Re: Harry Potter–A Worthwhile series??

[judyserenity]

No: HPFGUIDX 33601

Kevin Kimball listed a number of objections to the Harry Potter 
series, writing: 

> ...Rowling presents an arbitrary world in which good and evil are 
> simply two sides of the same sorcery....
> First, breaking rules is glorified:.....  
> Second, Rowling leaves the option of lying up to the individual, 
> and even glorifies it... 
> Finally, concerning the adult world, or those who would be in 
> authority, there is only derision.  Fred tells his mother,
> "Honestly, woman, you call yourself our mother?"   And another time, 
> "All right, keep your hair on."  All the teachers at Hogwarts are 
> either dirty, deranged, deceitful, or all three...

> ...In contrast, Lewis and Tolkien present a world where truth is 
> absolute and transcends the individual.  Because the world has 
> absolute truth, it is also a world in which order is upheld...

Kevin, you may be surprised by this, but I actually see the Harry 
Potter series as very much a Christian Allegory.  However, this does 
not become clear until Book 4, and according to your post, you have 
only read the first book.  My guess is, many of the people who object 
to the lack of Christian ethics in the "Potterverse" would like the 
series much better if they got further into it.  (I'm not saying they 
have a responsibility to do so; the books are quite long, after all.) 
 
Book 4 puts a lot of emphasis on forgiveness.  The demonic (or 
satanic) figure, Voldemort, is back to full strength.  He is angry 
that his followers have not helped him sooner.  One of his followers 
begs for forgiveness, and Voldemort responds by torturing him, saying 
"I do not forgive."  Notably, he does not torture the followers who 
don't ask for forgiveness.  He seems to feel that being asked for 
forgiveness is an insult. On the other hand, the good figure, 
Dumbledore, makes it clear that he is willing to forgive anyone who is 
sorry for past deeds, and will welcome them back.  A lot of the plot 
emphasis (and the discussion here!) focuses on Snape, who has been a 
Voldemort follower in the past but has now redeemed himself and is 
trusted completely by Dumbledore.  

In addition to the theme of forgiveness in Book 4, the whole series 
strongly emphasizes the theme of love.  Like you, I was a bit appalled 
by the first scene with the Weasley family, where the twins seem so 
disrespectful to their mother.  However, in later scenes with the 
Weasleys (we get to see them quite a lot in subsequent books) it 
becomes clear that they are a very loving family, who are secure 
enough to joke around.  Also, it becomes clear that the Weasley 
children actually have a lot of respect for Mrs. Weasley's authority; 
they *don't* want her mad at them. 

I agree with you that JK Rowling rather explicitly prefers chaos to 
order. The loving, chaotic Weasley household is contrasted with the 
orderly but cruel Dursley household. It seems to me that JKR is an 
"Act Utilitarian", that is, she believes that each action must be 
judged on its own merits, rather than believing that there is one set 
of rules that will provide guidance in all situations.  If an action 
is determined by love, if it is done to help others, then it is good, 
in her worldview.  Actions that are done out of cruelty or selfishness 
are bad.  This is what determines whether a particular instance of 
rule-breaking should be "glorified" or condemned. In the Flying lesson 
scene, Draco's rule-breaking was motivated by malice, whereas Harry 
just wanted to help Neville; therefore, Draco's rule-breaking was 
wrong and was punished (Draco is left on the sidelines while Harry 
gets to play Quidditch, and we find in book 2 that this bothers Draco 
a lot), whereas Harry's rulebreaking was rewarded.  In the rare cases 
where *Harry* breaks a rule out of selfishness, JKR makes it clear 
that he is wrong.  "Altair aka MJ" pointed out an excellent example of 
this from the 3rd book, where Harry breaks rules for selfish reasons 
and feels very guilty.  (He is also punished in that a valuable item 
is taken from him.)  

There is no question that the children in the Potter series often have 
to decide things on their own, without rules or adults to guide them. 
This happens because the either because the parental figure 
(Dumbledore) wants it that way, or because he is not there to help 
them.  This is in marked contrast to, say, the Narnia Series, where 
God is the authority figure and his presence (the Emperor's Magic) 
pervades everything.  The Potter series presents a world where the 
devil is very real (Voldemort "no longer has enough human in him to 
die") but the existence of God is uncertain (Dumbledore is good, but 
he's not God -- he's very clearly human and mortal.)  

I consider myself a very religious person, yet I see nothing wrong 
with Rowling's books.  It is normal for young people to question the 
existence of God as they grow up and see how much evil is in the 
world. I think these books may help them to cope with this problem.  
The books show that even if one questions (religious or secular) laws, 
one should still be guided by love and concern for others.  
Furthermore, the series presents the possibility that God is not 
absent, but simply has a good reason for leaving us on our own.  Harry 
eventually realizes that Dumbledore leaves him to his own devices not 
out of lack of concern, but because this is an important part of 
Harry's training.  Furthermore, we get glimpses of a good power, 
beyond human authority -- Fawkes, Dumbledore's phoenix, is a purely 
good, immortal, magical being (like an angel); a true prophecy warns 
of Voldemort's return; Harry's escapes are nothing short of 
miraculous; the love of Harry's mother casts a protective spell on 
him.  I think the Potter series sends the message that even when evil 
seems to have the upper hand, God is not absent, just subtle.  
Ultimately, I think the series strenthens faith, not weakens it. 

By the way, I see the JKR books as a Christian allegory, but not a 
Jewish one; this is why I didn't use the term "Judeo-Christian."  I'm 
Jewish (I hope that doesn't lead you to discount what I've just said), 
and I see the literal existance of Satan as contrary to Jewish 
teachings.  However, I'd have no problem letting my kids (if I ever 
manage to have any!) read the books; I'd just point out that Voldemort 
can't be real.