[HPforGrownups] Re: MAGICkal elITE - The Boy, The Man, The Hero, the Saint.

[No Limberger]

No: HPFGUIDX 186459

>Carol wrote:
>I certainly agree that Harry is not Christ, but I
>have yet to encounter anyone who claims that he is.
>And I agree that viewing Harry as a Christ figure or
>not is a personal preference (as is viewing Harry from
>the perspective of "the hero's journey").

No.Limberger responds:
On this we can agree.  At no time have I claimed that
anyone here has claimed that Harry is Christ.

>Carol wrote:
>SNIP<
>a Christ *figure* is a common literary motif which
>is different from an allegorical representation of Christ

No.Limberger responds:
In earlier thread (a few weeks back), I believe you referenced
the following site as a source for the definition of a
"Christ figure": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_figure.

Here is that definition taken directly from Wikipedia:
"A *Christ figure* is a literary technique that authors use to
draw allusions between their characters and the biblical Jesus
Christ."

No where does this definition indicate what can or cannot
be used as a basis for comparison, nor is there an
indication that any particular individual or group has been
authorized to make such determinations.  In fact, if one
follows the definition of "allusion" in Wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allusion), one finds the following
statement: "M.H. Abrams defined allusion as 'a brief reference,
explicit or indirect, to a person, place or event, or to
another literary work or
passage.<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allusion#cite_note-0>'
It is left to the reader or
hearer to make the connection (Fowler)."
In other words, it is in the eye of the beholder, which is
what I have repeated stated in past postings on this
subject, but have been told by several that that view is
wrong.

IMO, those that prefer use of the term "Christ figure" are
alluding only to a single similarity: that of Harry dying and
coming back to life.  They often also make references to a
scant number of biblical quotations, as well as comments
made by JK Rowling.  The purpose, then, is not to
use the term "Christ figure" as merely a literary
comparison (a comparison that I personally find no
relevant value given the weakness of the definition
itself), but to imply a more deliberate attempt by JKR
to use the Harry Potter books a means to promote
Christianity itself.  This is something that I completely
disagree with.

Then, when a closer comparison between Harry and
Jesus yields the tremendous differences between the
two characters; differences, that imo, are being ignored
by those who prefer the term "Christ figure", there is
an immediate implication that to do so is wrong.  Why?
As demonstrated, the definition of "Christ figure" does
not specify what constitutes what can be compared.

>Carol wrote (SNIP):
>You're trying to make the definition of Christ figure
>identical with Christ himself.

No.Limberger responds:
No, I am demonstrating obvious weaknesses in the
definition itself.  I am also showing how different Harry
is from Jesus; differences, that imo, show how imperfect
and flawed Harry is as compared with the perceived
perfection and unblemished Jesus as described in
the new testament.

>Carol wrote (SNIP):
>A Christ figure, as any literary critic would tell you,
>resembles Christ in certain significant ways.

No.Limberger responds:
What ways?  Certainly not the ones that are
different.

>Carol wrote:
>No virgin birth is necessary for a literary character to
>be interpreted as a Christ figure. No walking on water is
>necessary. No magi are necessary (though it's rather
>likely that the newborn Harry was visited by three wizards
>named Lupin, Black, and Pettigrew). no crown of thorns
>is necessary. Ad infinitum.

No.Limberger responds:
Because to do so removes the Christ figure allusion if
a number of those qualities are not present.

>Carol wrote:
>And I have yet to hear any Christian complain that a
>Christ figure "waters down" the concept of Christ.

No.Limberger responds:
Certainly those who have used the term as a way
to promote Christianity itself would not say that.

>Carol wrote:
>Can you refresh our memories regarding the
>"hero's journey" and how it applies to Harry?

No.Limberger responds:
Here's one link out of many that illustrate the
"the hero's journey":
http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/smc/journey/ref/summary.html

Here's the difference between "the hero's journey"
and "Christ figure": "the hero's journey" is a
purely secular term that neither promotes nor
denies any particular religious view; whereas
"Christ figure" is a religious-based term sometimes
used to promote Christianity itself.

>bboyminn wrote:
>Next to terminology, to say 'Christ Figure' in the context of
>Harry, is too strong a statement for my taste, though I concede
>it is mostly a shorthand or generalized comment when used in
>literary discussion. But to me it implies at least an allegorical
>similarity. I think that is far too strong for Harry.

>Next is the term 'Christ-like', again frequently used as a
>generalization, but still to me it implies too strong of a
>parallel.

>So, the best I can say, is that there are subtle and symbolic
>parallels in Harry's story, as there are in most Hero's stories.

No.Limberger responds:
Yes, I agree.

>bboyminn wrote:
>In many discussions, people have complained at how imperfect
>Harry was, he shouldn't have done this, he shouldn't have done
>that, but I think that imperfection is the very thing we see
>reflected in ourselves. Harry doesn't always know what to do
>or what is right, so like us everyday people, he blunders and,
>like us ordinary people, more often than not, he gets it right.

>So, we know and love Harry (and friends) both because they
>are 'everyman' and are also 'heroic'. In a sense, the stories
>leave us feeling that if Harry can do it, if Ron can do it,
>if Nevile can do, then so can we. I've read countless stories
>of young kids who were inspired to do the right thing, to
>make better choices because of Harry and friends.

No.Limberger responds:
IMO, it is far easier to relate to a very human characters like
Harry and friends than to religious figure such as Jesus who
was supposed a deity in human form.

>bboyminn wrote:
>Still, I stay my discomfort because I know a larger portion
>of that comparative language is very generalized and not
>meant to be taken literally.

No.Limberger responds:
Unlike "the hero's journey" that is clearly defined, the
definition of "Christ figure" is too vague and can be
interpreted by different people in too many ways.

-- 
"Why won't you dance with me, I'm not no limburger!", The B-52's


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]