Skip to comments.Harry Potter: 3 More Things I Learned
Posted on 08/01/2007 6:59:32 AM PDT by ParsifalCA
I am warning those who have not finished the series . . . and there must be still a few of them by now. . . that there are spoilers ahead. I have just finished the last book . . . having spent an enjoyable evening with it thanks to Sams Club and an indulgent wife.
I am done with Harry Potter and enjoying the literary aftertaste the way one enjoys a fine meal almost as much after it is done as when it is being consumed . . . though it is a bit sad that the series is finished.
And it is really finished . . .
Will one be able to re-read the books with pleasure?
I think the answer is only a tentative yes. If one knows the puzzles and the secrets of the book, it will not take away the charm of the characters or the fun of a good Quidditch match, but the first read will always be the best.
The strength of these books is in the plot and the second read, when everything is known, will be satisfying for finding all the clues to what happens . . . but I am hard pressed to know if I will want to re-read them a third or fourth time.
A really great book is as good on the fourth read . . . and some childrens books (Little White Horse) are better.
I deeply enjoyed the last book and thought the ending satisfying. For those who found them quite Christian, they will find much in this last book to give strength to their idea.
(Excerpt) Read more at exilestreet.com ...
I thought Albright. Simply because the character is repeatedly described as "toadlike". Heh.
I read the entire Hardy Boys series as a child, yet somehow I did NOT become a detective.
I've read the LOTR trilogy three times and have yet to become a Hobbit, a Dwarf, an Elf, a Wizard, or even an Orc. Nor did I develop a unhealthy passion for jewelry on a chain (maybe I should listen to rap [non-]music to develop that).
I have read Frankenstein several times, yet I have no desire to become a mad doctor who tries to induce life into the dead.
In the interest of full-disclosure, I must admit to having a desire spring into my heart after reading a book. I wanted dearly to build a log raft and lazily float down the Mississippi river with a friend. Guess which book!
My opinion? People of faith who fear the effects of fiction and fictional characters on their children have a weak faith, are weak parents, or both.
PM: Is God so powerless in your life that some children's fantasy stories, written by an everyday English mother, can destroy you and your family?
I am as conservative a Christian as they come - and I thoroughly enjoy Harry Potter. This is FICTION - and there are no exhortation or how to’s for witchcraft. No one doubts Tolkein’s Christianity, yet he wrote of wizards in his fantasy world.
Take the setting away, and there are actually some strongly Christian undertones to the story (intended or not)
My children understand that witchcraft is an abomination, and I have not found one of them trying to cast a spell after reading Harry Potter.
I think more Christians should read the book before they condemn it. I initially read the book to see if it would be OK for my children to read, and found myself enjoying it immensely. I have not missed a book since.
And what really seems to be lacking is the idea of parental responsibility. There’s no way I’d give a 9 or 10 year old a book like this (esp. the later ones), and I’d never just give it to them and not talk about it. But I certainly want my kids to read them when they are mature enough (as with any other book)!
Depends on which Minister of Magic you mean.
Cornelius Fudge was simply in denial that Voldemort could/did return. I don't think he was inherently evil, but had more of a "if I don't think about it, it won't happen" attitude.
Rufus Scrimgour was more manipulative, but he did believe in the threat. He may be the closest to Clinton as he wanted to use Harry to enhance the image of the ministry.
Pius Thicknesse was in under an Imperious Curse. He was being controlled by Voledmort. Nobody controls Bill Clinton. Not even Bill Clinton.
“PM: Is God so powerless in your life that some children’s fantasy stories, written by an everyday English mother, can destroy you and your family?”
My faith is not at issue.
What is at issue is that the most popular children’s series of our generation glorifies soemthing that God has called an abomination.
Speaking .. the Pagan Federations Steve Paine,.., said the hit US drama Buffy and the highly successful Harry Potter books were popular amongst practising witches. They are taken as fantasy entertainment. But they do encourage people to think about different forms of spirituality"
Are you saying that kids shouldn't think about spirituality other than what one religion directs them? Are you denying that man is a thinking animal able to discern good from evil, right from wrong?
"Although saying that the stories were a positive way of showing the struggle between good and evil, he was worried that they could be used as a springboard for exploring more sinister aspects of the occult..."
This is an emotional response with ZERO facts to support it. Try again.
So, what’s worse?
Reading a bit of children’s fiction that uses a make believe magic as part of the story line...
Or studying and obsessing about all of the occult references in pop culture?
Seems like people who aren’t supposed to be reading about witchcraft sure are spending a heckuva lot of time reading about it.
