A Time for Harry Potter

National Review ^ | 10/27/01 | Thomas Hibbs

[jrherreid]

A Time for Harry Potter
Hollywood sets to contribute to our post-September 11 culture.

By Thomas S. Hibbs, associate professor of philosophy at Boston College and the author, most recently, of Shows About Nothing.
October 27-28, 2001

 

n the wake of the atrocities of September 11, Hollywood has engaged in the sort of self-scrutiny typical of Hollywood: trivial self-absorption. Various studios have pulled or delayed projects now deemed too sensitive for the viewing public; there has even been talk of removing the Twin Towers from scenes shot in Manhattan, as if their absence would make it easier on viewers. Hollywood narcissism peaked with the director Robert Altman's insistence that the terrorist plots had to have been inspired by Hollywood films. Yet, almost in spite of itself, Hollywood may in the coming months make significant contributions to our post-September 11 culture. Hollywood will soon release two films, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone and The Lord of the Rings, that, if they attain anything close to the dramatic excellence of the novels, will have much to say about good and evil and the necessity and nobility of fighting evil for the sake of justice.

Although there is a settled consensus about Tolkien's artistic and ethical success in depicting a cosmic battle between good and evil, some, notably Christians, have voiced severe reservations about J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter series, especially about the role of magic in the books. To my mind, these objections are absurdly wide of the mark and none of the critics that I have encountered gives evidence of having read the books with care. (A thoughtful response to these criticisms can be found in Alan Jacob's essay, "Harry Potter's Magic" in the January 2000 issue of First Things.) In fact, I would argue that Rowling's series is not only not part of the problem, its is part of the solution to what ails our popular culture, especially our youth culture. In the aftermath of September 11, the books are remarkably timely, offering precisely the sort of lessons and examples young persons need to prepare them for life in a nation at war with the evil of terrorism.

Over the past 20 years or so, our popular culture has been preoccupied with a) destructive evil as a form of entertainment, b) freedom as a form of adolescent self-expression, and c) narcissistic individualism as characteristic of ordinary American life. By contrast, Harry Potter insists a) on the clear distinction between good and evil and between both of these and mere entertainment, b) on the importance of the responsible or virtuous use of freedom, and c) on the nobility of sacrifice for the common good.

In a culture where demonic evil is reduced either to a pointy-headed comic-book figure (think Jon Lovitz as Satan on Saturday Night Live) or to a sinister but ultimately playful aesthete (think Hannibal Lecter), Harry Potter offers a credible figure of diabolical evil: Lord Voldemort, traitor, murderer of Harry's parents, and Harry's enduring nemesis. As is true in our world, so too in Harry's world, evil often seems more attractive and complex than goodness. As Quirrell, one of Voldemort's faithful followers, makes clear, the logical term of the pursuit of evil is a raw will to power. Quirrell recalls the first time he met Voldemort : "A foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good and evil. Lord Voldemort showed me how wrong I was. There is no good and evil, there is only power, and those too weak to seek it."

But for all their ability to wreak havoc, to spread a culture of death (Voldemort's very name means "death wish"), evildoers in the Potter universe are either pathetic, weak sycophants or malevolent beings who rule through fear, hatred, and preying upon the innocent. Indeed, the very act of attempting to kill the infant Harry (an attack that left Harry with his trademark, lightning bolt scar) backfires on Voldemort, rendering him impotent, barely alive, forced to lead a vicarious, parasitic life, feeding off of and inhabiting the very bodies of others, hoping desperately to regain his power.

Although the books are always clear about the difference between good and evil, the contrast is never simplistic. There are a rich spectrum of character types, embodying a host of virtues and vices. Even those who are on the side of good can find themselves tempted by vice, momentarily uncertain whether their path is the right one. So struck is Harry by certain unsettling similarities between himself and Voldemort that he begins to doubt his destiny. As he often does in times of trouble, Harry turns to Dumbledore, the wise headmaster at Hogwarts, whose courage and force (he's repeatedly said to be the only wizard Voldemort fears) remains concealed behind his gentle, avuncular visage. Harry continues to be troubled by the fact that the Sorting Hat, a magical hat that in a public ritual assigns each student to a particular school within Hogwarts, at first wanted to put Harry into Slytherin, which produced Voldemort and many of his followers. Recalling this, Harry says to Dumbledore:

"So I should be in Slytherin," Harry said, looking desperately into Dumbledore's face. "The Sorting Hat could see Slytherin's power in me, and it--"

"Put you in Gryffindor," said Dumbledore calmly, "Listen to me Harry. You happen to have many qualities Salazar Slytherin Prized in his handpicked students. Resourcefulness … determination…a certain disregard for rules," he added, his moustache quivering again. "Yet the Sorting Hat placed you in Gryffindor. You know why that was. Think."

