Missing from 'Harry Potter" – a real moral struggle,

Christian Science Monitor ^ | 07.25.2007 | By Jenny Sawyer

[meandog]

If literature truly reflects society, then the end of the Harry Potter series spells trouble for us all.

Because, after 10 years, 4,195 pages, and over 325 million copies, J.K. Rowling's towering achievement lacks the cornerstone of almost all great children's literature: the hero's moral journey. Without that foundation, her story – for all its epic trappings of good versus evil – is stuck in a moral no man's land.

To be clear: This isn't a critique of Ms. Rowling's values. It's a recognition of a disturbing trend in commercial storytelling and Western society.

For those who've yet to finish "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows," stop reading now: There are spoilers ahead. If you did, however, embark on a Deathly Hallows marathon, you know that the shady Severus Snape died, not in the name of evil, but in the name of good.

Oh, yeah. And Harry defeated Voldemort. Good prevailed. The problem is, that's not the moral of the story. Good always prevails. It's the hero's struggle – and costly redemption – that matters.

Classic tales such as J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" trilogy and Madeleine L'Engle's "A Wrinkle in Time" set the standard for children's fiction. With their unrelenting drive toward "the moral of the story," they form a golden thread in the West's cultural fabric. And yet, like the society in which we live, storytelling itself has, in recent decades, undergone a radical transformation – sliding toward moral ambivalence with alarming speed.

Successful storytelling rests on a few basic principles. One of them is this: A story is about someone who changes, who grows through a moral struggle. What is Harry's struggle? Exactly.

[meandog]

Without inner conflict, the hero's tale was hollow.

[TexasAg1996]

Yawn...

[Red_Devil 232]

I thought this was going to be about the “17 missing pages”!

[Revolting cat!]

Once the lemming mania has died, no one is going to reado those 4,195 pages. Wait 5 years.

[Resolute Conservative]

Some answered the question as to who dies in the Potty book with:

“God dies”.

I have not read nor seen the movies and neither will my children, my brother read some of the books and saw one movie and he said Rowlings is a hack, without reading a word I agree.

[Abathar]

Geez, did she even read the book?

[50sDad]

Jenny, your sour grapes are ready.

[TexasAg1996]

without reading a word I agree.

That's obviously a well thought out and researched opinion...

[discostu]

There really is nothing more pathetic on the planet than someone that will proudly declare they have no actual exposure to someone’s work but they’re a hack. I’ve called many people a hack in my time, but I least bothered to read a few pages first.

[Battle Hymn of the Republic]

Present in all of Potter is the biggest moral struggle of all.

the struggle of the things of this world or the things of the Lord.

and potter surely isn't of the Lord.

[Abathar]

Yeah, 325 million copies and you think you can agree she is a hack. Millions of kids reading just for the joy of it again and it's a bad thing to you...

idiot

[Corin Stormhands]

without reading a word I agree...

Thanks fer yer expert opinion.

[Corin Stormhands]

Geez, did she even read the book?

Not the same one any of the rest of us read.

[snarkybob]

“Jenny, your sour grapes are ready.”

yep that’s what i was thinking as well.
maybe if jk rowling ever writes another book she can call
jenny for some pointers

[Emrys]

I could not put my finger on what it was about these novels that bothered me apart from the appallingly bad writing, why I did not find them compelling or even readable. This article explains it.

[Mr. Jeeves]

The trolls are out in force - be careful not to feed them the negative attention that they love. ;)

[Abathar]

Have you read any of the books?

[AnotherUnixGeek]

I have not read nor seen the movies and neither will my children, my brother read some of the books and saw one movie and he said Rowlings is a hack, without reading a word I agree.

I've only read the first book, and I've only seen glimpses of the movies as I flip through HBO channels. But any book that can entertain so many children and adults has a great deal going for it. By creating a series of books that have millions of young people reading instead of killing zombies in some virtual world, Rowlings has already done more for literature than most authors could ever dream of doing. She's no hack.

[Positive]

"lacks the cornerstone of almost all great children's literature: the hero's moral journey"

This judgement comming from a murderous cult mouth piece, founded by a charlatan fraud is not worth spit.

[null and void]

Geez, did she even read the book?

Nope. And did you happen to notice that the strongest negative opinions on this thread are from people who are proud and arrogant about not having ever even read the book?

I wonder why that is?

[ECM]

I’ve read the first book and part of the second—she’s a hack.

[Resolute Conservative]

By that argument the Simpson are great tv, is that the model you want for your kids?

