I think it is so ridiculous that people debate this sort of thing, and that they care.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/28/harry-potter-was-a-good-christian/?hpt=C2
Harry Potter is a good Christian
(102 posts) (14 voices)-
UrsaMinor
Member“I see him best as a seeker in a world where Christianity is not the vocabulary. I see him best as a seeker trying to live a life of faith in the same way a Christian seeker tries to live a life grace,” Tumminio told CNN.
Hmmm. Could it be that ethics and morality transcend Christianity? Just a thought...
Posted 2 years ago # -
Exactly. Shall we now wonder if Harry Potter was also a Platonist?
;)
Anyhoo, I just think these kinds of arguments are silly. Perhaps we would want to point to Christian symbolism in this and other Western literature. We could also point to epic patterns that trace back to the Odyssey in HP as well. Does that make HP a Greek?
Perhaps I'm grouchy because I took a look at the comments underneath the article and saw a bunch of dumbfuckery. Dumbfuckery always makes me cranky.
LOL!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Jabster
Member"So was Socrates, ..."
So who was that playing for Brazil then smarty pants? Oh and there's a text commentary of one of the games here ...
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~ebarnes/python/international-philosophy.htm
:-)
Posted 2 years ago # -
Mark the Pilgrim
MemberJK Rowling gave an interview with Oprah and she said that HP does contain some Christian themes and iconography. So maybe there's something to it, although I haven't read the link from the OP yet (my phone won't load it) to judge whether it is complete BS or not.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I think it's reasonable to debate this sort of thing because, like Mark said, Rowling explicitly acknowledged the elements of Christianity within her own writing. It's akin to literary masturbation, but I don't think it's really ridiculous.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I'm not saying don't analyze whatever themes one may find in HP that harken back to the Western Tradition (be it Greek, Christian, existentialist, etc.). I'm saying to speculate that Harry Potter (the character) was following a Christian morality (when really his morality could be called secular humanist as well) just seems a little silly to me.
Analysis= good.
Putting religion into something that is clearly not really religious= not so good.That's all.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Elemenope
ModeratorPutting religion into something that is clearly not really religious= not so good.
I agree. Problem is, HP does have some explicitly (as in, author noted) Christian themes. So it isn't exactly off-base to look at HP through a Christian prism. And more generally, since the religion is so deeply infused in Western textual traditions (as in, 2000 years deep), I think you'd be hard pressed to find a text that couldn't be analyzed fruitfully using Christian literary categories.
Existentialism itself is deeply entwined with Christianity, both as a positive element (Kierkegaard/Tillich) and as something to be reacted against (Nietzsche/Sartre). It is perhaps close to impossible to decipher the rich texts of existentialism without prior familiarity with the categories and texts they were acting with or reacting against.
Posted 2 years ago # -
From the article:
“I see him best as a seeker in a world where Christianity is not the vocabulary. I see him best as a seeker trying to live a life of faith in the same way a Christian seeker tries to live a life grace,” Tumminio told CNN.
Tumminio said she wrote God and Harry Potter at Yale: Teaching Faith and Fantasy Fiction in an Ivy League Classroom, to explore the contention by conservative Christians that Harry Potter is akin to heresy.
“I felt like the conversation about the Harry Potter series among Christians was really narrow,” Tumminio said.
So, this author is responding to the conservative nuttery that thinks that HP is evil and should be burned. These are the same folks that criticize the Simpsons and Madonna.
I mean, c'mon!
This woman can write about whatever she wants to, but rather than argue that HP is following Christian morality (when really he's equally humanist) rather than point out the fact that the fundies are ridiculous seems a little too legitimizing of the fundie side of the argument than it should be.
I dunno. It just seems silly to me.
And yes, I agree that analyzing symbols in literature is a meaningful activity. I'm not against that.
I guess I'm insulted because I don't think one has to be a Christian to be a "seeker." I don't see HP as a Christian book. I see it as a book with *some* Christian symbols in it. It also has a LOT of Greek epic symbols in it as well. In fact, I could possibly even argue that Hermione/Harry/Ron represent the classical Greek tripartite soul (reason/spirit(courage)/appetite). So for me HP is more a classical tale than a Christian one.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"I guess I'm insulted because I don't think one has to be a Christian to be a "seeker."
I have no idea how Rowling feels, but I think most functioning human beings would also agree. However, I think it's worth noting that someone has singled out Christian themes through out (her) their work. In order to properly analyze such works, it's worth analyzing whether or not Harry fits the mold.