But maybe that’s just me.
“I am as conservative a Christian as they come -”
From a previous post...
Now if there was a very popular childrens series about a couple of crack-addicted, teenage, male-prostitutes - and this series described the kids life and habits in detail (making it all seem fun) and also included a bunch of life lessons - would you want your kids to read this?
Remember, its all just fiction.
So, would you?
Oh he’s back on the teenage male prostitute thing. Let me guess, you recently got back from Thailand?
Sorry, I don't want to sound picky but I just don't think Scrimgeour should be compared to Clinton, at least, not after his actions in the last book (I don't want to spoil it, but if you've read it, you know what I'm talking about).
You're right. Nobody on FreeRepublic would bother reading or watching that garbage. That must be the reason that there haven't been any threads about HP on Free Republic.
Do I need a "/sarcasm?" I've read all the books, seen all the movies, and enjoy Jim Dale's performance on the audio books: I'm listening to "Prisoner of Askaban" right now at work. Some of you may have noticed that I'm a little bit interested in politics...
One of the exception is in fortune-telling (as you point out) and tea-reading, astrology, etc. These are "magical disciplines" in Harry Potter which map quite closely to "magical disciplines in our own world. But Look:
The professor for these subjects is Trelawney. She is a fraud. Everyone knows it. She is a laughingstock. The magic that she tries to teach simply doesn't work!
The one exception is that Trelawney makes a prophecy (without intention and without knowing she's doing so)which harks back to the inborn genetic capability that the Harry Potter wizards have.
I think Rowling in telling us how she feels about the Occult when she portrays Trelawney this way.
Jeannie's dark-haired sister *was* fairly naughty, as was Samantha's dark-haired cousin Serina. When I was a teenager, I often wished I could take a magic wand to those two. ;-)
Jim Webb's a FReeper????
it would depend on the setting of the book, the age of my children and the ultimate lessons coming out of the book. If they were going into law enforcement or medicine, and needed the info about how this subset of the society lives, and were old enough to handle it (prob late HS, college) I would not object. This would be mild compared to some of the things I was exposed to in medical school.
In most cases no, but the point is the decision is made on a case by case basis. I actually read Harry Potter first, and determined there is nothing that would harm my children by reading it. We also discussed witchcraft (the real kind, not the Harry Potter kind, and how God feels about it.)
There are some Christian books I do not want my children reading due to the graphic nature of the same. Sorry, the arguement does not hold water.
And he hates Harry Potter. Probably doesn’t like oil cans either but that’s a joke for another day.
No I agree. My point was that, if anyone could closely be compared to Clinton it was Scrimgour and his desire to have Harry “hangout” at the ministry to enhance the image of the ministry.
But you’re right, his actions in the last book are definitely NOT Clintonlike.
Geez! You'd think that being a reader for audio books would pay enough for one to at least afford a house!
I confess, I saw the movies and wanted to become an elf. Of course, that could have been cause I had the hots for Olando Bloom at the time :-) In fact, I'm pretty sure that's the reason, since reading the books never gave me that desire.
Just to end this obsessive rhetoric you seem to repeat so often, no editor worth his salt or author for that matter would consider your fictional 'crack-addicted, teenage, male-prostitutes' as appropriate for children.
Let me repeat so you don't get confused.
no editor worth his salt or author for that matter would consider your fictional 'crack-addicted, teenage, male-prostitutes' as appropriate for children.
Try something new.
(Sorry for the late ping! Apologies to anyone I may have left off the list, I’m on a backup computer.)
“Try something new.”
It’s a “What-if” question.
Ever heard of that?
It’s a logical fallacy, specifically poisoning the well with a false comparison. Ever heard of that?
I see this argument all the time, written by ADULTS as though they were critiquing a book written for them. It's a KIDS book!! It is written for tweens and teens, and won't be written in the same way as a typical book for older adults. That's not to say that adults can't enjoy them, but the books shouldn't be judged on how they're written if the person doing the judging is using an incorrect measure by which to do it.
As for the contention that the jargon is too contemporary, and will be 'dated', aren't folks still reading Thomas Hardy and Jane Austen with their stilted language? That's pretty dated, but it doesn't take away from the fact that they wrote some pretty good stories that have held up over time. It remains to be seen if the Harry Potter series will endure, but I think it will, because the struggle between good and evil is timeless.
“it would depend on the setting of the book, the age of my children and the ultimate lessons coming out of the book. “
There would be no moral lesson - for or against - their conducts. It would simply serve as a “plot device” as magic does in HP.
