Harry Potter vs. Gandalf

In the last two months of this year, two of the most eagerly anticipted movies of 2001 will hit theaters. Both are the first in a projected series of films, adapted from the first volumes of two popular series of books written by British authors who go by their initials. Both series, and both films, deal with magic and wizardry. The authors, of course, are J. K. Rowling and J. R. R. Tolkien; and the films are Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and The Fellowship of the Ring. The former, due in November, is the first of what will surely be a number of films based upon Rowling’s projected series of seven Harry Potter books; and the latter, coming Christmas, is the first of Peter Jackson’s series of three films based on Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, slated for consecutive Christmas releases from 2001 to 2003.

Among many Christians, the coming of these two films is a herald of renewed debate. On the one hand, the works of Tolkien have been almost universally embraced by literate Christians, who have long recognized the richness and beauty of Tolkien’s Middle-earth as well as the profound influence of Tolkien’s Christian and Catholic faith upon the shape of his imaginary world. Christian fans of Tolkien also tend to be fans of C. S. Lewis, whose seven-volume series The Chronicles of Narnia is also a work of Christian imagination that involves magic and wizardry. The Harry Potter books, on the other hand, have met with decidedly mixed reactions among Christian readers. In both Catholic and Protestant circles, some have enthusiastically embraced Rowling’s popular series, at times even explicitly making comparisons to Tolkien and Lewis (at least as regards the use of magic and wizardry). Others, however, have attacked the young hero of Rowling’s series as a veritable poster child for the occult.

The quality of the discussion hit its lowest point with the advent of an ever-spreading email campaign based on facetious statements in a satirical essay in the Onion.com, a humor website. That essay, complete with made-up “quotes” from Rowling and her young readers (advocating the Church of Satan and mocking the death of Christ), has been mistakenly distributed as genuine reportage by innumerable Christians, achieving urban legend status. But even relatively sober arguments on the subject have too often been superficial, relying on guilt — or innocence — by association.

Before plunging into the moral debate over the magic of Harry Potter, it’s worth noting that, in general terms, the Harry Potter stories have real merit as literature and entertainment, and perhaps social and moral merits as well (along with some moral drawbacks). They are well-written, lively, exciting, and quite funny, with vividly imagined creations and engaging characterizations. Moreover, although highly fantastical and imaginative, Rowling’s narratives are packed with knowledgable allusions and references to historical myths, legends, superstitions, and so forth, so seamlessly woven into the fabric of the narratives that even literate adults may not catch them all. Tie-in books with names like The Magical Worlds of Harry Potter offer readers insight into the cultural backgrounds of many elements in Rowling’s stories, potentially turning an exercise in entertainment and diversion into a genuine learning experience.

On a moral level, the Harry Potter books offer villains who are utterly odious and despicable, and protagonists who are, if not quite charitable or forbearing, at least brave and loyal. Courage and loyalty are, in fact, significant themes in the books, along with the evils of prejudice and oppression. Best of all, there are wise and competent adult authority-figures, especially brilliant and commanding Albus Dumbledore, Headmaster of Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft, who inspires boundless confidence as being always in control of the situation, who virtually never makes a mistake, and whom no one can for long have at a disadvantage. (On the other hand, the series takes too long for my taste to get around to pointing out the problem of Harry’s repeated failures to avert potential disasters by not seeking help from Dumbledore as soon as possible.) And what of Harry himself? He’s a decent enough and likable fellow, with nothing of the bully or troublemaker in him. He’s not one to make an enemy — though, should someone make an enemy of him, Harry will make war on that person with every weapon at his disposal. The notion of turning the other cheek or using a soft answer to turn away wrath is completely foreign here; and even the more sober voices, such as that of his friend Hermione (whom Rowling has said of all her characters most resembles herself), generally caution Harry on purely prudential grounds, not moral ones. One aspect of the Harry Potter books that has raised some moral concern is the recurring theme of rule-breaking. Like many young children, Harry and his friends break a lot of rules (“about fifty,” Hermione figures at one point, and Dumbledore elsewhere reckons their transgressions at twice that number). Sometimes Harry is legitimately driven by necessity to break a rule; other times it’s only because he feels like it. Sometimes he is caught, sometimes not; sometimes he is punished, sometimes not. At first glance, this may seem like mere honest storytelling, depicting a typically imperfect young boy whose behavior sometimes leaves a bit to be desired. Yet closer examination reveals that Harry and his friends are only ever really punished for breaking rules when they’re caught by one of the nasty authority figures, particularly spiteful Professor Snape. When it’s one of the benevolent authority figures, such as genial Dumbledore, or even stern Professor McGonagall, there are no real consequences for breaking any number of rules, because Harry’s heart is in the right place, or because he is a boy of destiny, or something like that.

