Lockhart as Pullman? CLARIFICATION... Religious Aspects of HP

[Hitomi]

No: HPFGUIDX 91206

I'm just going to add my extra thoughts to this thread.  Sorry, 
Susan, for going off on my own little tangent with Sally Lockhart, I 
sort of... answered your post without answering it.  I just kept 
wondering why Granger (and I haven't read his book, so I'm basing 
this off your questions) would postulate Rowling had written 
Gilderoy to represent or symbolize Pullman, especially when she has 
recommended him in interviews?  It didn't make any sense, and the 
only parallel I could draw was the similarities in the characters' 
surnames.  (Unless, of course, Granger just likes imagining false 
characters to be caricatures of Pullman, which would be rather small-
minded, to say the least).

"His Dark Materials" caused a lot of controversy, not on the level 
that "Harry Potter" has, but that is more than likely due to the 
vast popularity of "Harry" compared to other children's novels.  
Pullman does rather attack organized religion outright, especially 
in "Amber Spyglass," but for some reason the fundamentalists have 
been more offended with the overt "withcraft" of "Harry."  It's easy 
to see Rowling as edifying towards a Christian audience or towards 
anyone, for that matter, but only on a purely figurative level.  But 
for whatever reason, most of the Christian readers I've come in 
contact with can't get past the "occultism" so blatantly displayed.  
As if Harry is worshipping Satan or something (I have very little 
patience with judgemental Holiness followers, who only read into 
technical detail, without looking for universal themes).

But then some have read HDM, and are completely unoffended by it, 
which just... befuddles me.  Pullman might as well state "I disagree 
with organized religion, Christ is good and all, but the assertion 
that humanity is naturally evil is a gross judgemental point of 
view."  He seems to work with the assumption that people would be 
more inclined to do good, if the world and ecclesiastical systems 
did not revolve around the natural human inclination towards 
ralacity and desire for power.  And on the assumption that God works 
in the same context.  I can see why Granger would have problems with 
his work, but I do also see the empathy displayed for the human 
condition among Pullman's work.  He just doesn't seem to want to 
blame humanity, he seems to place the blame on God for creating us 
in such a way, and in "His image."  Paradox, anyone?

But for all that, Christians attack "Harry Potter."  You think 
Pullman would appreciate HP more, what with its VERY human, yet 
impossibly altruistic, hero, which is the assumption Pullman likes 
to work with.  And Pullman does have a weird proclivity for writing 
female characters, which is not nearly as common for male writers, 
but he's never written anything I've found offensive.  Which brought 
me back to Sally Lockhart, and the very un-religious atmosphere of 
said series.  Maybe Pullman was writing his own religious statement 
in HDM, but I always read it as more of a search for that 
statement.  A lot of the messages he puts across contradict one 
another, which can be said about the Christian organized-religion 
all around (though not Christianity itself).

Rowling, however, seems, in my opinion, to just be doing her thing.  
As I said, she may very well be trying to edify towards a general 
audience, but don't all writers?  When writing something, your own 
beliefs are going to come through, as are your assertions as to why 
the world is the way it is, and what should be done about it, 
especially on the grand epic scale that is HP.  That's why I get so 
confused with the Bible Belt fundamentalists.  Where are the evil 
undertones?  There are human/original sin undertones, I see those, 
but you can't very well write about people without such themes.  
More than anything I see Christian undertones.  The right vs. easy 
way.  Truth vs. deception.  Loyalty and bravery towards a selfless 
ideal.  Some of the lurid imagery of HP has reminded me forcefully 
of "Pilgrim's Progress." (not to say Rowling is influenced by 
Bunyan, because I highly doubt she is).  But from that Christianized 
perspective, you can see such examples, especially in the Department 
of Mysteries.

But getting to my point, I see a lot of the religious debate as 
superfluous and irrelevant to HP.  In Pullman's work, the religious 
aspects are obvious.  In Rowling's, they are assumed to be there.  
It's as if the Christian fundamentalists don't want to believe in 
the natural human persuasion towards evil and Satan when reading a 
book, but want to tell you all about fire and brimstone in everyday 
life.  I just wish they'd make up their minds.

~ Hitomi, who noticed she misspelled a lot of words in her last 
post, much to her vexation

And thanks, Sylvia, for pointing out my error on "Hard Times," like 
I said I haven't read that book in ages.  Harthouse didn't seduce 
Louisa, I just remembered her having been inclined to commit 
adultery, but then changing her mind (though with a husband like 
Bounderby, you empathize with the poor woman).  I just liked the 
Utilitarianism vs. Romantic themes underlying the novel, though I 
agree, Dickens has written better.  ("Little Dorrit" and "Nicholas 
Nickleby" are my favorites :-) )