I know you are strongly convinced that the Potter books are evil. I was told the same, but when I started to read them myself I came to the opposite conclusion. I guess the answer is, if you are going to get obsessive over the setting (floating candles, ghosts, etc) it will seem occultish to you. Certain people, especially those who have come out of the occult, have problems with that.
But I tell you the plot and themes are absolutely Christian and conservative. Rowling has made more conservatives than witches, I’ll promise you. The theme is basically Everyman (Harry Potter - you know, Tom, Dick and Harry, and Potter’s Field - her names are highly symbolic) is a young wizard, and his life seems to parallel another young wizard’s, Tom Riddle.
However, Riddle makes all the wrong choices, out of an evil heart, and Harry makes mostly right ones, out of love for friends and under the guidence of wise mentors - despite the fact that he is just as angry about things as Riddle (the heart is desperately wicked).
The book turns into a spiritual and physical warfare between good and evil, with love for others expressed through self sacrifice becoming the redemption of mankind.
A strong subtheme is the desire of government to control the lives of individuals, and how easily that turns to aiding evil. There are many other Christian themes. Actually, I didn’t see any new age ideas in the book at all.
Don’t count on the movies to give you a true picture. The movies were interpretations by worldly folk, and they miss much of the Christianity.
“poisoning the well with a false comparison. “
Occultism and homosexuality are a one-to-one comparison in terms of their bBiblical status as “abomination”.
For a description of Lord of the Rings, check this out...
CAUTION!!!! Saying this is NOT family friendly is an understatement. If you play this at work, you will be fired. In fact, just watching this will put you on an express elevator straight to hell. In other words, they use a lot of naughty language, and rude, crude, and socially unacceptable imagery. You have been warned.
Well a few things come to mind, first being what universe could someone live in to make a comment like this?
Then an old Mark Twain quote and an old proverb that say much the same things.
"It is often better to keep one's mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt." --- Mark Twain
Or another version
"It's better to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and prove it." - old proverb
“The shredding of poor logic can sometimes cause that.”
Universality is what makes great and lasting stories great and lasting. Whatever the setting, from Hogwarts to Middle Earth to Narnia to the banks of the Mississippi to Victorian London to fair Verona to Camelot, what rings true is the human motives, good, bad, and ugly. Greed, lust for power, anger and hate; Sacrifice, justice, courage and love.
A common theme of modern literature is that even out heroes have feet of clay -- that is certainly true in Harry Potter. I do not see that as a negative, or as creeping moral relativism. Someone who is human and flawed, but nonetheless heroic, is someone we can choose to be, something we can aspire to -- not some other-worldly celestial being who is too far beyond us to contemplate.
Except of course there is no occultism in HP, thus your comparison is false. Then of course there’s the whole addition of the crack addict thing which you clearly included just to pile on the negative imagery, thus poisoning the well. You’ve got no facts, you site bigoted website and false claimers, and use logical fallacies to construct your argument. You lost, man up and walk away, you’ve proven yourself wrong.
It means your powers of observation are flawed, or you don't know enough people to create a decent sample for your 'survey', or both.
Now you know that Spell-O-Tape on wands leads to tragedies like vomiting slugs.
That's right... You need the Elder Wand."
I hope that point came across to PM in my post. Parental responsibility and one's faith.
“Oh hes back on the teenage male prostitute thing. Let me guess, you recently got back from Thailand?”
Please refrain from personal attacks and stick to a discussion of the topic.
Yours is more the latter than the former. Most of the latter have little basis in reality and often come under the influence of drugs or alchohol.
“You. Poor logic “
Please give examples of where my poor logic has been shredded.
I've enjoyed Harry Potter on audio, read by Jim Dale, and have two of them. However, I recently learned that the British version of the audio books are read by Stephen Fry. I'm gonna have to start collecting THOSE, because I just love his voice!
Actually that would be your first request, don’t fib. And it’s not a personal attack to point out that you keep returning over and over to the teenage male prostitute thing, because you do. And it’s also not an attack to mention that I find it a little creepy.
I know! I believe that there's something in the Bible that says you're not supposed to commit murder... Does that mean that you're not allowed to read a book where murders occur? If that's the case, I guess we're not supposed to read the Bible.
“Actually that would be your first request, dont fib.”
See post #102
There’s nothing in there that says anything about personal attacks or a request to stop same. That post has as little to do with personal attacks as HP does with the occult. Maybe you were thinking about personal attacks, but you didn’t write anything about them.