[Politicalmom]

Thread Dementors!!

All together, now.

Wands up!!

EXPECTO PATRONUM!!

[goodwithagun]

I have read all of the books except for the last. My mother bought it for me for my birthday and I will get it this weekend when I visit her. I loved all of the books, and consider them a Godsend. As a publik screwl teechur, it is difficult to get kids to read. These books have opened up the world of reading to so many children of the video game generation. Not only are the books entertaining, there are many moral and even Christian issues dealt with by the characters. These issues will not jump out at the reader, the reader must look into the issues. I strongly suggest that you read them for yourself instead of relying on another’s opinion.

[wolfinator]

“Without inner conflict, the hero’s tale was hollow.”

I don’t buy it. Where’s the “inner conflict” in, oh say, “Atlas Shrugged”? And I’m not sure Frodo experienced much inner conflict other than that caused by the evil properties of the ring.

The greatest conflict in Potter is the one involving the effort to try to persuade people that evil exists, cannot be ignored or wished away, and must be fought.

Sounds to me like the author of this article is just trying to be “the smartest guy in the room.”

[Resolute Conservative]

We have taste and standards maybe...

[Revolting cat!]

I’m certain that all those accusing you of providing “expert opinion” have read all the book reviews which indeed confirm that the author is a talentless hack, who can’t write an English sentence without a cliche or a dead metaphor in it. And of course, 325 million horsepoop eating flies can’t be wrong!

[null and void]

This judgement comming from a murderous cult mouth piece, founded by a charlatan fraud is not worth spit.

I saw no reference to islam.

[discostu]

At least you bothered. To each their own. I don’t think she’s the best writer on the planet, though she definitely does get better with the craft every book, but I like the story and she at least has good pacing. There are three things I want in a writer: a good story, pacing that allows the reading to be entertainment, and good prose. JKR has 1 and 2 down, and like Meatloaf said two out of three ain’t bad.

[FortWorthPatriot]

Saw your profile page - your baby looks like a very young Hermione!

[Hoodlum91]

And no knowledge.

[null and void]

I’ve read the first book and part of the second—she’s a hack.

FWIW, the writing quality improves thoughout the series. Her first book is a bit lame, but there are darn few authors for whom that isn't true.

[goodwithagun]

I explain this to my students all the time. All you need to do is find a genre that appeals to you. Apparently, Harry Potter does not. Just because you don’t like the books doesn’t mean that they are crap. It simply means that you don’t like them.

[lovecraft]

By creating a series of books that have millions of young people reading instead of killing zombies in some virtual world,

Hey watch that, I and many others are simply preparing for the day when the dead walk...mark my words young man, that day is coming and YOU BETTER BE PREPARED!!!

When some stiff is trying to eat your brains out, I'll be in my bunker eating pork n' beans....and then will see who will be laughing.

[hsalaw]

I grew up in the 50s where all we did was read because we didn’t have the joys of TV and the internet. I’ve read classics and I’ve read cr*p, and I don’t need anyone to tell me what I should like. I enjoyed the books, and I enjoyed the movies (but less so, because books are always more fun than the movies made from them), and I fully expect to enjoy the last book and remaining movies.

[Resolute Conservative]

“many moral and even Christian issues dealt with by the characters”

Good trick since I was under the impression that Rowlings has made no statement to being a Christian and has tacitly denied it knowing that a admission would kill book sales. Regardless it is frown upon by churches for its message.

[Corin Stormhands]

I’ve read the first book and part of the second—she’s a hack.

Oh Yeah?

She can afford it.

;-)

[billbears]

When I was the age of these kids reading Potter, I was reading the first of Asimov's Foundation trilogy. There was a story behind it but it had less to do with morality as the author is speaking of. I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with these Potter books (other than the reading level is sub-first grade at best and says something about our culture's education system). And while the books aren't up to par, the movies are excellent escapism for a Sunday afternoon.

Not every book for a kid has to be a morality tale. Yes, Chronicles and Lord of the Rings before they're teenagers but other than that, with some boundaries, kids should be able to read anything and everything out there. Well other than Wuthering Heights which is a torture tool to be used only when they've done something extremely bad

[ClearCase_guy]

Successful storytelling rests on a few basic principles. One of them is this: A story is about someone who changes, who grows through a moral struggle. What is Harry's struggle? Exactly.

Okay. I'll mark "Harry Potter" down as "unsuccessful storytelling".

