Secular criticism of Harry Potter

[Lost_Wanderer]

To simply remark to all of this by saying that the Potter tales show good as better than evil is , to say the least, an insufficient defence of the series. Rowling has radically blurred the lines between good and evil, indeed redefining some of both. The real question surely is: what is the nature of good and evil as she has presented it?

It should also be observed that children read fiction with a different consciousness than adults. Once again this is something else that is quitely overlooked by the Christian Potter-pleaders. They seem to pass over the fact that the young are in a state of formation - their understanding of reality is being forged at every turn. It is for this very reason that there is an onus on children’s writers not to blurr the distinction between right and wrong, truth and falsehood; people like Tolkien and Lewis realised this and respected it, Rowling owing to her liberal worldview does not.

Even if Rowling peppered her views with a liberal mindset, reader-oriented theories have proven that anybody can interpret a book even if it’s not from the same angle as the author’s. However, unlike the Bible where such misinterpretation would be theologically and morally perilous, different interpretations of Harry Potter are no more truthful than the other (generally speaking).

Furthermore, it’s because of how children are still developing that parents should watch over them not just in what they read but what they watch, hear, do etc. It is unfair to make books such as Harry Potter an exclusive “threat” to their moral upbringing.

And for the record, as a writer myself, I don’t plan on writing books for children (shivers). If you’re so concerned over your children reading books like that then just stick to having them read Clifford the Big Red Dog or watch Sesame Street.

However it is not merely the withcraft and sorcery element that I find worrisome, although that fundamental defect is enough to condemn the series alone. There are other very serious problems also, notably the question of authority and obedience - both taboo words nowadays in our ungovernable society.

The fact that you consider it a fundamental defect is my biggest problem with you here. Frankly, you believe the use of magic is something exclusive to evil. I have already presented my case which challenges this view of yours and your response is still due.

Secondly, you can’t exactly say that the rules that were being disobeyed in Harry Potter were rules that were worth keeping. Neither can you say that the authorities in the novels were the type that were worth adhering to either. (I’d swear loyalty to Dumbledore over Fudge any day).

Unless of course you really haven’t read the books (another charge brought forth by people that you have still yet to address).

Heck, even the Christians in the olden days defied the authority of pagan emperors and broke the laws of the Jews.

By the way I have no objection* per se* to wholesome fantasy literature, irrespective of how wildly imaginative it may be, since it reinforces the absolute, unchanging moral order of the universe in the child’s mind. Corrupt morally ambiguous fantasy undermines it; the Potter-world is, I regret to say, corrupt fantasy with a dab of cosmetic veneer. The cosmetics are the “values” woven into the tale by the author.

Harry’s faults are seldom punished, if they are it is usually by the negative authority figures in the tale. The positive authority figures actually reward H.P. for his disobedience when it brings about some perceived good. His lies, his acts of vengeance and the misuse of his powers are frequently ignored. The only message that seems to ring loudly throughout the series is, “the end justifies the means”. Now of course our morally bankrupt society sees very little wrong with this, but God does - “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Isaih 5: 20). Clearly there is no indefinite morallity from God’s standpoint and neither should there be from ours. Indeed this is why by definition moral absolutes do not need to be “proven to be absolutes by a fair amount of logic”. Thus the Ten Commandments for instance do not need to be validated or demonstrated to be logical before being worthy of our acceptance. The only alternative to this is moral relativism where you and I decide what we deem to be a moral absolute by pure force of logic or just mere personal subjective opinion. To embrace this position is to abandon orthodox Christianity and endorse a neo-pagan stance.

Well then I guess the Catholic Church is already steeped in this neo-pagan stance you speak of because they’ve clearly outlined the Catechism with notes and explanations beyond that of mere roughly cut out Bible verses. In case you haven’t noticed, it’s the fundamentalists who try to justify their views without reasoning and just quote the Bible out of their hat. Sadly, it’s thanks to people like that that were are labeled as irrational, fanatical idiots and our religion is unfairly marked as a superstition that has no basis in logic. You can cite more verses all you want and see this as a sign of persecution but those will never answer the actual questions put forth by those charges. Thus, the last thing I want is someone who reinforces this stereotype so I suggest you give logic a bit more credit than what you’re currently handing it.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

So why is that so many Christian commentators refuse to condemn the Harry Potter novels? I can only speculate as to the reasons, but I suspect that many are fearful of being branded anti-intellectual or reactionary, this would be very much an issue for those in acedemia where an outright condemnation might discredit them in the eyes of collegues.

