Harry Potter-Antichrist Jr.

My parents were smart enough never to censor my reading material, even though my teachers were upset that I was reading "grown-up" books in elementary school. My mother was called in to discuss this and told my teacher, "well, if little Flora doesn't understand what's in the book, then it won't hurt her, and if she does understand it, then she's obviously old enough to read it."

Goodness, I was reading Charles Addams and Edmund Pearson's "Studies in Murder" and my father's Playboys when I was eight! As of yet, I haven't become a serial killer or a sex maniac. Give kids a little credit for intelligence, and maybe they'll develop some.

[David B]

Orangecakes said:because I personally,wouldn't want my son to read this. I do believe it is occult,and therefore evil.Not having read the books myself, what, exactly, makes you believe this? Have you read any of the books?I don't agree with banning the books. I just don't want my child reading them. I do applaud your stance in opposing the book banning and taking actual parental involvement.I was,way back when,slightly involved in the occult,it's real, and no fun at all."Real" how?

[Pickman's Model]

Well, I've mentioned this before, but I got in trouble in high school for reading Andersonville and The Caine Mutiny, which various school personnel thought I shouldn't be reading; and I got in big time trouble in the service when the first sergeant found a copy of The Communist Manifesto on a shelf above my bunk in the barracks. But I was allowed to read whatever I wanted to----and my parents would discuss with me what I was reading. They were involved, and I think that's the key point here. You have to know what your kid is reading, and you have to know how it's affecting him or her.

Do I think books should be banned? Absolutely not. I think there are some that kids should probably not be exposed to until they reach a certain age; say, Helter Skelter, or The Satanic Bible, or The Anarchist Cookbook, or The Illustrated Pictorial History of Operational Gas Chambers at the Treblinka Death Camp (ok, I made the last one up---but you get the idea), but I certainly would not ban them. In any case, the kids are going to be too young to understand them anyway, until they get to be a certain age. I do not agree with banning books. Any books. The only time I'd start to worry is if the kid grows up and runs for office with an idea of using The Prince for his domestic policy, or if he suddenly expresses a desire to marry the girl down the street while he has a copy of The Graphic History of Countess Elizabeth Bartholy's Sadomasochistic Torture Chambers under his arm. (Ok, I made that one up, too---but you get the idea. :))

[Boris B]

Dang it, orangecakes, it took you one minute to get my clever gag! So I guess it wasn't very clever, or maybe you're just very quick with gags. I feel so inadequate!

Not really. Actually, there is an interesting point here. There isn't necessarily a difference between religion and the occult, except that religion is the mainstream and the occult is the underground. I mean, isn't Harry Potter a good guy? Doesn't he fight bad so justice and weal will triumph? I'm not very familiar with the books, but that's the idea I've gotten.

Harry seems like kind of the same thing as Superman or Beowulf or Heracles - a good guy with non-Biblical super powers. I just hope no one bans Beowulf or classical mythology from the schools.

[Ukulele Ike]

Orangecakes, if you were into the occult, and it wasn't fun, then you simply weren't doing it right.



------------------
Uke

From the original post:
I do believe it is occult,and therefore evil.

Have you read any of the books? They are a light-hearted presentation of magic, I'm not sure how they can be classified as "evil".

Should parents draw the line at all,anywhere? Are there any books You wouldn't want your child to read? Should they be banned from school libraries?

I'm sure that's happening already, with the consent of a vast majority of parents. I doubt any school library has the latest issue of Hustler magazine, or "120 days of Sodom" by the Marquis de Sade. I doubt anyone could succesfully start a large-scale movement to make those available in schools, either.

------------------
Jacques Kilchoer
Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains.

[aseymayo]

The only evil I've found in the Harry Potter books is in the third one - the word "sherberts" (p.197). I certainly don't want children seeing that!

