Book Reviews: Various Christian Commentators on HP

[shihtouji]

No: HPFGUIDX 60624

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pennylin" <pennylin at s...> > 
Observing that Rowling has identified Caravaggio's Supper at Emmaus 
as her
> favorite painting, Killinger makes even stronger connections between
> Christianity and the Potter novels, concluding that Harry is a 
potential
> Christ figure.  He believes that indomitable hope is perhaps the 
strongest
> message of the Harry Potter novels and that Harry himself is a 
strong symbol
> of both hope and resurrection.

[snip]

> 
> While he finds that the value system of Potterworld is consistent 
with the
> Christian belief system, Bridger stops short of identifying Harry 
as a
> Christ figure or acknowledging any explicitly Christian messages in 
these
> novels.  He makes no presumptions with respect to Rowling's 
religious
> beliefs and confidently states that he believes that the "snippets 
of
> Christian theology" in Rowling's novels were worked in without any 
overt
> intent on her part (and perhaps without her knowledge even).  He 
finds that
> Rowling's treatment of death and resurrection put her most at odds 
with
> Christianity, and he accordingly cannot believe that she is writing 
with any
> particular theological intent.  


Surely one element of Harry (or anybody) as Christ figure must be the 
acceptance of sin and the willingness to be a sacrifice for the sins 
of others.  Lewis's Aslan is so transparently the "suffering servant" 
of Isaiah 53 (the deeper magic of the "willing victim" &c. &c.); 
Frodo as ring-bearer can be said to carry the weight of the evil of 
Middle-Earth with him (although he only loses a finger: Gollum ends 
up carrying the burden in the final moments, which is a fine ironic 
twist)--but I don't see any such parallel, or the need for any such 
parallel, in the Potter books.  I'll hesitantly add "yet," because 
the story's not over, but again, The Potterverse seems to operate 
purely on natural, not divine, laws.  The moral framework in the 
Potter books is entirely secular, although it does ultimately derive 
from Christian principles.  But then, isn't the Western concept of 
justice ultimately based in Judeo-Christian tradition?  JKR's 
philosophical underpinnings derive as much from Rousseau and Paine 
and Godwin as they do from the Gospels; but naturally the "snippets 
of theology" work their way into her books because JKR is engaged 
with Enlightenment sensibilities.  The more intelligent conservative 
Christian writers acknowledge that the Potter books aren't about 
Wicca or promote Satanism, but they do say that their main problem 
with the books is the absence of any higher power than a human one, 
and if JKR's point is to explore ideas of justice, then I can see 
where her books would be problematic for strict Christian readers.

I still think the big issue in the Potter books is the basic world-
view, promoted and accepted in the Wizarding World, that sees 
manipulation of Nature through magic, not Muggle technology, as the 
standard cultural mindset.  But between magic and technology there's 
not much to choose, when it comes to making moral choices.  There are 
Voldemorts in the science world, as there are Dumbledores.  It's 
precisely because magic and science lack an inherent ethical 
framework that both can be allowed--and that makes Harry's choices 
all the harder.  Certainly Harry doesn't learn much about correct 
moral behaviour from the Dursleys, except perhaps that they represent 
everything he doesn't want to be (a negative exemplum).  Dumbledore 
prods him in the right direction sometimes, but more often than not 
he shows up after the event to interpret Harry's actions for him and 
show him the ethical context within which he has been operating.  And 
the rest of the Hogwarts faculty are too locked into rules to be of 
any use for what Harry needs.  

But will Harry be asked to pay for the sins of this world by 
sacrificing himself to defeat Voldemort?  I can see that as one 
possible outcome--maybe the only trajectory possible for the plot--
but without a cosmological framework that accepts the concept of the 
scapegoat, such a sacrifice will seem more of a tragic accident than 
an act of redemption.  If anyone can point out to me that the WW has 
such a concept of redemption, then I'll rethink my approach to the 
novels.  But for now, I still say JKR is working with Enlightenment 
concepts of justice rather than with a Judeo-Christian cosmology of 
transgression and redemption. (Note:  As a practicing Christian 
myself, I am well aware that many of the mainstream Churches, 
including mine, the Anglican Church, have moved away from a theology 
of sin and redemption towards one of promoting social justice, but 
IMHO the Churches are keeping pace with concepts of justice already 
fully worked out in the secular world, and providing them with a 
theological framework.  This is excellent work, and I've been 
involved in it myself, but it's not exclusively in the hands of 
Christianity, as, say, the concept of the suffering servant as bearer 
of the world's sins might be.)

Red Inkstone