Which is true, as you’re starting to prove. Unless of course anti-intellectual is a label you would boldly brand yourself with and would love to see other Christians to do the same? In case you haven’t noticed the Church itself takes pride in being a religion of both faith and reason. It’s time you started counter-balancing your religious adherence with sufficient reason as to why you do so. Otherwise we might as well join the ranks of trailer park street preachers who command people to obey simply because the Bible says so.

Another reason could be that they simply do not have the courage to be unpopular, either with their families or friends, so they just keep silent. However in many cases I believe that people have become so impacted by the spirit of the age (what Sacred Scripture terms “love of the world”), that their powers of spiritual discernment have been severly impaired and blunted. Thus they sincerely believe that there is nothing amiss with the H.P. novels and that those who dare to criticise them must be well “joyless prigs” or hidebound fundamentalists.

Well you’re certainly not doing a good job of proving us otherwise. Your assumption that it has left people spiritually blunt, however, is hilarious. As I’ve stated before, I defend books like Harry Potter because (like a lot of fantasy writers), we don’t take kindly to restrictions on our imagination. It’s not about being popular (we’re happy being popular amongst our own fantasy-indulging kind thank you very much ). To say that it is love for the world is not only fallacious but it doesn’t even make any sense.

By the way it is very easy to hurl abusive epithets at those with whom one strongly disagrees in order to discredit them and to make them appear irrational reactionaries,. and uncharitable ones at that. This, however, is no substitute for informed discussion and debate; I would maintain that bitterness of spirit and expression is not only a breach of Christian charity but is also an indication of the deep insecurities underlying its use.

I value my style of writing. Fantasy is not just something I want to read about, it’s also something I want to create. Pardon me if I’m quite very defensive of it because I don’t pretty much have anything else about myself to stand up for (other than my faith of course).

 

[Lizziebel]

Portrait wrote:

“Both of these Christian writers firmly underline the fact that the vanquishment of radical evil is dependent on humility, courage, love, self-sacrifice - in short, our natural human virtues.”

It was with courage, love, and self-sacrifice that Voldemort was defeated. With courage, many characters in the series stood up to the prejudice and corruption pervading the world inhabited by these characters. With love and self-sacrifice, many came together to protect and defend others, and took action to defeat Voldemort. The love and self-sacrifice of Lily protected Harry from coming to harm at the hands of Voldemort, and Harry in turn made this same sacrifice to protect others.

It was Voldemort’s arrogance and refusal to repent that also very much contributed to his death and the ultimate fate of his soul.

---

Portrait wrote:

"The fundamental problem with the Potter series is Rowling’s use of the symbol-world of the occult as her primary metaphor and occultic activities as the dramatic engine of the plots. It presents these to the young reader through attractive and charismatic role models, such as Harry and Hermione, who are students of witchcraft and sorcery. "

As far as the “magic” in the Harry Potter series, the main issue really would be that there is a class in Divination, though Hermione does dismiss it as a “wolly discipline” and drops the subject.

The rest of it isn’t exactly occult as we typically think of it. What I mean by this is that the “magic” is actually a genetic trait/ability. The “spells” are words taught to focus this ability (so that the kids do not continue to unleash untrained, accidental magic when they get emotional…like what happened when Harry accidentally blew up his aunt after she made some horribly cruel comments about his parents.) It’s different from magic as we think of it, which would involve calling on some outside, dangerous power to cause something to happen.

Presumably kids of all faiths attend Hogwarts, though Christianity is the really the only religion depicted (e.g., Harry and the other kids celebrate Christmas, Harry has a godfather, among many examples).

 

[Portrait]

Portrait wrote:

“Both of these Christian writers firmly underline the fact that the vanquishment of radical evil is dependent on humility, courage, love, self-sacrifice - in short, our natural human virtues.”