Shall the hundreds of millions of copies of the book be recalled? And shall we yank the Billion dollars out of JK Rowling's bank account? That woman has failed miserably to tell a successful story!!!

[goodwithagun]

The greatest conflict in Potter is the one involving the effort to try to persuade people that evil exists, cannot be ignored or wished away, and must be fought.

Excellent point. We can apply that to the WOT. I could integrate that into my Brit. Lit. class!

[AnotherUnixGeek]

By that argument the Simpson are great tv, is that the model you want for your kids?

Depends on what seasons. The writing quality in The Simpsons has fallen off badly in the last 5 years or so.

More seriously, I think you do kids and their parents a disservice if you assume that they will automatically take on TV shows and books as models, instead of entertainment.

[discostu]

Every now and then one just must square off against one these dorks and poke them in the eye. The trick is hit and ignore, getting into a running discussion with them is less fun than going to the dentist, but they should be told at least once that they’re a complete moron and waste of oxygen.

[antiRepublicrat]

I can’t understand all this hatred of Harry Potter. Maybe it’s the standard leftist hatred of success, as Rowling went from having nothing to being a self-made billionaire in under a decade. The left by definition must hate her.

[TexasAg1996]

Good trick since I was under the impression that Rowlings has made no statement to being a Christian and has tacitly denied it knowing that a admission would kill book sales. Regardless it is frown upon by churches for its message.

Having not read the book, you're hardly in a position to judge whether goodwithagun's statement is correct. He/she is, by the way, in case you're interested. There were quite a few Christian themes/issues in book 7, more so than in prior books.

[TChris]

???

Since when must there be Moral Conflict in entertaining works of fiction?

It's amusing how so many whip up their own standards by which J.K. Rowling's work should be judged and, of course, condemned.

Here are a couple of clues for the morally superior:

1. The Harry Potter series was never intended to be some sort of moral declaration. Please stop judging it as though it were.
2. Ms. Rowling is not calling on anyone to follow her lead, nor is she condemning anyone else's morality.
3. Get a grip. It's fiction.

[Abathar]

Simple, it’s the HTT crowd. A preacher somewhere got all excited about this, also never having read them, and have banned them from ever being read because they don’t want kids to read anything other than the bible. Expanding ones mind without guidance is still a big no-no to most of the people criticizing these books.

[JenB]

Trying to figure out what version of Harry Potter this author read. No inner conflict? What'cha smoking, lady? Harry has to decide to walk to his own death. Willingly. Consciously. It's not spelled out in letters ninety feet high, maybe, but the conflict is there! Would she have preferred something as idiotic as this?

Harry looked up from the Pensieve. He knew what he was being asked to do as though Dumbledore were standing there in the room. He knew, too, what his friends would say. "There's another way, Harry, there always is, let me check my notes," would be Hermione's answer, and "Dumbledore was off his rocker, mate, don't even think about it" would be Ron's. He could picture Snape, too, watching him, with one side of his mouth curled up in a sneer. "Mother's son, Potter, or father's? Your mother gave her life. Who's the coward now?"

Harry's heart pounded as he crossed the room, backward and forward. He didn't want to die! And yet he must. If not, the world would fall to Voldemort. The pain in his heart increased. More than anything he wished for someone to make his choice for him, to tell him what to do. He knew what he must do. Yet he was afraid - deathly afraid - that he did not have the strength to do it.

And so on, ad nauseum, for six hundred pages? Rowling doesn't need choppy stupid maudlin scenes like that, we know Harry so well by this time we can interpolate what went on in his mind. She doesn't have to spell out his inner struggle in the last book because we struggled with him.

PS that was my writing in those italics, not JK's, I'm just trying to illustrate my point.

[w1andsodidwe]

I have never seen such promotion of a book series by the press. It really bothers me that this particular author was so pushed by the press. Maybe the books were entertaining, but why more so than other authors?

[goodwithagun]

It does not matter what Rowling has claimed. When I read, I make decisions for myself. I found moral and Christian values in the series. Again, I had to read into that myself. I make judgments based on my own interpretation, not what someone else, or the author, says the interpretation is. When I have children I will read these books to them and help them draw those conclusions also. Perhaps you could do the same.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

When some stiff is trying to eat your brains out, I'll be in my bunker eating pork n' beans....and then will see who will be laughing.

Depends on whether it plays out like "Doom" on my desktop PC with the lights out and headphones on, or "Sean Of The Dead" on cable on a Sunday afternoon.