Whether or not Harry Potter is worth analyzing at all is a completely different manner.
Posted 2 years ago # -
That's just the problem, tho... which "morality" is the Christian one? The one where slaves are ordered to obey their masters (Hermione worked toward the freedom of house elves/ Harry set Dobbie free)? How about when Paul tells women to sit down and shut up (again Hermione is a strong, smart, and capable strong female leader, as is Professor McGonagal)? Is there some kind of excessive emphasis on physical purity or special eating laws or against gluttony (puking up slugs or eating Bertie Bott's bogie/vomit/earwax flavored beans or eating huge banquets of food secretly prepared by house elves seems to suggest otherwise)? How about being told to obey one's government (Harry repeatedly thwarts the Ministry of Magic)? How about an open rejection of gay people (Rowling herself leaked that Dumbledor was gay)?
If the supposed "Christian" morality is the "love" message in HP, well, I suggest that this is a morality that many, many ethical systems possess. If JK herself links HP to Jesus, it still is only HER sanitized version of it.
Yes I think it's fine to analyze in that context. No, I don't think that HP resembles Christianity or even basic Christian morality above other sorts of morality. That's all I'm saying.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Well, literary analysis must go far deeper than simply examining simple moral problems in respect to the characters, but look at what imagery and symbols are most prevalent. For instance, the parallels in C.S. Lewis' Pilgrim's Progress and the end of Chamber of Secrets is uncanny: Harry goes into the Chamber (Hell/underworld in PP), is saved by his faith in Dumbledore (in PP, faith in God the Father), rescues a virginal girl, and then is victorious over evil.
Then, of course, Deathly Hallows is so loaded with Christian allegory that it might as well be under religious fiction. HP dying and coming back to life to save humanity (in a chapter called "King's Cross", and talking to a father-god figure), the use of the trinity concept, using a Bible verse as Dumbledore's tomb message as well as his parents.
It's not as overt as Lewis' or Tolkien's works, but the Christian themes are certainly present. Especially because JK Rowling felt that talking about her faith would somehow ruin the ending... meaning Harry's story is not exactly an original tale.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Elemenope
ModeratorI get your point that Christian morality is an ever-moving target, but I think that in part has to do with the simple fact that ethical systems (even--nay, especially--religious ones) are affected by their cultural situation. Portrayals of Christian moral values in the modern world must wrestle with how those Bronze Age itinerant shepherd values are made compatible with ours (although, in truth, a good argument can be made that the HP wizarding world itself bears hallmarks of being an atavism of medieval values and structures).
The one where slaves are ordered to obey their masters (Hermione worked toward the freedom of house elves/ Harry set Dobbie free)?
Those things aren't in conflict. The house elves do obey their masters, and that has no bearing on what Hermione advocates for or Harry does. In the ancient world, Christians tended to view manumission of slaves (individually and as a group) as a supererogatory good and not a moral duty, but still a good thing; Hermione's advocacy to that end (not being a slave herself) would be consistent with those strictures.
Is there some kind of excessive emphasis on physical purity or special eating laws or against gluttony (puking up slugs or eating Bertie Bott's bogie/vomit/earwax flavored beans or eating huge banquets of food secretly prepared by house elves seems to suggest otherwise)?
The purity laws would be more of a Hebrew ritual that Jesus can be read as having spoken out against (e.g. "it is not what goes into your mouth that makes you unclean, but what comes out..."). The only explicitly gluttonous characters presented are Crabb and Goyle, who are both evil.
How about when Paul tells women to sit down and shut up (again Hermione is a strong, smart, and capable strong female leader, as is Professor McGonagal)?
There are many cases of strong women in the Bible (so the mere presence of strong women is not a problem, strictly speaking), and they don't do any religious instruction in the HP text. Only on historical and technical matters.
How about being told to obey one's government (Harry repeatedly thwarts the Ministry of Magic)? How about an open rejection of gay people (Rowling herself leaked that Dumbledore was gay)?
These would be those modern intersections. Most of them are cultural prohibitions which have proved to be not critical to the practice of Christianity, and so their contravention (if that is what is in fact going on; plenty of argument there) is not really salient to whether the work is Christian or not.
If the supposed "Christian" morality is the "love" message in HP, well, I suggest that this is a morality that many, many ethical systems possess. If JK herself links HP to Jesus, it still is only HER sanitized version of it.