Another area of concern for some are the dark, scary, or grotesque elements in these stories: the Dementors, dreadful creatures almost as horrifying as Tolkien’s Nazgûl; a spell gone awry that leaves one of Harry’s friends coughing and choking on slugs issuing from his throat; a school washroom toilet apparently haunted by the ghost of a dead student; disembodied voices breathing murderous threats; anthropomorphic mandrake roots that look and scream like living human babies but may be transplanted or destroyed at will by teachers and students; and many others.

Taken altogether, it seems fair to say the Harry Potter stories are something of a mixed bag, with some genuinely worthwhile elements and some legitimate points of concern. Of course, for many parents who have children that love the books or who want to read them, the question may be not so much “Is this the best possible book my child could ever read?” as “Is this all right for my child to read? Or must I forbid it?”...

It wasn't this way a few years ago.

"A few" must be a much larger number in your lexicon than in most other peoples. Cause I've been the poster child for the "it's anti-Christian" entertainment industry (if there's a Christian group that hates it, I love, but I was there first, they're following me I swear) for 22 years. And it's always the same few beefs: occult, the devil, bad word. I could take any article written about the evils of D&D in 1980 and by replacing fewer than 20 words make it an anti-HP article and you probably wouldn't know the difference, that's how cookie cutter this all is. And that's why I'm always jumping in to defend, because I feel picked on and after 2 decades of this stuff I've got a pretty solid handle on just how bogus the complaints are.

I have never read of, heard about, or witnessed anyone ACTUALLY able to control another human via "witchcraft". The friggin country of Haiti was dedicated to Satan - read up on the people, the evil is tangible and plainly apparent to all with eyes who will see.</rant off> I dont mean to froth but that I disagree strongly, pardon my lather

Give Aquinasfan credit here. This is an excellent article he's posted. Even if one doesn't agree with the moral argument behind it, it is excellent scholarship on fantasy literature and media -- from Tolkien to Harry Potter to Buffy, The Vampire Slayer -- and how they treat magic.

It definitely has me thinking about the fantasy fiction I write and want to write.

No a few years ago it was cigarettes and liquor and dancing that would send you to hell. Today it's Harry Potter.

My parish priest told me that the Catholic Superintendent of our local high school (town population: 5000) told him that there is a large number of students who describe themselves as "Wiccans" or "witches," and a smaller number that identify themselves as satanists.

I'm 39, attended a high school with 1,250 students, and don't recall a single self-described witch.

There is a phenomenon here to see for those with eyes.

So then let me see if I understand this --- Dumbledore is the headmaster who makes the rules that Harry and his friends break without Dumbledore punishing him. At one point Harry's teacher is told by Dumbledore not to teach the deeper secrets of sorcery to Harry's class, but the teacher says "I'm going to ignore the headmaster and do it anyway". It sounds to me like JKR wants kids to think of God as Dumbledore -- someone who makes silly rules that can be broken without consequences from the maker of those rules -- that "learning and practicing magic" is a viable reason for ignoring rules against it -- kids don't have to pay attention to his words because he really doesn't mean it. "Dumbledore" ---- what a mocking name she has chosen for the chief authority figure. Even a blind man can see that Dumbledore, his name and bumbling character, is a slap at the God who her books are intended to mock. For all of you who think that these books are innocent fantasy, and think that children falling in love with Harry is innocent fun, you probably think and hope that God is really like Dumbledore , but guess what --- that is your fantasy !!!!!!!!