It was with courage, love, and self-sacrifice that Voldemort was defeated. With courage, many characters in the series stood up to the prejudice and corruption pervading the world inhabited by these characters. With love and self-sacrifice, many came together to protect and defend others, and took action to defeat Voldemort. The love and self-sacrifice of Lily protected Harry from coming to harm at the hands of Voldemort, and Harry in turn made this same sacrifice to protect others.

It was Voldemort’s arrogance and refusal to repent that also very much contributed to his death and the ultimate fate of his soul.

---

Portrait wrote:

"The fundamental problem with the Potter series is Rowling’s use of the symbol-world of the occult as her primary metaphor and occultic activities as the dramatic engine of the plots. It presents these to the young reader through attractive and charismatic role models, such as Harry and Hermione, who are students of witchcraft and sorcery. "

As far as the “magic” in the Harry Potter series, the main issue really would be that there is a class in Divination, though Hermione does dismiss it as a “wolly discipline” and drops the subject.

The rest of it isn’t exactly occult as we typically think of it. What I mean by this is that the “magic” is actually a genetic trait/ability. The “spells” are words taught to focus this ability (so that the kids do not continue to unleash untrained, accidental magic when they get emotional…like what happened when Harry accidentally blew up his aunt after she made some horribly cruel comments about his parents.) It’s different from magic as we think of it, which would involve calling on some outside, dangerous power to cause something to happen.

Presumably kids of all faiths attend Hogwarts, though Christianity is the really the only religion depicted (e.g., Harry and the other kids celebrate Christmas, Harry has a godfather, among many examples).

Dear Lizziebel,

To adress your last point first, at Hogwarts holidays such as Christmas and Easter are stripped of Christ, rendered down to nothing more than social customs and assimilated into the “broader” context of the occult symbol-cosmology. One of the friendly ghosts sings a mocking parody of a Christmas carol. It is Halloween that is the great feast of the year. Alas, it is this wizard world, gnostic in essence and practice, that neutralizes the sacred and displaces it by normalizing what is profoundly destructive and abnormal in the real. This I find most disturbing be it in a Harry Potter novel or any other novel.

Magic is about taking control in areas of life where man has no authority to take control. It is clearly a repudiation of the divine order in creation. All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at ones service and have supernatural powers over others are, incontrovertibly, gravely contrary to the virtue of true religion.

Whilst it is true that Rowling posits the “good” use of occult powers against their misuse, thus imparting in her tales a sort of aura of morality, the cumulalitive effect is to shift our understanding of the battle lines between good and evil. The border is never defined. The archetype of “misuse” is Voldemort, whose savage cruelty and will to power is blatantly evil. Yet the reader is lulled into minimizing or forgetting altogether that Harry himself, and, indeed, many other of the supposedly good characters, frequently employ the selfsame powers on a lesser scale, allegedly for good ends. The spurious notion of “the end justifies the means” is the subtext throughout.

The Harry Potter series is a fantasy-projection of materialist man imagining himself to have god-like powers without any reference whatsoever to the source of those powers, nor to any set of moral absolutes by which he can weigh the rightness or wrongness of his actions. Whatever morals or virtues are found in the books, are an inheritance from Christianity, surviving only as a humanistic ethos, a remnant of what they once were.

Forgive the lenghthy interval in responding to your posting; I have recently investigated the Harry Potter debate again and decided to revisit this thread to check if there had been any further additional contributions. Just thought I would submit one myself - hope you read it sometime.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Magic is about taking control in areas of life where man has no authority to take control. It is clearly a repudiation of the divine order in creation. All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at ones service and have supernatural powers over others are, incontrovertibly, gravely contrary to the virtue of true religion.

You’re applying the standards of our world to a world created by someone else’s imagination. Not only is that logically unsound, it’s quite unfair. Who you are to say magic can and must be outside man’s control in a fictional universe?

Whilst it is true that Rowling posits the “good” use of occult powers against their misuse, thus imparting in her tales a sort of aura of morality, the cumulalitive effect is to shift our understanding of the battle lines between good and evil. The border is never defined. The archetype of “misuse” is Voldemort, whose savage cruelty and will to power is blatantly evil. Yet the reader is lulled into minimizing or forgetting altogether that Harry himself, and, indeed, many other of the supposedly good characters, frequently employ the selfsame powers on a lesser scale, allegedly for good ends. The spurious notion of “the end justifies the means” is the subtext throughout.