"It only put me in Gryffindor," said Harry in a defeated voice, "Because I asked not to go in Slytherin."

"Exactly," said Dumbledore, beaming once more. "Which makes you very different from [Voldemort]. It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." Harry sat motionless in his chair, stunned.

The books affirm in multiple ways the complex interconnections among choice, habit, character, and destiny. Indeed, those who criticize the presence of magic in the books fail to see the way the stories underscore the inherent limitations to magic. The strongest limitation concerns truth, which Dumbledore calls a "beautiful and terrible thing" that must be treated with "great caution." At one point, Dumbledore informs an astonished Harry, who had expected Dumbledore to come up with a magical solution to a particularly vexing situation, that he has "no power to make others see the truth." Thus, those who stand with the truth will at times find themselves at a disadvantage in their battle against those who believe that the use of any means is justified so long as serves the end of their own aggrandizement and power. But this means that those who fight against dark forces must be ever vigilant in their exercise of the virtues of courage, loyalty, prudence, and justice. It also means that the virtuous must be willing to die in the service of the common good, especially to defend the innocent. In a marvelous passage at the end of the most recent entry in the series, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Dumbledore urges his students, "we are only as strong as we are united, as weak as are divided. Lord Voldemort's gift for spreading discord and enmity is very great. We can fight only by showing an equally strong bond of friendship and trust."

Is not this among the things that young readers find so attractive in the Harry Potter books, an invitation to participate in a series of quests, to find their proper place, their dramatic role, not alone but in friendship with others, in the battle between good and evil?

[OWK]

Well, if you are interested, you can start with these two: "The African Roots of Voodoo" from National Geographic (August 1995), and also "Haiti's Voodoo Pilgrimages: Of Spirits and Saints." National Geographic (March 1985). You can probably get these at your local library.

Does these periodicals depict people flying, climbing on ceilings like flies, levitating themselves, engaging in "astral projection", or other activities that defy the laws of physics?

Or do they simply show people wriggling around mumbling incoherent phrases that people would just swear sound just like some extinct language?

[Lurker]

Isn't penicillin a 'magic potion'?

L

[BMCDA]

Isn't penicillin a 'magic potion'?

Of course it is. Applied correctly it adds +5 to your health and +2 to your hitpower.

[Aquinasfan]

So then, how was it created?

[Aquinasfan]

I think O'Brien identifies the heart of the difference between Rings and Harry here:

Much of the neopagan use of magic is the converse of this. It is frequently used to overwhelm, deceive and defile. In the Harry Potter series, for example, Harry resists and eventually overcomes Voldemort with the very powers the Dark Lord himself uses. Harry is the reverse image of Frodo. Rowling portrays his victory over evil as the fruit of esoteric knowledge and power. This is Gnosticism. Tolkien portrays Frodo's victory over evil as the fruit of humility, obedience and courage in a state of radical suffering. This is Christianity. Harry's world is about pride, Frodo's about sacrificial love. There is, of course, plenty of courage and love in the Harry Potter series, but it is this very mixing of truth and untruth which makes it so deceptive. Courage and love can be found in all peoples, even those involved in the worst forms of paganism. The presence of such virtues does not automatically justify an error-filled work of fiction. In Potter-world the characters are engaged in activities which in real life corrupt us, weaken the will, darken the mind, and pull the practitioner down into spiritual bondage. Rowling's characters go deeper and deeper into that world without displaying any negative side effects, only an increase in "character". This is a lie. Moreover, it is the Satanic lie which deceived us in Eden: You can have knowledge of good and evil, you can have Godly powers, and you will not die, you will not even be harmed by it-you will have enhanced life. There is so much that dazzles and delights in Rowling's sub-creation, the reader must exercise a certain effort to see these interior contradictions and mixed messages.

