The religion known today as "WICCA" is not "pre-Christian."
It is for the most part a 20th Century creation that shares it's roots with "Earth Day" and other feel-good nonsense from the 1960's and '70's.
:
Posted on 12/26/2001 8:35:02 AM PST by massadvj
As I lurk about the various topics here on Free Republic I have noticed a paradox that I think I can explain, but I'm not sure. The paradox is this. Currently, there are two mainstream movies out about magic and sorcery: Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings. I have noticed that Freepers of the right wing Christian persuasion have lambasted Harry Potter for causing young folks to believe in sorcery and witchcraft; and also possibly causing hair to grow on one's palms. On the other hand, the praise for Lord of the Rings seems to be universal, in spite of the fact that it, too, features sorcery and the like. The question is why.
Personally, I liked both movies. Lord of the Rings was the better flick, in my opinion, because of its fantastic scope and special effects. Also, Lord of the Rings was a better story, which is where the question of the paradox comes in. If you think about it, Lord of the Rings is filled with Christian symbolism. One devil, the ring (original sin), a savior, there is even a resurrection at one point. So the movie appeals to Christian sensibilities at an unconscious level. This is nothing new to movies. Take a look at E.T. the Extra-Terrestial or The Abyss for two more obvious examples of tugging at Christian heartstrings.
Harry Potter, on the other hand, is more "New Agey" and relativistic, which rigid Christians find irreverent. And so, Potter gets slimed while Lord gets lauded.
That's my take, anyway. I'd be interested to hear whether others think this hypothesis of mine has any credibility. So flame away.
Your basic premise is mistaken. Objects cannot be good/evil/heroic or otherwise. Only individuals can have these traits. These movies may promote individuals to these kinds of behavior, but inanimate objects cannot in and of themselves be good or evil.
Having said that, I agree with your basic take on the two movies.
IMHO W.K.
I know which my kids will be allowed to read/watch.
The religion known today as "WICCA" is not "pre-Christian."
It is for the most part a 20th Century creation that shares it's roots with "Earth Day" and other feel-good nonsense from the 1960's and '70's.
:
A lot of us are also members of the Got A Life Club. Eternal ones, that is :)
I believe another reason is that LOTR has a far more defined contrast between good and evil. In HP, to a large extent good and evil are both severely watered down concepts. A lot more "relativism" in HP, IMHO.
Not that I'm really an expert on HP.
Quite simple. Simply contrast the ways in which sorcery is presented in the two novels.
In LOTR, there are maybe 3 wizards on the entire planet, and any spell casting which occurs, if any, is minimal.
In Harry Potter, the whole thing is about a school for children wizards.
Basically, in LOTR, the whole realm of occult sorcery is minimized, while in Harry Potter it is excessively glorified...
I don't disagree with your premise. As I stated earlier, movies cannot be good or evil; only people possess these characteristics. Reasonable parents will monitor, edit, and filter what their children see and hear.
W.K.
The worship of Woden/Wotan/Odin and Frig of the old Germanic and Anglo Saxon peoples is what I am referring to by "Wicca." This religion still has its remnants in the names of the days of the week (e.g., Wednesday) and in seasonal celebrations, e.g, Yule, May Day and Haloween. It was reconstructed in the 20th Century by such people as Johan Jacob Bachofen. But the origin of the word "Witch" is "wicca" meaning "wise" and referred to a practictioner of the old pre Christian religion. So called witches were persecuted by Christians hundreds and hundreds of years ago. In much the same way, Christians presecuted the old Greek religion. Every new religion turns the old gods into demons.
Another possibility is that Tolkein was an unabashed Catholic (although many HP-bashers say that Catholics aren't actually Christians....), whereas J.K. Rowling's religious leanings aren't public knowledge. Churchmanship is apparently a saving grace. (FYI: Rowling is a practicing Anglican -- a rather uncommon thing in the UK).
Finally, the geek factor. There is not as yet a vast contingent of HP geeks, and there is a whole host of LOTR geeks -- many of whom, I wager, are among the loudest HP bashers. One cannot discount the geek factor -- it lends a tremendous amount of heat and venom to any disagreement. I actually suspect this is the major bone of contention: to an LOTR geek, any avenue of attack against the interloper is allowed.
Well, to be fair, Frodo's life was saved by elfen magic after getting stabbed by one of the nine-bad-guy-thingeys. Gandalf again used magic to save everyone's life in the mines of Moria when fighting the Balrog (and emerged a more powerful sorcerer for it). In fact -- all sorts of "good" characters use magic throughout the LoTR triliogy to fight evil.
Frodo doesn't fight magic per se. The quest is to destroy a ring bound with evil magic.
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.