Again, you condemn Harry’s actions without even the slightest consideration of what you would’ve done in his place. You’re just repeating the same thing again and you have never addressed your inability to see through the eyes of a character.

The Harry Potter series is a fantasy-projection of materialist man imagining himself to have god-like powers without any reference whatsoever to the source of those powers, nor to any set of moral absolutes by which he can weigh the rightness or wrongness of his actions. Whatever morals or virtues are found in the books, are an inheritance from Christianity, surviving only as a humanistic ethos, a remnant of what they once were.

It’s a work of fiction. For goodness sake does an author have to outline every detail of his/her fantasy universe down how it’s morality and Natural Order work? You ask question that are really dubious. I doubt people care about something as trivial an issue as the source of magic in a fictional, fantasy setting when there’s a story to be told.

And I hate to break it to you but what you say about the Christian values being turned to sad, humanistic shells can be applied to many other allegedly “Christian” novels. It all boils down to how one interprets it. And as I have said many times, go look up reader-oriented theories. These are proof that you can’t always write something and expect people to react in the way you want.

 

[curlycool89]

I don’t see why everyone has got to harp on Rowling. The Harry Potter novels were excellent fiction. One of my favourite series. Actually, my second favourite only behind Tolkien (LOTR is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, novel of the 20th century in my opinion, and practically forms the basis for the entire modern fantasy genre).

I really don’t really get the focus on symbolism or themes or other english things. I hated english class in high school and I could really, really, really, really care less about things like that. I just want to read and enjoy the book. What I want a good narrative and a good, enjoyable story.

I find that I enjoy 2 types of stories. One is the thrillers akin to 24 in book form. I’ve found a couple good authors in Vince Flynn and Tom Clancy for that. They’re not going to win any “artsy” prizes or whatever they pretend to call them, but are they ever fun to read!

The other type I like is the adventuring type, which is of course why I like Tolkien and Potter books. It is probably the hardest genre to write properly. You have to keep a story going with deeper characters without bogging it down too much. I find that British author Bernard Corwell writes this well actually. Some people here would probably never pick these books up due to the way Christianity is sometimes treated (his one series has a pagan protagonist as a kind of foil to Alfred the Great, who the protagonist hates and vilifies, but is on again/off again allies with him. You just need to remember who history remembers, the fighters or the great scholar and king).

Art is subjective. I find that most of the “true” art people rave about is pure, well I can’t say what I think it is here

 

[reasonforseason]

There is so much in this world destroying our society, so much that this culture of death is corrupting, Harry Potter is the least of our worries. It is a very good fairy tale that is encouraging children to read. And yes there is good and evil, and just like the Bible, evil loses and good wins.

 

[shondrea]

I think if one is concernd or doubting, they can read HP aloud with their children. It could be a good opportunity for moral discussions.

“What do you think about Harry’s choice?”

“Have you ever been tempted to do that? Did you?”

“What do you think would have been a better choice for Harry?”

And my favorite moral you can see form Harry Potter- he’s has done a lot of things wrong. He has sinned, lied, and been disobediant. But we are all sinners, and we can all do good things in the end.

 

[Nan_S]

I have been the 6th Grade CCD bible-study teacher at my church for close to a decade, I’m part of the RCIA team, and my copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church is seriously fingerprinted, stained, and tattered. I am a mom whose kids were all pre-teens when Harry Potter #1 was published. I’ve read all seven Potter books myself and seen all the movies.

Just so you know I’m not some kind of head-in-the-sand fundamentalist parrot, I’m also going to tell you I have read all the Tolkien books and seen the movies, I’ve read the entire Chronicles of Narnia series, I’ve seen all the Star Wars movies and read up on George Lucas’ life-view (he’s a New Age believer), and I’ve read Robert Jordan’s entire Wheel of Time series, as well as many others. When I was a kid I checked out Bram Stoker’s Dracula from the library, read it at night by flashlight, and hid it in my bedcovers during the day so my mother wouldn’t find out. Some of you may remember the late-1960s gothic vampire / werewolf soap opera called Dark Shadows. (No, Twilight / New Moon are NOT originals; they’re just old stories repackaged.) There was an entire series of romance novels written about the Dark Shadows characters, and when I was a teenager I also read as many of those as I could find.

