Posted on 07/18/2005 9:57:30 PM PDT by Eurotwit
Oh, my goodness! Did I have a momentary lapse of memory regarding the first name of an author, when posting at 3 in the morning?
Heavens, that certainly is significant.
P.S.
You couldn't have picked a more appropriate avatar.
"And in fairy tales, there are good and bad witches and faries and imps and all sorts of other types of "magical" creatures. None of whom have decimated "WESTERN CULTURE" !
It seems that you are so eager to quarrel that you're not even bothering to notice what it is I'm saying.
I compared classic fairy tales *favorably* with HP.
I would agree that fairy tales have been a significant element of Western Culture, and in particular for the transmission from generation to generation of some of the eternal verities.
"Tell me, what exactly does the magical powers either given to, or used to help the girls, in such fairy tales as Cinderella, THE PINK, THE TOCKABBIES, and such, does to teach children how to strive for themselves?"
I really wish you'd make an effort to argue against positions I have actually taken.
Not every fairy tale addresses the same subject or teaches the same lessons, obviously.
I am not familiar with fairy tales named "THE PINK" or "THE TOCKABBIES," and in fact find no mention of "THE TOCKABBIES" anywhere on the Internet.
" I suspect that the latter are a minority, and that they have always been a minority."
Yes, which is why schools used to (and should) force the majority to read them.
'Scuse me. Should have clarified a thing or two. Harold Bloom's "Closing Down of the American Reader" was an article in (ugh!) The Boston Globe in 2003. Wasn't a book.
And of course you're correct about Allen Bloom's book title, "The Closing of the American Mind."
Sooooooooo, we're both right. I love happy endings, don't you?
Cheers,
CSG
Once, four hundred times, I don't care. I wish I'd written Harry Potter. However, my imagination was stultified during my early years in the book biz when fantasy for children was considered totally rotten by the school and library muggles in power. Had I not been so prejudiced, I would have recognized the opportunity presented to take over children's books at the publishing house that owned the rights to the entire Wizard of Oz series and had them in mothballs. I turned them down, and a few years later, copyrights expired and the Wiz went large. Live and learn, but does it have to be so expensive?
Potter is fun. Doesn't need to be great literature. Obviously.
"Oz didn't give nothing to the tin man
that he didn't already have..."
In the same way, Potter isn't conjuring up anything for kids that their magical little minds hadn't already considered.
placemarker
You are mostly wrong on every possible interpretation of this comment. This is made particularly clear in the latest book, which deals explicitly with this very issue.
One of the things that becomes evident to any child who reads the Potter books is that magic is no short cut to anything. Althought some of the characters experss sympathy for people without magic powers, in actuality, magic makes life no easier or happier than electricity or any other "natural" source of power. It has advantages, in the same way that being born into a rich family has advantages -- but then look at the Kennedys.
For those who havent't noticed, magic is a metaphor.
" I do not know you, dear reader; the only thing I know about you with certainty is that your innermost feelings would bore me."
He proves that he has succumbed to that same selfish attitude which he despises. His own innermost feelings he would find fascinating -- evidenced by this poorly written and overly wordy critique. It is everyone else's feelings he finds boring.
These things are actually part of an older tradition - as you say in fact. I mentioned printing because that was the first indication of the demand for these things.
Ariosto was certainly not the first such fantasist. "Orlando" is actually a sequel to Boiardo's similar work (I assume, since I have not read Boiardo).
I have no problem with calling "Orlando" a work of the Renaissance. The 1500 cutoff is pretty arbitrary.
My larger point is that Potter and its ilk have ancient roots, and sure, they are not necessarily Christian ones. But even Christianity did not lack such influences, from St. Paul onwards.
Funny. I've heard Tolkein praised for decades, and
I had high school students who read everything he
wrote. So I'm not knocking his ability to create
"another dark world" for people to wander through.
Yet, I've tried many times to read his stuff and
just can't get into his characters. Hobbits and
Efts are ok for those who enjoy them, but I prefer
my main characters to be at least somewhat on my
level of being; i.e. human! <>g<> OTOH, I couldn't
get into Watership Down or that spider heroine either.
I've come to chalk it up to my flawed taste.
As for Rowling vs Tolkein...I find Harry and his
friends most satisfying, enabling me to lapse
back to my youth emotionally and mentally. It's
a real trip! Most kids have an Hermione and Ron
in their cache of memories. How great it would
be if every kid also had a Dumbledore and a Dobby
tucked away in his childhood!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.