unicorns and religious references in HP (was checking out the library book

[Barry Arrowsmith]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> wrote:
> 
> After that I had my radar switched on, so to speak, and that's why 
> I think  the incidental mentions are just as significant as the
> biggies like souls and prophecies. Unlike JKR I have
> read massive amounts of fantasy, and one of the things an
> author does when establishing an AU is show, early on, what's 
> *not* different about it. Those things are likely to be significant. 
> The Potterverse,  whatever else it may be, is not a universe where 
> Christianity never existed, though it's carefully established,
> via mention of Egyptian tombs and the Ollivander's sign,  that
> the wizarding culture pre-dates it. 
>

Kneasy:
Um.
Being totally and unrepentantly mischievous ....
Are all these pointers somewhat similar in quantity and quality
and in any way comparable with the evidence for Vampire!Snape?
Just asking. 

Neri voices an opinion close to my own in wondering how
much of the 'religious' evidence is mostly cultural. It's almost
impossible to hold any discussion of western culture without
religion getting a significant mention since it is an integral
component of the whole. Suggesting links between mythical
monsters and religious concepts was high fashion a few
hundred years back, codified iconography was an intellectual 
game.

And it allowed fanciful speculation of the impossible/highly 
improbable without attracting the attention of the censors.
Most of the mythology had origins other than Christian and
the Index kept a close eye on anything that did not express
or subordinate itself to the tenets of religious orthodoxy and
its centrality as the origin and rationale for everything.
The suborning of pagan symbols would more or less guarantee
the approval of those who in other circumstances had the power 
to make your life difficult.

It's almost impossible to think of classical mythical beasties that 
at some time or other have not been subject to this sort of 
re-invention. A good rule of thumb IMO is - can it be found
on coats-of-arms? If it can then it's highly likely to have been
re-invented, iconographically speaking.

Then there are the others that don't appear in quarterings and on 
escutcheons - banshees, trolls, ghouls, centaurs and perhaps 
vampires. All non-classical, you'll note. The variety of life-forms
found in FBaWTFT is (IMO) maybe a truer indication of Jo's thinking,
on this aspect of the books anyway - she needed beasts and 
monsters, so grab what's available and invent extras that could be
useful or entertaining.



> I wasn't surprised to learn that the  author had a strong
> identification with Christianity, or that she felt  that expounding 
> on her beliefs would give the storyline away.
> 

Kneasy:
Yes, no argument. But I'm wondering *how* it will be expressed.
As a frankly religious theme or perhaps an allusion, a parallel,
or,  and this is possible given what  she said about those with a
familiarity with Christian themes could guess the ending, a straight
steal of a storyline/resolution? Some would be amenable to such
adaptions -  the Prodigal Son, for example. Familial affection and 
forgiveness is a universally recognised theme, not solely a
Christian one, though if enough clues are sprinkled about anyone
with religious knowledge would cotton on immediately.
'Identification with' does not automatically result in 'obvious 
expression of.'
  
> 
> I haven't read Johnson, however the middle ages and the matter
> of Britain have been a passion of mine since childhood and I have 
> loads of books about them, including primary sources
> in translation. I wouldn't want to give an opinion of Johnson's 
> book till I've read it, but since it's out of print that may take
> a while (must check amazon.uk).
> 

Kneasy:
It is available at amazon.uk. Strangely enough it's been reprinted
with its original title - "The Offshore Islanders". It's a paperback
that they claim is despatched within 3 days of order.

It's more than just the Middle Ages - it's from the end of Roman
occupation to entry into what was then the Common Market. I
think you will enjoy the pre-Conquest section too. All too often
that bit doesn't get the attention it deserves.