Yeah but most of the "witchcraft" in Haiti is consentual. Never one to say there's nothing in this world I can't explain, and certainly willing to admit Haiti is a wierd place (never been there, but my aunt was a travel agent for a while and brought me back a voodoo doll once, I could literally (and remember, I'm a huge disbeliever) find that thing in my oh so messy room just by "vibe", when I wanted to find it I knew right where it was, real freaky stuff). But most of the zombie and loa stuff has been shown to be little more than the "target" going along with it for reasons we can't figure out. Which, I think, occult investigators have known all along. There's gotta be a reason why that school is called "sympathetic magic", I think certain sections of society have known for a long time that the "victim" gives voodoo it's power, not the "caster". And of course I can't recall HP having anything to do with that stuff (could be a sidelong I've forgotten). Actually almost nobody in fantasy fiction has. Hmm could be a good convention panel. Better send myself an e-mail to remember this in July.

To her, and to me, there's no reason to warn people of the dangers of the occult because the most common danger is that people will waste a lot of time. So there's no form of warning within her books, and that doesn't bother me. To you the occult is a real and tangible danger so you see anything that portrays magic in even a neutral light as dangerous.

That would explain our differences then. I appreciate your candor and reasoned arguments. BTW, are you a Christian, atheist, agnostic or some other religion?

I'm 39, attended a high school with 1,250 students, and don't recall a single self-described witch.

But what fads were there, when you were in H.S.? I can't remember any witches in H.S. (I'm 35), but I remember a fair share of heavy metal fans and D&D players (with me occasionally among the latter) who came in for much the same thing. A few self-destructed; the majority when on to be adults in the same basic range as most adults.

OTOH, I noted more than a few self-described witches and the like, when I was a freshman at the University of Michigan in 1984. There were a pair of roommates, one of whom was fundamentalist Christian, the other a self-described "white witch." Generally they got along. But when the did argue they would start -- as one of them put it -- "furiously blessing each other."

If these books were "fantasy" books about violence or pornography ...

But hey - they're not!

If violence & pornography are so bad, you should be railing against prime-time TV, not HP.

A boy, living in miserable conditions, is discovered to have an unusual affinity to magical manipulations of his surroundings, is taken away to a council of masters who decide what he should learn, and what to teach him to achieve mastery of his mysterious talents to percieve and manipulate his surroundings through magical means. Along the way he meets up with an attractive girl, an annoying sidekick or two, and is caught up in greater events and is pursued by an evil wizard. Wild adventures occur, the story ends, and there is an expected sequel.

Question: am I describing Harry Potter or Anniken Skywalker?
Question: why is the Harry Potter movie considered evil, yet Star Wars is not?

Generally they got along. But when the did argue they would start -- as one of them put it -- "furiously blessing each other."

LOL! The first "witch thing" I remember was when my girlfriend told me that Stevie Nicks was a "white witch." I was a pretty confused high school kid at the time and didn't know what to make of it. Seemed a little creepy.

We had a contingent of "fleabags" (burnouts), the Led Zepellin crowd, and a handful of D&D players. No witches though.

My wife is 43, and I still can't get over the fact that her high school was divided between the "Us's" and the "Thems (burnouts)." 1975. Two years after the release of Dark Side of the Moon. Freaky.

In college I roomed with 3 Deadheads. One transferred. One drank himself into a janitor job. One managed to graduate. Strange religion, but no devil or nature worship.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.