[RickG]

I, for one, have read the first book in the Harry Potter series (HP and the Sorceror's Stone). Both my wife and I read it, and we both liked it very much. Kind of Roald-Dahl-meets-(insert your favorite hack fantasy writer here). Generally light-hearted, but definitely some stuff that would be too intense for a very young child. We decided that our 4-year-old was too young for it, but when she's seven or eight, we'll probably let her have it if she wants. Seems to be pitched more at the 10-12 year old market, though (Harry is 11 when he goes off to wizard school).

Anyway, since the messages of the book (such as there are) include the value of honor, loyalty to your friends, good triumphing over evil, good sportsmanship, and the dangers of getting everything you want, I don't see how anyone could see it as evil.

Rick

[GuanoLad]

I agree. The Harry Potter books are light-hearted, with a fantasy setting. Magic isn't occult by default, and if you read these kinds of books one of their points they are making is that it's how you use it that counts. If you use it for evil, then you're evil, if you use it for good, then you're good. Just like with anything.

Mind you, Harry Potter does keep breaking the school rules all the time. I'm not so happy about that aspect myself.



------------------
"Waheeey! 'Duck!' Get it?"
"Errr.... No..."
"Duck! Sounds almost exactly like fu-"

Just heard there are some parents in Alabama who want the Harry Potter books out of the libraries because he is portrayed as a wizard,and there is much occult indoctrination in the books. I feel I should have put this in the pit,because I personally,wouldn't want my son to read this. I do believe it is occult,and therefore evil.I am sure no one else here agrees with me,and pl will probably burn my butt,but..let me say I don't agree with banning the books. I just don't want my child reading them. I was,way back when,slightly involved in the occult,it's real, and no fun at all. Should parents draw the line at all,anywhere? Are there any books You wouldn't want your child to read? Should they be banned from school libraries? Thank you.

------------------
If you can read this,youre too close.

[JoeBlank]

Methinks there is a difference between occult and fantasy. Shall we ban the following, all of which have references to "the occult" and/or magic: The Wizard of Oz, Lord of the Rings, Hansel and Gretel (sp?), Macbeth, Star Wars, and The Chronicles of Narnia? Folks may be getting carried away. This talk of banning took place in Metro-Atlanta too. My thought was the kids were lining up outside a freaking BOOKSTORE to buy a BOOK to READ, instead of buying a video game, watching TV, or going to the movies, and someone has to find fault. Fantasy is a part of childhood. Reading should be too.

[Boris B]

There was a book I remember reading, set in the Middle East. It seems there was this man, who was leading his ethnic group through a very dry region, who had been given some sort of a magic wand by a diety. He used the wand to get water for his people. Would the parents consider this occult indoctrination?

Actually, I also remember a part in the book about a soothsayer, who magically healed and fed people, and claimed his powers derived from his descent from a diety. I'm a little fuzzy on the details, but later on this individual, more or less a demigod, was executed. So, it's a pretty violent book with lots of occult overtones. I don't think it's banned though.

[Falcon]

Whenever I have a child, there are plenty of books I won't want him/her to read. (At a certain age, of course. Once they reach teenagerhood, they can read whatever the hell they want....)

However, banning books ain't the solution here. OC, I think I'm in agreement with you when I say that if you don't like a certain book, it's the PARENT'S job to decide if it's appropriate for their child. Not anyone else's. What I think is okay may not be the same as anyone else's, and I don't feel I have the right to impose my decisions on anyone else.

BTW, OC, I applaud you for saying that even though you think the books are "evil" (which I disagree on), you don't think they should be banned. If only everyone thought this way... *sigh*

Boris,very funny :D

------------------
If you can read this,youre too close.

[kknick34]

If parents don't want their kids reading H Potter, then they shouldn't let them. But don't make the libraries ban them because they are too lazy to monitor what their children are reading. There are plenty of books in most public libraries which are worse than Mr. Potter's works, should we ban every book that deals with occult themes?