On the other hand, O'Brien says that the use of "magic" in Rings tends to diminish people/hobbits. I'm on page 50 now and I'm seeing that the ring diminishes whoever holds it. For example, Bilbo stopped aging and was tempted to hold on to the ring, even though he felt like he was withering away.

[the808bass]

You believe that people actually levitate?

Of course, if you start with materialism as your map, you will arrive at OWK's house. If material is not all there is, then we might end up somewhere quite different. What basis do you have for rejecting out of hand the possibility of events which are not explained by the "laws of nature?"

[Dr. Eckleburg]

It would be great if everyone discussing these books had made the effort to read them, as you've done.

The number of parents who see no harm in "Harry Potter", yet haven't read one word, is disheartening.

However, it does explain a lot.

[BMCDA]

I think it was a painting from the 14th century. Here is a website that deals with the examination of the shroud.

I have an other question concerning the supernatural. You claim that certain things have supernatural causes and I just want to know how you determine when this is the case or not. How do you know that there does not exist a natural explanation and you just didn't investigate this issue carefully enough?

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

I think the problem is you keep quoting people who have obviously never read the Harry Potter books. They form their opinions from other peoples opinion and so on. They obviously have only a passing knowledge of Tolkien as well. Harry does not use magic for his own selfish purposes, in fact, the books are very explicit when they point out that in Rowling's created world, magic is a neutral force. The application of ethics and morality appear due to the intent of the wielder. Just like in Tolkien's Middle-Earth. Tolkien is deeper, however, because he discusses things like corruptability and the addictions of power, but Tolkien's work is also aimed at a significantly older audience than Rowling's work. Rowling's work teached good vs. evil. When a good character makes a bad choice and does something bad, he pays the consequences. That is a much different lesson than is taught to children through most forms of children's entertainment. Good vs. Evil; consequences of actions; personal improvement through hard work; friendship and loyalty; respecting authority. What horrible things are taught at Hogwart's, huh? The rules of her created world are that magic exists, and it exists as a mechanical action, like chemistry or physics. It's a tool to be used for good or evil, because, as is her rule for that imaginary world, it contains no inherent evil or goodness.

[nopardons]

You only seem to know the Disneyfied Cindrella. Ther are well over 500 different bersions of this story. Almost EVERY culture, all over the world, and throughout ever period of time, this story in one version or another, has been told or read.

In most versions, Cinderella cries on the grave of her mother; it is her tears and prayers ( spell, conjuring , raising the spirit of the dead ? ) whih unleashes the MAGIC. In the Korean version, Tocabbies ( tiny, naked, mischievious sprits ) perform the " magic ". Then, there is the stepsisters ' sef mutilataions, in order that they each can fit the shoe / slipper , but their own drops of blood speak, as it falls to the ground , frorm the bloodyd shoe, and tells the prince that each girl is an imposter.

What about Sleeping Beauty ? This story and Cinderella are direct descendents, split in twian, of the Greek & Roman myths : Cupid and Psyche . Beauty's kiss ( just as in The Princess and The Frog and The Swineherd ) is MAGIC, and far from Christian. There are many magical eliments in MOST fairy tales, from ALL countries, cultures, and eras. They've NOT turned centeuries of children int " pagans" .

The posted info, that supposedly it has ONLY been in the last 100 + years that witches were portrayed as okay, in stories, is NOT factual at all ! The French, Medeival chansones about Meleissand portray her as a beautiful, loving , unfortunate shape shifter. The old Scotch ballads, about " Sulkies " sosmetimes portray them as good, and someimes as bad ; it justs depeeds upon which story you read. No, WHEN they were popular has little to do with which is good and which is bad.

A lot of this propaganda and hysteria, has MORE to do with paranoia and a shocking lack of knowledge, than anything else. Flagrant disregard about the sorts of stories children have been told / read to, from millenia to the present, and what effect it has had on them, is what allows the hystereic, gullible, fanatic to make ridiculous claims.

[nopardons]

People who BELIEVE that they have been " cursed " will react as though they have been. It IS mind over matter; that's Voodoo's "MAGIC". It was claimed, during the Inquisition, that witches flew on broom. The "flying potions ", which witches were wont to use, contained a skin penitrting hallucinagen ; they felt as though they were " flying " and they didn't use a broom ; that , along with many other weird things, is what the " Witch Finder Generals and Roman Catholic priests thought up, and under extreme tortures got the accused to admit to. The Catholic church invented a horned, tailed, and cloven footed devil. Jesus NEVER described him as such. It is NOWHERE in the Bible.

