The Philosopher's Stone (Was: PS/SS Title Change)

[gwendolyngrace]

No: HPFGUIDX 55883

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alison.williams" 
<alison.williams at v...> wrote:
> 
> I've recemtly read John Granger's book The Hidden key to HP and 
found it
> fascinating even if I think he stretches some points a little past 
credulity
> at times to draw out what he sees as Christian symbolism.  However I
> couldn't read the ending of CoS again after reading his book 
without the
> symbolism seeming to leap out at me.
> 

Hi, Allison!

Replies to this parts of post should probably go to OT-chatter, but I 
can't resist pointing out a few things:

1. Yes, there's a great deal of symbolism in the books, but where I 
object to the (predominantly) Christian readings of the books is that 
most of those symbols are *much* older than Christianity, and at *no* 
time have those symbols been exclusively Christian. 

Off-topic digression:
2. You know that Granger is presenting at Nimbus - 2003, right? He's 
a featured speaker and will be signing his book. 

3. His talk is part of a larger track on Saturday of spiritual and 
moral themes in the books and various groups' reactions to them. Our 
own Peg Kerr is presenting on her excellent series of Seven Deadly 
Sins / Seven Heavenly Virtues that she did for HPFGU (yes, right here 
on this very list!) a while back. Not only that, but Cantor Amy 
Miller (who is here somewhere) will present on the perspective of 
Judaism on the books, and John and I will be among several people 
pointing out the pagan point of view. There are additional panels and 
also Connie Neal will be speaking as well.

Back on-topic: There's a lot of death and rebirth symbolism in the 
books, true, but again, those symbols (and indeed, the whole idea of 
resurrected life or reincarnated life) are not exclusively Christian.

I think one of the things about the "religious controversy" over the 
books that is the most intriguing to me is that that controversy 
comes almost exclusively from the Christian Right Wing.  It's 
telling, I think, to see that nearly every other denomination and 
path, even within Christianity, really doesn't seem to have too much 
of an issue with the books. Certainly, there are folks here who can 
attest that as devout Christians, they were originally "told" not to 
read these evil things and then they said, "What the heck?" and went 
and read them anyway... and, well, they're here, so that should tell 
you something.

As a pagan, I myself rolled a baleful eye at the stereotypical pop-
culture witchcraft demonstrated in PS/SS. But I got past it very 
quickly, realizing that it was just the platform she had used to 
build upon the myths we already have in our gestalt. Given the way 
she interweaves the wizarding world with that of the Muggles, it 
makes perfect sense to draw upon the *mis*conceptions of witches and 
wizards throughout the ages, in order to then turn those stereotypes 
on their ears. Not to mention a little bit of "factual" basis for the 
old wives' tales.

Beyond that, though, I have read Granger, and I have read Bridger, 
and I think Bridger's far, far closer to the truth of the matter than 
Granger is. Bridger acknowledges the conservative Christian's plight 
with Harry Potter, and responds to it with a hearty, "not to fear." 
Unfortunately from my perspective, he *also* goes on to say that HP 
opens the door to proselytizing the Word, to which I can only 
say, "Spare me." But despite that, he still addresses the books *on 
their own turf* without trying to turn them into something that they 
are not, in my opinion, meant to be.

Because at root, the symbols and the myths that Rowling draws on to 
paint the world of HP are really the symbols and myths of the fantasy 
genre. Though she claims never to have really cared for or read much 
fantasy, she clearly understands the epic equation and so far, HP 
falls well into line with that paradigm. 

While we can debate whether fantasy has its roots in Christianity, 
particularly given the influence in the 20th century of JRR Tolkien, 
I say that those roots go much, much deeper than just a retelling of 
the Bible. The oldest known work of literature, The Epic of 
Gilgamesh, is at heart a tale of death and rebirth. Campbell relies 
heavily on the archetypes it establishes for his "Hero's Journey." 
Anyone want to tell me that Sumerians and Estruscans had heard of 
Jesus or believed he was the son of God?

Greek myths. Gilgamesh. The Odyssey. Metamorphoses. The Egyptian 
pantheon and myths associated with them: Osiris, Anubis, Isis, Ra, 
etc. The Mabinogion. The legend of Herne the Hunter. Arthurian 
legend. These works have the same themes and stories as the roots of 
HP interwoven through them - and they're no less effective. Rowling 
draws on them as much as she does upon Mediaeval legend, Shakespeare, 
Scott, Shelley, Dickens, and a host of other cultural and literary 
resources and references. She deliberately plays on what we *know* - 
and what we *think* we know.

But that doesn't necessarily mean she's writing a Christian parable, 
just because many of the symbols that are instantly recognizable in 
fantasy have also been co-opted by Christianity (after all, they have 
as much right to symbols as the rest of the world). She's telling a 
story, and that story is set in a genre with conventions, and she's 
using those conventions to great effect.

Like you say, it's one way to look at it. I happen to reject it, but 
you can see it that way if you want to do. I think, like statistics, 
symbology is a very woolly science, though - you can make the symbols 
say nearly anything you want them to do. Trelawney provides evidence 
enough of that.


Gwendolyn Grace (who is really looking forward to 65 presentations on 
just this sort of thing at Nimbus - 2003!)