Posted on 11/02/2001 12:32:40 PM PST by Brookhaven
This raises the question of why those opposed to Harry Potter accept comparable works of "magic" in other acceptable works, especially Narnia. In Harry Potter - as in Narnia - the setting is an alternate world where physics and technology are a bit different, manifesting themselves in what we can only term "magic". This "magic" is not to be confused with Biblical references to "magic" where the powers come from demonic forces.
Consider the "magic" in our own world, as it would appear to a visitor from Narnia or Hogwarts. Just this morning, I:
- was warmed by mysterious heating coils (electric heat)
- was woken by a box which spoke to me (radio)
- traveled 30 miles in 30 minutes in a box (car)
- am now writing in a "book" which instantly copies text to other books (computer & internet)
- hold my job because of my talent of creating incantations which cause otherwise inanimate objects to perform a variety of delightful and astounding tasks (programming)
Thus viewed, we can see Harry Potter's world (or Narnia, or Middle Earth) as simply the result of a universe operating on a slightly different set of rules - technology based on different physics, not real "magic" based on deals with devils.
In any of these worlds (real or imaginary) we may indeed encounter evil. What, really, is the difference between the reader encountering the pain and gore in Harry Potter as quoted (out of context, I may add) by a prior poster, a comparable scene from Narnia, and the real-world non-fiction scene I'm currently reading in "Black Hawk Down"? Perhaps I would rather a child learn consequences of evil in a "safe" realm of Harry Potter or Narnia before introducing him to the real thing via Black Hawk Down.
Come to think of it, what - really - is the difference between Harry Potter and Veggie Tales? Computer-generated vegetables going on adventures and engaging in harm which we laugh at but which would cause serious harm in the real world? Do we _really_ want our children learning such nonsense? Absolutely! For some reason, children (of all ages) learn from stories set in alternate realities. Perhaps Harry Potter is a fine, engaging work depicting a boy going to school and learning about his world - a world that just operates on different rules of physics.
...you'll have to forbid your kids from reading Lord Of The Rings, The Wizard Of Oz, The Chronicles Of Narnia, Grimm's Fairy Tales, anything from Disney, etc....
Yes, CheneyChick....he is the type that LIKES pictures if you follow his (cough) Kelly Brooks threads!
"JK Rowling will be heartbroken by your snub..."
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...
jj, for someone who claims to not have READ the Harry Potter books you sure have alot to say about them!
They are very imaginative, and can appeal to a young and older audience. I bought the first book in the summer to see what the hype was all about but I admit I haven't been able to finish 1st book yet...probably because I'm at Free Republic too much!
Search results for Wicca/Voldemort without a mention of Harry Potter
How about Erised?
I think my children would be in much bigger danger of learning about premartial sex from Dawson's Creek than becoming a Satanist from reading Harry Potter. Christians should be focusing more on secular programs/literature like Abby McBeal and Michael Critchon than on Harry Potter.
You're absolutely right. And in my book, THEY are the pernicious ones.
We are talking about a fictional book series that is controversial....how can you be so SURE you wouldn't agree that some things may be inappropriate to children.
Did you know it begins with the bloodly slaughter of Harry's parents?
I would think if you want to defend something you would buy the book, and read it. It's an easy read, and then you may really understand what people are objecting to.
I'm not saying it's the work of Satan, but I've got some reservations and probably can see both sides here. I've talked to teachers about it, and they just LOVE the series because it gets children to read. I wasn't so sure that should be the only criteria.
So, if you continue to follow this logic, might as well start bringing home the porno magazines and showing them to your kids cuz "your kid is going to deal with it sooner rather than later". And the adults know that it's fantasy......
You're making a false argument.
I do imagine at some point we WILL have to talk to my son about pornography, because he will be using the internet.
The problem is not shielding children from ideas; it's teaching them how to interpet ideas.
Apparently in your view the child is better left to interpet the ideas on his own?
Not responsible, in my view.
Do you seek to ban Mary Poppins?
Where do you draw the line?
YES
AND....... KNOCK OFF THE POSTING POLICE
RED LETTER EDITS
What are you a frustrated ENGLISH teacher?
LIKE YOU ARE SOME KIND OF PERFECT POSTER!
Cheers Tony
That is exactly the heart of the matter, IMHO. Everyone's line is different. For me, HP is not in my comfort zone.... those are just my 2 cents. I don't have kids, so its a decision I don't have to waste time on. Now, what to make for dinner IS a decision I have to make..... Cheers, CC :)
You won't find any reference to them at all, because whoever wrote the article is a liar writing for a fundamentalist Christian audience who want to hear bad things about Wicca. Guess what? There are no 'seven satanic princes' in Wicca, either.
A certain type of Christian just can't accept the real truth about Wicca, which is that it's actually a pleasant, easygoing philosophy with the ideal of 'live and let live' regarding other people and their beliefs and an attitude that people shouldn't harm others.
The truth just doesn't sell in those evangelical bookshops, you see.
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.