So I feel a little bit qualified to offer an opinion on Rowling’s novels.

Harry Potter Books #1, 2 & 3 seemed tame enough. Starting with Book #4, I noted that the series suddenly devolved into really dark, disturbing stuff, and some serious parental guidance was in order. Knowing that there was no way I could supervise my kids 24/7 and keep the books out of their hands, I proactively headed them off at the pass instead.

I agreed to be in the bookstore at 12:01 AM on the release dates and buy the remaining books, on the condition that I would read them first and my kids would have to be prepared for some serious discussion on the issues and images Rowling portrayed. This opened the door for me to instruct my kids on what the Catechism says about magic, horoscopes, divination, necromancy, and the occult, and how they are all condemned without exception even when the would-be user intends them for good purpose.

That parental intrusion in itself spoiled some of the books’ “charm” for my kids. Fantasy magic lost some of its allure. That was what I had hoped would happen. As adults, it’s easy to abstain from problem issues by banishing or avoiding them. But as parents, we’ve got to understand that “forbidden fruit” will attract our kids like flame attracts moths. I believe you can’t just tell them to stay away from something and expect it to happen; you have to teach them why they should stay away by standing beside them and showing them when ugliness lies under a coat of whitewash.

Looking back, my youngest (who is now in college) tells me that Rowling’s insistence on having major characters die bothered her a lot. During her growing-up years experienced death for herself, the deaths of pets, of family members, and of friends’ family members. She did not see Rowling’s characters’ deaths as the Noble Sacrifices which Rowling intended. Instead she saw it as senseless. Her favorite characters were killed “just because.”

My daughter hates the 7th Harry Potter book.

It’s easy for us as adults to reconcile all the “shades of grey” which color the world. What we have to remember is that kids see things in black-and-white. Something is either right or wrong, good or bad. For kids and teenagers, the little in-between nuances don’t register. Have you every heard someone say to a teenager, “Why don’t you just move out and get a job while you’re young and still know everything!” Even as teenagers they marginalize evil, and in particular want to chow down on the forbidden fruit.

The Harry Potter books take stuff that is dangerous and reprehensible, and package it up with a pretty bow for the kids. That’s why the Harry Potter books cause problems, and why responsible parenting is in order.

 

[shondrea]

I think I just have a very difficult time with the rule of parental supervision when it comes to media, because…I kinda had a very different unbringing in that sense, but turned out very fine.

My grandma read to me from the time I was born, and I learned to love reading early on. By age 11, I had the reading level of a college student, and a very grounded understanding of what was real, even though I enjoyed my little imaginary world in my head.

I was bringing home books with content many parents would consider questionable since I was in middle school, and had very little instruction fro my family as to what was right and wrong to read. There really weren’t any limits on this sort of thing. Yet still, I turned out fine from it. It wasn’t until I got a computer that I got corrupted.

Now of course, I think I’m the exception rather than the rule. Although I loved reading about magic and wizards and seances and such, I never had any inclination to try that stuff because I knew it was bad or fake. I was much more interested with pretending I was a fairy.

I’m not saying to not monitor what your kids watch or read. I’m not saying that at ALL! All I’m saying is that I think, on a personal level, if I’d have had restrictions on what I could read and what was evil, I would have been drawn to it even more, and in a negative way.

Some children are very good at taking the instruction their parents have already given them, and applying it to what they read at a young age. Others still need some help! And you know your child better than anyone.

My two rambling cents

 

[Portrait]

You’re applying the standards of our world to a world created by someone else’s imagination. Not only is that logically unsound, it’s quite unfair. Who you are to say magic can and must be outside man’s control in a fictional universe?

Again, you condemn Harry’s actions without even the slightest consideration of what you would’ve done in his place. You’re just repeating the same thing again and you have never addressed your inability to see through the eyes of a character.

It’s a work of fiction. For goodness sake does an author have to outline every detail of his/her fantasy universe down how it’s morality and Natural Order work? You ask question that are really dubious. I doubt people care about something as trivial an issue as the source of magic in a fictional, fantasy setting when there’s a story to be told.

