[HPforGrownups] Re: Baptism/Christianity in HP: was Looking for God in Harry Potter

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 153649

> Leslie41:
> What shocks me is the vehemence with which readers are unwilling to
> see Christian elements or themes in the books, and the lengths to
> which they will go to disprove them.

Magpie:
Funny it doesn't shock me you would say that, though it's untrue.  The 
arguments being made for specific parallels aren't convincing.  I think 
that's a problem with the specific parallels or your argument, not my 
vehemence or unwillingness to believe that there can be Biblical parallels. 
I don't have to go to any lengths to point out that I don't think these 
names are referring to specific apostles or that Harry and Ginny in CoS 
don't fit the Adam and Eve story.  I know the stories you're referring to 
and I don't see it.  If Peter had denied knowing James three times before a 
cock crowed in the text I think I'd see that as a Biblical reference to that 
other Peter.  It's not like this is the first time I've remained completely 
unconvinced by a theory or interpretation somebody has brought up on this 
list.  Why am I suddenly more unwilling and vehement just because the 
Bible's involved?

Leslie:>
> You spend a lot of time saying that James is just any other name,
> that Lily is just a flower name.

Magpie:
I don't spend a lot of time at all.  I said that I thought Rowling probably 
did choose Lily because it has spiritual associations as well.  I said James 
was just another name because your parallels to the apostles in question 
(what few there were) seem pretty empty.  Peter does not seem to me to have 
anything to do with Peter the apostle, nor does James seem to me to fit the 
role of James the apostle or Remus John the apostle.  Since all they have to 
do with each other are similar names I don't see why it's "going to great 
lengths" to point out that there are lots of other Jameses and Peters.

Leslie:
> Firstly, it's patently obvious that names have meaning in the
> books.  But she's very careful with the names she uses.  Sirius, the
> dog star.  Lupin, which means wolfish. Aberforth means "to wander
> off".  Even "Harry" means "to make a destructive raid." Should I go
> on?

Magpie:
Yes, many of the names have meanings.  Harry, I believe, is simply JKR's 
favorite and not picked because it means "to make a destructive raid."  Not 
to mention there are lots of other Harry's throughout history.  Similarly, 
although King Arthur is obviously the most famous Arthur I don't think 
Arthur Weasley is symbolizing him to a very great extent.  Remus is a fairly 
uncommon name that I absolutely link to the most famous person to carry it. 
However, my main reason for doing so is that Remus is also called Lupin 
and--most importantly--is a werewolf.  The text and the name work together, 
as they do with many of other names.  I do not think that Michael Corner is 
symbolizing the archangel because they share a name.

If the MWPP story more closely paralleled the story of the apostles I think 
I might be able to see it.  I think if you could come up with evidence of 
that you wouldn't have to suggest that the problem is ad hominem, an 
accusation that can be easily turned around on anyone.

Leslie:
>
> So if you suggest that suddenly the names "James" and "Lily" really
> don't mean much with regard to the Bible, it seems to me that you're
> the one trying to make the text fit your interpretation.

Magpie:
I did not make the claim that the name James means nothing with regards to 
the Bible or that lilies are not associated with Easter and I'm kind of 
shocked you'd think you can turn it around that way.  YOU are the one making 
a claim here about the meaning of something within Harry Potter.  YOU are 
the one who has to support it with evidence from HP.  That means evidence 
that James Potter is somehow a reference to this other James in the Bible. 
As you've not provided any evidence at all besides the fact that they share 
a name I don't have to change the text to say you haven't provided any 
evidence.  As for Lily being associated with Easter I actually have said 
that Lily's character and story can support spiritual associations with Lily 
the flower--because I see it in HP. I have not changed the text at all.

Leslie:>
> The first association that a Christian (such as Rowling) would make
> when hearing the name "James" would be the apostle.

Magpie:
You do not actually have the authority to say what a Christian's first 
association to the name James would be.  JKR is also British and it's 
equally possible her first association with the name James would be the 
kings by that name.  Or perhaps any number of people she's known who are 
named James.  If his name was Judas then yes, I'd say that a Christian's 
association would be the one in the Bible.  Job as well.  James does not 
have the same exclusive associations.

Leslie:
 The first
> association that a Christian would make when hearing the word "Lily"
> is an Easter lily.

Magpie:
Again, you are actually not the psychic interpreter of the thoughts of every 
Christian.  I have already said that I see enough associations between 
lilies and their spiritual associations and Lily Potter's role in the story 
to believe that Rowling chose that particular flower name for Harry's mother 
for that reason.  But I'm seeing those associations within the story.  Not 
because I think that as a Christian Rowling couldn't name any character Lily 
without meaning something else.

Leslie:>
> I would agree with you if Rowling weren't a professed Christian, but
> she is, most definitely.

Magpie:
And as I've said, I think you've gone beyond what you can safely assume 
about her because she's a professed Christian.

> Leslie41:
> I'm not at all implying that the HP books are an allegory.  Not at
> all.  What I'm saying is that the books are informed by Christianity
> and Christian themes.

Magpie:
And I've agreed with some and rejected others because they don't hold up.

> Leslie41:
> I'm not offering a key at all.  What I'm saying is exactly the
> equivalent of "neat, that illuminates that scene in a new way".
> But what you seem to be objecting to is even that, or at least
> that's what I'm getting.

Magpie:
No, I'm not objecting to even that.  I'm objecting to parallels that are 
being drawn and references that I don't think work.

Leslie:
Seeing James/Lily with an eye towards the
> Bible "illuminates that scene in a new way" for me, but you object
> to that interpretation.

Magpie:
I object when I think you make a claim that doesn't work.  You're perfectly 
welcome to find personal illumination in connecting James and Lily towards 
certain people in the Bible and to share it with others, but when one claims 
that the author meant to be referring to a specific Biblical thing or claim 
that one thing in canon is symbolizing something, something I am familiar 
with but don't think works as a parallel, I say so.  Even if James was 
Rowling's favorite apostle and she named him after him it still might not 
see much in the name besides that if it wasn't there.  I can compare the two 
books as easily as you can.

If I claimed the mark on Harry's forehead was the Mark of the Beast from 
revelation and that Harry was therefore damned I think somebody could argue 
against that interpretation without it meaning they just refuse to accept 
any Biblical ideas.

Leslie:
> So what I'm getting from your argument is that you are opposed to
> bringing in any biblical elements at all, because you are arguing
> against the very points of that interpretation.

Magpie:
No, you can bring the Bible in as much as you want.  But if you say that 
something in the story is a reference to a Biblical story that I know and 
don't think applies, or I think something else applies better, I say so.

-m