[joathome]

"Your post is great because you touch exactly the problem bedeviling those humorless and dried out at the heart Christians who hate these inventive books that fire a child's imagination and awaken a love of reading. "

sigh Perhaps our children never needed to be "awakened" to a love of reading, so we aren't so quick to overlook things in the book we find disagreeable. :)

[joathome]

Most of the Christian children in this country up until this century did not read stories that focused on magic. Sure, my kids read "Cinderella", but if you would ask them to tell you the story, the "fairy god mother" plays a very small part in it. Snow White had a wicked witch. The Seven Dwarfs had a wicked witch....and so on. Children's imaginations were stirred by fantasy, but not by a fascination with the occult.

[SuziQ]

My 13 yo daughter loves the Harry Potter books, though she can't even BRIBE her 11 yo brother to read them! She laughs when I read her the threads here about how horrible HP is for kids. Clearly she understands what this writer is saying; I'm convinced most kids who read HP do also!

[jrherreid]

OWK, I'm not talking about a Hollywood perception of posession, with flying pea soup and 360 turns of the head. What they show in those articles (if I remember correctly) is that the folks who claim to be posessed have some unusual powers, such as being able to withstand extreme heat, like burning coals. Heart rate and respiration changes, that kind of thing. If you don't believe me, try doing a little research before you end up making yourself look silly.

[pchuck]

If you fill their little minds with witchcraft and spells and disregard for the rules..do not be surprised if you reap what you sow.

Better not have them reading MacBeth (the witches). Currently, my kids are watching The Nutcracker, it has supernatural things in it. I better have them turn it off. Better not read any of those fairy tales either.

[RnMomof7]

Better not have them reading MacBeth (the witches). Currently, my kids are watching The Nutcracker, it has supernatural things in it. I better have them turn it off. Better not read any of those fairy tales eithe

The witches were not the Focus of the tales.HP glorifies spells and witchcraft..it teaches young minds that they can manipulate and control others with witchcraft.....a whole different feel to it..but put into your childs mind what you choose.On the day you are called to account for how you raised your children in the fear and admonition of God you will not be able to say you didn't know..

[Aquinasfan]

Warning: Nightmare material

'The Exorcist': The Story Behind the Movie
Straight Answers By Fr. William Saunders
HERALD Columnist

I was watching the movie "The Exorcist" with some of my friends. Can the devil really possess someone? Does the Church really do exorcisms? I heard that the movie is based on a real story. Is that true? — An eighth grade student in Annandale.

Last week, Straight Answers addressed the issues of diabolical possession and exorcism. Concerning both the book and the movie versions, The Exorcist was based on a true account of diabolical possession. One must remember that the book and especially the movie have certain sensational, "hollywoodesque" elements which are purely fictional. The true story began in January 1949 and involved a 13-year-old boy named Robbie who lived with his parents and grandmother in Mt. Rainier, Maryland. Robbie was very close to his aunt who visited the family frequently from St. Louis, Missouri. She was a medium and attempted to communicate with the spirit world. Not only did she spark Robbie’s interest in this practice, she also taught him how to use the Ouija board.

Strange phenomena began happening on Jan. 10, 1949. The family heard scratching on the walls; however, exterminators found no evidence of pests of any kind. Objects moved by themselves: a table would turn over, a chair would move across the room, a vase would fly through the air, and a picture of Christ would shake. At night, Robbie felt scratching in his bed, and he suffered nightmares frequently.

After the aunt died suddenly on Jan. 26, Robbie continued to use the Ouija board to communicate with her and others. The strange phenomena also continued. Moreover, Robbie’s disposition changed — he become unsettled, agitated, and angry.

In February, his parents took Robbie to visit their Lutheran minister, Rev. Schulze. Being interested in parapsychology, he thought perhaps a poltergeist was tormenting the family. Pastor Schulze allowed Robbie to move into his house for observation for a couple of days. The minister witnessed chairs and other objects moving by themselves. After he saw the bed shake, he moved the mattress to the floor, where it glided along by itself. Pastor Schulze became suspicious of the presence of evil.