And I hate to break it to you but what you say about the Christian values being turned to sad, humanistic shells can be applied to many other allegedly “Christian” novels. It all boils down to how one interprets it. And as I have said many times, go look up reader-oriented theories. These are proof that you can’t always write something and expect people to react in the way you want.

Dear Lost Wanderer,

Greetings to you and a belated happy and healthful New Year to you.

First, let me say by way of response that it is not the worlds standards but God’s that I am seeking to uphold and apply to the Potter novels. Even the unrestrained and, often, unhallowed imagination of fantasy fiction writers must conform to the moral law of God, if they are to escape censure by the Christian community. The more so when it involves culturally unhealthy material (as HP most decidedly is) that will be read by impressionable children and young persons whose minds are still very much in a state of formation. Clearly authors have a basic moral responsibility towards their young and susceptible readership.

Second, we cannot gloss over the the abscence of a genuine morality in the HP novels on the pretext that they mere “works of fiction”. This is actually a very common objection; anything is permissable, so the argument runs, because the novels are a sub-creation and, as such, Rowling has free reign to establish her own laws and internal coherence and consistency. However, this is to overlook the fact that Rowling’s wizard world is interactive with the real world and in fact violates the moral order of both. The story takes place in contemporary London and the English countryside. The witches and wizards are the gnostic cabal whose secret knowledge must be hidden from ordinary people and disclosed only to initiates. The students and professors at Hogwarts are like personalities one would expect to encounter at any British public school; their difference is only their extraordinary powers and bizarre activities. Some like Harry are likeable, whereas others are snobs and bullies. Now this is essentially our world, but one in which supernatural powers are redefined as human faculties, requiring only proper learning in order to be used rightly.

Third, I think it is a slur on the moral judgement of many devout Catholics, and indeed Christians generally, to state that the source of magic in a fictional fantasy novel is a trivial issue. Would any Christian really entertain such a notion, especially if they are the parents of young children?

Finally, although one could be forgiven for thinking so, Harry Potter is not some sort of sacred cow that is above any negative appraisal or unfavourable opinion. Moreover, it is utterly preposterous to sugest that critics of the HP series represent a dangerous form of fundamentalism and to infer that their whole approach could lead to some sort of Catholic version of the Taliban regime. This sounds to me very much like an a cunning manoeuvre to descredit the opposition and effectively to close down any dissenting voices. As the threads on these Forums demonstrate only too well, the atmosphere in which the debate is conducted can all too easily become heated and poisoned with denunciations and ad hominem attacks from many quarters. The same sort of thing occurs in that other thorny and much debated issue, the Rock music controversy. Thus the opportunity is entirely lost for informed, charitable debate and sober reflection on the real issues. So I would appeal to all posters, whichever side of the HP debate you fall, can we all endeavour to be courteous and debate the issues without rancour.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

 

[curlycool89]

Serious question Portrait.

Do you actually believe that you can take a stick of wood, and if you swish your wrist and say some words that something will actually happen? Or is it all just make believe?

 

[Portrait]

Serious question Portrait.

Do you actually believe that you can take a stick of wood, and if you swish your wrist and say some words that something will actually happen? Or is it all just make believe?

Dear curlycool89,

Are you not distorting the issues in the debate by stating them in too simplistic terms?

If the controversy involved nothing more than a light-hearted discussion about waving magic wands and uttering spells, then surely the Catholic world, including academic figures, would not be divided on the HP issue. Evidently, a vast number of people do have genuine apprehensions and feelings of unease, and with good reason, regarding the HP series.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

 

[curlycool89]

Dear curlycool89,

Are you not distorting the issues in the debate by stating them in too simplistic terms?

If the controversy involved nothing more than a light-hearted discussion about waving magic wands and uttering spells, then surely the Catholic world, including academic figures, would not be divided on the HP issue. Evidently, a vast number of people do have genuine apprehensions and feelings of unease, and with good reason, regarding the HP series.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

You’re avoiding the question. I’ll restate it for you.

Do you actually believe that you can take a stick of wood, and if you swish your wrist and say some words that something will actually happen? Or is it all just make believe?

 

[Portrait]

You’re avoiding the question. I’ll restate it for you.