I think more properly it is "a sacrificial love on behalf of the whole world that in resurrection after death conquers a personified evil (in the form of a snake)", so that narrows the field a bit. Also, while authors don't control the meaning of the text, their intentions (if known) can inform how the text was intended to be read. So while a person who was versed in Hellenic lore (and ignorant of Christian lore) may be more apt to read, say, Dionysus, into the story instead of Jesus (and it would be legitimate to do so), it is plainly legitimate to read Jesus into the text as was intended by the author. That's why I don't understand your being offended or off-put by someone doing that. Especially since I don't think anyone is arguing the text must be understood as *exclusively* Christian, or as a flat-out Christian allegory (like Narnia); there's plenty of room for other influences and interpretations.
In fact, I could possibly even argue that Hermione/Harry/Ron represent the classical Greek tripartite soul (reason/spirit(courage)/appetite).
I like this, quite a bit.
Posted 2 years ago # -
LRA, I don't like this artificial distinction between humanism and Christianity. Shockingly, one can be both. And LMNOP is right in that you can read any story *correctly* in a number of different ways. A Dionysian reading can coexist with a Christian one. A Greek quest epic can also have Christian themes, etc. Certainly humanism and Christianity can play nicely.
I think you just have to remember that just because some chica is teaching a Christian reading of HP at Yale does not mean a) that that is the only good reading, b) that such a reading diminishes other readings, and c) that this lady herself would not easily admit that there are other perfectly good ways to read the same text. I guarantee she would. It's her profession: she knows what's up.
Additionally, I don't think this legitimizes nuttery at all. In fact, I think its an engaging and subtle rebuke to that kind of dogmatic thinking. It's as if this reading is saying: the way *you* read something is not the only correct way to read it. It's an argument against dogmatism, packaged in a way that might attract people from many walks of life. That isn't the same thing as pandering. In fact, I tend to regard your rejection of that reading as dogmatic (although perhaps that's not entirely fair of me.)
Posted 2 years ago # -
UrsaMinor
MemberNothing in HP leapt out at me as being explicitly Christian, but then I was reading the series for entertainment. You know, feet up and mind in neutral. Sure, when I look back, I can see some things that might be taken as Christian allegories, but many Christian themes are not exclusive to Christianity anyway. So where does that leave us?
I totally agree with LRA. The ending of the series was very disappointing.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Elemenope
ModeratorAdditionally, I don't think this legitimizes nuttery at all. In fact, I think its an engaging and subtle rebuke to that kind of dogmatic thinking. It's as if this reading is saying: the way *you* read something is not the only correct way to read it. It's an argument against dogmatism, packaged in a way that might attract people from many walks of life. That isn't the same thing as pandering. In fact, I tend to regard your rejection of that reading as dogmatic (although perhaps that's not entirely fair of me.)
This, so much. I'm sure it tweaks fundies *far more* the idea that HP can be read in a Christian way and they're just reading it wrong, than the idea that HP is simply satanic and just one more in a long line of things to avoid and/or bitch endlessly about.
Also, this is indeed the better question. :D
It highlights (in some ways) the difference between a "rich" text and a "good" text. The Matrix Trilogy is often held up as an example of this distinction (sometimes fairly, sometimes not); there can be a lot of analytical depth to a text and it can still be dross, in a literary sense. In other words, your characters can be still be cardboardy and your plot derivative if they're talking about Plato than if they're talking about more mundane matters (sometimes, moreso; pheer the infodump!).
Now, I tend to enjoy texts *because* they are analytically rich (and I'll gladly defend HP, the Matrix Trilogy, et al. on that basis), but that's not how most people enjoy literature/art.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Ok- clearly I'm not being clear enough here. I don't mind interpretations or analyses of text through various lenses. That's fine. Also, I haven't sat down to write a critical paper about this book on the so-called Christianity of HP (which is something that literary scholars often do-- you know rebut each other). I'm merely stating MY OPINION about the situation.
Is that ok? Am I allowed to have a cranky opinion every now and again? Is it ok that the article and the multiple responses below it made me cranky and opinionated?
*cranky, grumble, grouse*
Posted 2 years ago # -
Elemenope
ModeratorIs that ok? Am I allowed to have a cranky opinion every now and again? Is it ok that the article and the multiple responses below it made me cranky and opinionated?
Of course. But then when you express it in a place like this, you invite a playful pig-pile of contrariness.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I was also disappionted by the ending LRA, but I was similarly disappointed by the beginning and middle.
Posted 2 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.