[copy ed]

I have read all three Harry Potter books, as has my third-grade son. News out yesterday that S.C. state school honchos being petitioned to ban books from all school classrooms and libraries because of wizards, magic, etc. What a shame. These are good kids' books, with better characterization and more interesting to today's kids than, say, the Wizard of Oz books. Certainly better than Animorphs, Goosebumps and their ilk. The problem to some may be that the wizards and witches are the good guys, and that religion simply isn't mentioned at all, pro or con. That seems like a plus to me. After all, if religion were featured in all children's literature, whose should it be?

No,I haven't read the books. I know that Harry is supposed to be a self-discovered wizard,and I do know a little about wizardry,much of which Is mentioned as wrong in the Bible:Not using divination or powers that come supposedly from the devil. So I would rather not my son read this and think,hey maybe I can cast spells. I've done so in the past. Real?Well,not by James Randi's viewpoint,but I don't always have witnesses around me. What if there were popular kids books on the market that had the main character throwing cats in the river? I wouldn't want him reading That either! Like I said,I don't want books Banned;I thought it was quite legal for Mr. Flynt to publish his joke about Mr. Falwell,and pretty stupid of Jerry to make a huge publicity thing about it.

------------------
If you can read this,youre too close.

[GLWasteful]

oc:I've done so in the past.
I would be very curious to know more about the spells that you say you have cast.


Real? Well,not by James Randi's viewpoint, but I don't always have witnesses around me.
I'm more interested in my viewpoint, actually.


What if there were popular kids books on the market that had the main character throwing cats in the river? I wouldn't want him reading That either! Like I said, I don't want books Banned;
Offhand, I can't imagine for even a moment that a book with a protagonist who throws cats into the river would do that well, but I suppose that it's possible.

And I admire you for not wanting to ban books, but simply to exercise parental authority inre which books are acceptable for your son, but I hope you accept that eventually, he will do whatever he wants.

Waste
Flick Lives!

[Pickman's Model]

Personally, I don't see any harm in the Harry Potter books. I think that kids are a lot smarter and more perceptive than we give them credit for, and they can tell the difference between reality and fantasy magic in a storybook. I read Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle's Magic repeatedly when I was around seven or eight or so, and I certainly didn't grow up to be Anton LeVey II.

And look at it this way: even if they succeed in banning them, so what? They'll be in good company. Consider books like Catcher In the Rye, which dealt with teenage angst (could be dangerous!!!) or Slaughterhouse Five, because of the sexual innuendo concerning Montana Wildhack (gasp!); or Huckleberry Finn, which was denigrating to blacks because Jim talked like Stepin Fetchit. (Big deal. It took place in what, 1850? Did black slaves talk that way at the time? Yeah. So what's got your garters in a twist? It's historically accurate, then. Relax.) Are those books still around? You betcha they are; you can walk into any Barnes and Noble and walk out with brand-new editions of all of them, and many more that have been banned over the years. My prophecy is that we'll be seeing Harry Potter around for a long, long, time, banned or not. Which is as it should be.

[David B]

Orangecakes said:No,I haven't read the books.Um, if you haven't read the books, how do you know they are occult/evil/whatever?I know that Harry is supposed to be a self-discovered wizard,and I do know a little about wizardry,much of which Is mentioned as wrong in the Bible:Not using divination or powers that come supposedly from the devil.So, then, you don't plan to allow your children to ever read, say, The Hobbit? Or pretty much anything in the fantasy section of the bookstore? It's fantasy fiction here; we're not talking about Harry Potter's How-To Guide on Becoming a Wizard.So I would rather not my son read this and think,hey maybe I can cast spells.If your son watched Star Trek, would he think he can beam up to a starship? If he watched Star Wars, would he think he can use the force? If he watched The Wizard of Oz, would he think he can ride a tornado to a land of short people? I really do have to say that I think you are underestimating your son's ability to distinguish between fantasy and reality.

I do admire the fact that you are not trying to ban these books for anybody else, but I also think you are overreacting a bit for your own child.