Do you actually believe that you can take a stick of wood, and if you swish your wrist and say some words that something will actually happen? Or is it all just make believe?

Dear curlycool89,

Although I fail to see the point of your question or indeed where it is leading, I will, nevertheless, answer it. No I do not believe that by uttering some magical formula something will happen.

However, the issues in this debate are exceedingly more complex and should not be reduced to discussion about incantations - hence my reluctance to to answer your question with a simple affirmative or negative.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

 

[curlycool89]

Although I fail to see the point of your question or indeed where it is leading, I will, nevertheless, answer it. No I do not believe that by uttering some magical formula something will happen.

However, the issues in this debate are exceedingly more complex and should not be reduced to discussion about incantations - hence my reluctance to to answer your question with a simple affirmative or negative.

How is it anymore complex than that? It’s complete fiction and no one is trying to portray it as anything more (unlike say Dan Brown).

Now we can argue about the moral implications of the characters actions in the context of the story (truthfully, I couldn’t possibly care less about it because I find that analyzing books and movies to death ruins the whole experience), but within the context of the real world it is about as important as arguing about whether a Star Destroyer would beat the Enterprise. It doesn’t matter what Harry did or didn’t do because it’s fiction.

 

[Celtic_FC]

I will never read the books, but I sure do love the movies. The 3rd movie is my favorite.

 

[Portrait]

How is it anymore complex than that? It’s complete fiction and no one is trying to portray it as anything more (unlike say Dan Brown).

Now we can argue about the moral implications of the characters actions in the context of the story (truthfully, I couldn’t possibly care less about it because I find that analyzing books and movies to death ruins the whole experience), but within the context of the real world it is about as important as arguing about whether a Star Destroyer would beat the Enterprise. It doesn’t matter what Harry did or didn’t do because it’s fiction.

Dear curlycool89,

First, it is not always so easy to make a clear-cut distinction between the fictional world and the real world, there is nearly always an interaction between the two (I discuss this above in Post 51), especially when it comes to principles of right and wrong and violations of God’s moral order. No author writes in some sort of neutral, impartial vacuum; if his imagination is unrestrained and unhallowed then that will of necessity colour his work for the worse.

Thus the HP novels have the potential to expose children to witchcraft and the occult. The most obvious problem is Rowling’s use of the symbol-world of the occult as her primary metaphor, and occultic activities as the dramatic engine of the plots. It presents these to the young and impressionable reader via attractive role models such as Harry and Hermoine, who are both students of witchcraft and sorcery. This has the capacity to lower the child’s guard - both subconscious and spiritual - to actual occult activity, in the real world, which is everywhere on the increase.

Rationally, the young reader knows that the fantasy element in the novels is not ‘real’, but emotionally and subconsciously the child absorbs it as real. Moreover, this is further complicated by the fact that in the world today there are many opportunities for the vulnerable young person to enter the occult subcultures, where some of Harry’s powers are indeed offered as real. Now surely most Catholic parents will be very desirous to do all within their power to minimize this potential risk and forbid their children reading/watching any culturally unhealthy material that could cause them to sin and go seriously astray? Incontrovertably, the witchcraft and sorcery element constitutes a fundamental defect in the entire Potter series and is enough condemn them per se, before any other considerations. This is why I said in my previous posting that the issues were more complex than asinine discussions about waving magic wands and uttering magic formulas.

There are, alas, other grave problems with the HP books which I am more than happy to discuss, but it has just turned midnight on this side of the pond and I must now retire to bed.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

First, let me say by way of response that it is not the worlds standards but God’s that I am seeking to uphold and apply to the Potter novels. Even the unrestrained and, often, unhallowed imagination of fantasy fiction writers must conform to the moral law of God, if they are to escape censure by the Christian community. The more so when it involves culturally unhealthy material (as HP most decidedly is) that will be read by impressionable children and young persons whose minds are still very much in a state of formation. Clearly authors have a basic moral responsibility towards their young and susceptible readership.

First off, there’s a difference between applying physical laws and applying moral laws. While both are something authors have more liberty in constructing, the most liberated is the physical laws. However, those are the same laws you are now infringing upon.