Upon Pastor Schulze’s recommendation, the family took Robbie to the Mental Hygiene Clinic of the University of Maryland for testing. After two rounds of testing, nothing abnormal was discovered. Pastor Schulze then advised the family to contact the local Catholic priest.

Robbie and his parents visited Father Hughes of St. James Catholic Church in Mt. Rainier. While interviewing Robbie, Father Hughes saw the telephone and other objects in his office move by themselves. Robbie also cast obscene and blasphemous remarks at him in a strange, diabolical voice. The room became eerily frigid. Father Hughes was convinced that Robbie was possessed. After reviewing the facts of the case and the medical evidence, Cardinal O’Boyle authorized an exorcism.

Robbie was admitted to Georgetown hospital, where Father Hughes began the ritual of exorcism. The boy became violent, with spitting and projectile vomiting. He cast obscenities and blasphemies at Father Hughes. Although restrained to the bed, Robbie broke loose and wrenched out a metal spring with which he slashed Father Hughes from his left shoulder to wrist. The wound required over 100 stitches to close it. Robbie seemed calm after this attack, not remembering the ordeal. He was then released and sent home. The strange phenomena soon resumed at their home. One night, when Robbie was changing for bed, he screamed. A bloody word had been scratched on his chest, Louis. His mother asked if this meant, "St. Louis," and another bloody word appeared, yes.

Almost immediately, the family journeyed to visit their cousin in St. Louis, Missouri. The same strange phenomena began to happen. The cousin, a student at St. Louis University, talked with one of her priest professors, Father Bishop, S.J., about the situation. Father Bishop then contacted one of his close friends, Father Bowdern, S.J., pastor of St. Francis Xavier Church.

The two priests and a young Jesuit scholastic went to interview Robbie on March 9, 1949. They noticed bloody zig-zig scratches on his chest. They heard scraping sounds. They saw a large bookcase move and turn around by itself and a stool move across the floor. Robbie’s bed would shake as he lay on it. He hurled obscenities and blasphemies at them. The priests knew they were confronting evil. They petitioned Cardinal Ritter for permission to perform an exorcism. After reviewing all of the evidence including medical and psychiatric exams, he granted permission on March 16.

As the priests began the Rite of Exorcism, Robbie became violent. He made howling and growling noises. The bed shook up and down. On his chest appeared bloody scratches with the words hell and devil, and even an image of Satan. Robbie spit at the priests as he hurled obscenities and blasphemies, with intermittent fiendish laughter. For his own safety and for the family’s welfare, Robbie was then transferred to the Alexian Brothers Hospital and placed in the psychiatric ward. Father Bowdern, continued to perform the exorcism. With the family’s consent, Robbie was baptized a Catholic. When Father Bowdern tried to give him First Holy Communion, Robbie five times spit out the Sacred Host; they then paused to say the Rosary, and Robbie finally received the Holy Eucharist.

On April 18, Easter Monday, the exorcism came to a climax. As Father Bowdern continued the ritual, the demon recognized the presence of St. Michael the Archangel, and was expelled from Robbie. A sound like a gunshot was heard throughout the hospital. After this whole ordeal, Robbie remembered nothing of the diabolical phenomena, except the vision of St. Michael. Certainly, this story is frightening, but is nevertheless true.

So to answer the reader’s original questions, yes, the devil really can possess someone, and yes, the Church really does exorcisms. Be on guard! Stay away from anything dealing with the occult, including Ouija boards. Use the weapons of the holy arsenal that protect us from evil: pray, attend Mass, receive Holy Communion, live by the commandments and the teachings of the Church, and confess sins frequently. If we rely on this holy arsenal for God’s graces, we have no need to fear: the love of God will always triumph over evil. Fr. Saunders is dean of the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College and pastor of Queen of Apostles Parish, both in Alexandria.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I read MacBeth in high school. Again in college. But most eight-year-olds aren't devouring Shakespeare.

Parents object to the fact that Harry Potter glorifies witchcraft to young, impressionable minds. Rowling presents a perverse, Godless world order that looks to be lots of fun.

You sound like a good parent. Do yourself and your kids a favor and read one of the books yourself. It's the only way anyone can make an accurate judgement.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Maybe your 11-year-old knows something you and our daughter don't.

Read the books for yourself and see if they're appropriate for kids.