[Barnacle]

As Christian children, we weren't told we couldn't go see Dracula, or the Wolf Man, or Frankenstein. We were told that these things were not real, that they were 'legends' or stories made up by people. I think it's the same with Harry Potter. Advertising has made it a phenomena, but parents can make their children understand that it's only a story.

The big difference I see between those stories and the Potter stories is that the others show the weird stuff as weird. Where as the Potter stories shows the weird stuff (the occult) as something that can be accessed to one's advantage.

Thus, whereas only the very weird child would aspire to create a Frankenstein or be a Wolf-man. The Potter books present the occult in a palatable sense, with heroic possibilities and broad appeal.

The occult is real, and it's real dangerous.

[Corin Stormhands]

Where as the Potter stories shows the weird stuff (the occult) as something that can be accessed to one's advantage.

Which is exactly why kids should read them. I would never have made it home tonight without using the reparo spell on my flat tire.

:rolls eyes:

[Shadowstrike]

I agree that the occult is dangerous, and very real. However, people have been lured into the occult long before these books were even thought of. Only weak minded, weak willed individuals can be lured into the occult, and if a parent has done their job. Grounded their child with a sense of morality, responsibility, and understanding, then I don't see anything to worry about. When Superman was on tv in the 50's some kids tried to be Superman. They wound up in casts or traction, and learned a very valuable lesson. Did all kids do this? Of course not. There have always been, and will always be 'weak people'. Look at the news. We have Druids (or people who want to be) running around. No, there is very real Evil in this world right now, and I don't think it's name is Harry Potter.

[Mr. Silverback]

The Potter books present the occult in a palatable sense, with heroic possibilities and broad appeal.

The Star wars movies present a faster than light drive and laser swords in a palatable sense, with heroic possibilities and broad appeal.

Only a nut would believe he can become a Jedi knight after seeing a Star Wars movie. Only a nut would believe he should become a wizard after reading a Potter book.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"the Potter stories shows the weird stuff (the occult) as something that can be accessed to one's advantage."

If that's your concern, you really don't have to worry about the Harry Potter books on that score:

(1) The magical ability is portrayed as being quasi- genetic. If you haven't got it, you're --- like all the people reading these books ---a Muggle, and there's nothing you can do about it, however hard you try.

(2) The wands cannot be duplicated in the real words: each one must have a core consisting of either dragon heartstring, unicorn hair, or phoenix feather. Nothing you could find at Wal-Mart. The potions have similarly fictitious ingredients (ashwinder eggs? jobberknoll feathers?) not likely to inspire alchemical imitators.

(3) Most important: the ordinary wizarding magic is portrayed as an alternative technology (the equivalent of a fax, a laser, an antibiotic, a GPS), not as access to unseen bodiless entities.

Harry never uses the ultimate unforgivable curse (the "Avada Cadavra") which causes death, even in the heat of battle; the bad guys, the Death Eaters, use it all the time. Instead, Harry almost always uses the "Expelliarmus", which causes the weapons to fly out of aggressors' hands. The fact that he doesn't use deadly spells is portrayed as very significant; "Expelliarmus" (Disarm) is seent as Harry's "signature spell", by which others can identify him.

And when in the HP books there IS access to an unseen bodiless entity, a true conjuring of occult spirits (e.g. Voldemort's conjuring) it is always portrayed as dangerous, defiling, and sickeningly evil.

Exactly the lesson you would want impressed upon your children.

I don't think HP is above criticism. The series has its flaws. Myself, I much prefer Narnia. However, I think your most serious concerns --- about making the occult attractive ---- can be laid to rest.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"the Potter stories shows the weird stuff (the occult) as something that can be accessed to one's advantage."

If that's your concern, you really don't have to worry about the Harry Potter books on that score:

(1) The magical ability is portrayed as being quasi- genetic. If you haven't got it, you're --- like all the people reading these books ---a Muggle, and there's nothing you can do about it, however hard you try.

(2) The wands cannot be duplicated in the real words: each one must have a core consisting of either dragon heartstring, unicorn hair, or phoenix feather. Nothing you could find at Wal-Mart. The potions have similarly fictitious ingredients (ashwinder eggs? jobberknoll feathers?) not likely to inspire alchemical imitators.

(3) Most important: the ordinary wizarding magic is portrayed as an alternative technology (the equivalent of a fax, a laser, an antibiotic, a GPS), not as access to unseen bodiless entities.

Harry never uses the ultimate unforgivable curse (the "Avada Cadavra") which causes death, even in the heat of battle; the bad guys, the Death Eaters, use it all the time. Instead, Harry almost always uses the "Expelliarmus", which causes the weapons to fly out of aggressors' hands. The fact that he doesn't use deadly spells is portrayed as very significant; "Expelliarmus" (Disarm) is seent as Harry's "signature spell", by which others can identify him.

And when in the HP books there IS access to an unseen bodiless entity, a true conjuring of occult spirits (e.g. Voldemort's conjuring) it is always portrayed as dangerous, defiling, and sickeningly evil.

Exactly the lesson you would want impressed upon your children.

I don't think HP is above criticism. The series has its flaws. Myself, I much prefer Narnia. However, I think your most serious concerns --- about making the occult attractive ---- can be laid to rest.