You claim that magic is taking control of something beyond man’s territory. The realms of fantasy fiction are devoid of that very fact. Magic is within man’s territory. It is a force no different from steam power or nuclear energy. Thus, you still decrying it as wrong proves that you are unfairly applying physical standards of our reality to an imaginary one. What better proof of man’s power over magic in such fantasy realms than the fact that they harness it with the same ease as we harness electricity? This is just one of the many clear-cut differences between fictional magic and real “magick” (as the Wiccans seem to call it).

Second, we cannot gloss over the the abscence of a genuine morality in the HP novels on the pretext that they mere “works of fiction”. This is actually a very common objection; anything is permissable, so the argument runs, because the novels are a sub-creation and, as such, Rowling has free reign to establish her own laws and internal coherence and consistency. However, this is to overlook the fact that Rowling’s wizard world is interactive with the real world and in fact violates the moral order of both. The story takes place in contemporary London and the English countryside. The witches and wizards are the gnostic cabal whose secret knowledge must be hidden from ordinary people and disclosed only to initiates.

Wrong again. Just because it is based on a world like our own, it doesn’t mean it actually is. There are many stories set our world but that is only a mask of false reality that the author(s) uses to hide the actual (and unpredictable) fantasy realm underneath. For instance, take that cartoon Yu-Gi-Oh!. When it starts out, it looks like the setting is no different than our world. They have the same countries, the same cultures in them, the same stereotypes… etc. Now fast forward to the third series, Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D’s.

I personally can’t even recognize our world in it anymore. The whole world (the precious “real” world you’re trying to base your judgments on) has suddenly become centered on what is actually just a children’s card game in our world.

Another example is the sci-fi manga Air Gear. It’s world is even closer to our own in terms of appearance with the author even making the U.S. President there an obvious copy of President Obama (a betrayal I’m still recovering from >_<;; ). The only difference at the beginning is that of the invention of these high-powered roller skates. Now at first, a world like that might actually become possible. However, as the series progresses you will start seeing elements that, simply put, will make you say, “Is this for real!? :ehh:”

The same with Harry Potter. It may seem based on our world but that’s when the author starts deconstructing it and creating an entirely different one altogether. That’s why it’s called fantasy.

I once recalled me or someone else saying you promote bland realism. Apparently, you seem intent on proving that.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

The students and professors at Hogwarts are like personalities one would expect to encounter at any British public school; their difference is only their extraordinary powers and bizarre activities. Some like Harry are likeable, whereas others are snobs and bullies. Now this is essentially our world, but one in which supernatural powers are redefined as human faculties, requiring only proper learning in order to be used rightly.

That is true however, that’s no excuse to be too rigid in applying the laws of our world either. They are similar but not to the point that we have to apply every aspect to the point that we become moral nitpickers.

Third, I think it is a slur on the moral judgement of many devout Catholics, and indeed Christians generally, to state that the source of magic in a fictional fantasy novel is a trivial issue. Would any Christian really entertain such a notion, especially if they are the parents of young children?

It is a trivial issue. Because for one thing, it’s not real. Why would anyone (much less children) care for the source as something so blatantly fictional as fantasy magic? Cosmology is an art for sure, but if an author focused too much on it instead of the story then he/she might as well be writing a field guide or text book to their fantasy realm.

Finally, although one could be forgiven for thinking so, Harry Potter is not some sort of sacred cow that is above any negative appraisal or unfavourable opinion. Moreover, it is utterly preposterous to sugest that critics of the HP series represent a dangerous form of fundamentalism and to infer that their whole approach could lead to some sort of Catholic version of the Taliban regime.

There’s a difference between a literary criticism which I can accept (seeing as I’m trying to be an author myself) and one that criticizes fantasy novels for the sheer fact that magic is present and furthermore presented as something either positive or neutral; a position you are obviously holding.

The reason why many Catholics who defend these (like myself) seem uncharitable to you is that not only is this a worn out debate but also it is most unintellectual to keep saying that stuff like rock music or Harry Potter are gateways to the occult. Such a thing has always been debunked countless times with sheer common sense alone that it just reflects badly on Catholics in general to insist otherwise. We are expected to be more reasonable than other Christian sects. It saddens me to see people deliberately failing those expectations.