analyze the book and remember all the details. 🤷
 
Just to offer an outsiders opinion (outside from the two of you I mean), I don’t believe LemonAndLime was being defensive at all.

I can agree with you nickybr that by not obeying all of the school rules, he disobeyed Dumbledore. However, as LemonAndLime said, he always did what Dumbledore explicitly told him to do. It’s even a huge part of the final book that Harry “blindly” followed Dumbledore without knowing the man hardly at all.

As LemonAndLime said, in children’s literature, it’s almost a running theme that the children don’t listen to the adults. It’s not unique to HP at all and doesn’t take away from the morals behind it at all. I highly doubt that most children would disobey their parents because book “XYZ” said it was okay.
🙂 Yes, I recognize this. And as I’ve said multiple times I was merely pointing out the only ‘negative’ things I saw in Harry Potter as that is the topic of choice.

I enjoyed the books very much and I recognize that this is a common theme in children’s books which is why I don’t mind the Harry Potter books. Just finding the only negative I could think of for the sake of the topic. 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top