David, I do appreciate you all here. I thought I was gonna be run off the board.You've been quite nice,must've been reading Disney books lately. You do have a point. My son watches the coyote fall over a cliff and come back up intact. Some slow people might think to try this,I meant he could get an idea of interest in the occult from reading about wizards,even though he would know that the books are fantasy. Of course,I can always explain to him about real-life wizardry,and why it is wrong according to my beliefs. Like I said,you've been nice,come on up to Ohio and I'll buy ya a beer! :D

[phouka]

orangecakes,

I picked up the first Harry Potter book last night and read it, and I have to say that it's an absolutely charming book

Magic is not presented as a "it'll solve all your problems and make you a better person" idea. All the characters - magicians and muggles - are presented as real people.

There are two characters that I think you might consider as occult (I'm guessing that you define occult as using magic for selfish or evil ends, and not as "Hidden from the eye or the understanding; inviable; secret; concealed; unknown."), however, they are both villains in the classic sense, and it's made very clear what the unpleasant consequences of occult magic are.

Really, the use of magic in the story is only a plot device. The story itself is of a young boy who makes friends, learns important lessons, and finds his own self-worth.

It was a quick read for me, and I'd suggest that you pick up a copy for yourself and read it. It may not be to your taste, but I honestly don't think it's as dangerous as you've heard.

Yes,youre correct about my definition of occult. I will pick one up,as its in my sons library. However,he is 6.5 and not reading quite yet,so its a bit abovce his level right now anyway.

------------------
The poster beneath me is really smart!

[C K Dexter Haven]

I suggest you take a look at Disney's SLEEPING BEAUTY. The Harry Potter wizards are not too far removed from the three good fairies. If you think that's demonic and satanic, then you should censor your kids' reading VERRRRRRY carefully.

Most 11-year olds fantasize having miraculous powers -- a fairy godmother, a magic wand, a wishing ring, a genii in a lamp. It's a normal and healthy part of growing up, when you're young enough to believe that you can do good in the world, but you're old enough to realize that you're not empowered.

My suggestion is to focus on the intent of a work of literature or film, and not on the trivial. Many posters on this topic have mentioned The Wizard of Oz, a great example. The whole point of that movie (like Harry Potter) is that the child can do a great deal of good in the battle between good vs evil (represented by good witch and bad witch in Oz). The fact that evil is represented by a bad witch and good by a good witch is irrelevant. The question is how those witches are used in the story.

An 11-year old with no fascination with magic would, I suppose, instead be reading about serial murderers and rapists and Nazi torturers. I think it's better by far to let them read about witches and sorcerers who must choose to do good or to do evil.

[Lumpy]

Why not ban reruns of "Bewitched" while we're at it?

[kaylasdad99]

It's good to see a Harry Potter thread here. I am, however, just a bit disappointed that it was begun with a reference to whether it's too evil for public consumption. I'd been hoping to contribute to a discussion of some of the plot points/background infrastructure. Oh, well. This is Great Debates, after all.

(Funny, this board won't let me go back and review the topic so I can address a remark to the person who brought up a particular point. I'll just have to wing it.)

With regard to the point that religion is not considered a part of the stories at all, I feel I must point out that all three books so far have dealt with Harry's activities during the Christmas and Easter holidays, sometimes with occurrences which are indispensable to the story line.

It strikes me that Ms Rowling is cheating a bit (taking the easy way out by not mentioning religion, but nevertheless utilizing certain cultural references that have their bases in the dominant religious practices of her chosen locale).

Orangecakes, if you have any interest in reading for your own pleasure (and I presume you do, or you would not likely be here), I urge you to head down to your local library and check out Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. (actually, that may be a bit naive on my part; from what I've heard, these books have a long waiting list) Or, you could head on down to the local super bookstore and find it in paperback (imagine my chagrin upon finding that this was available two weeks after shelling out real bux for the hardcover). I really think you'll find it enjoyable and harmless for children of all ages. Not a single reference to the Necronomicon. :)

[andros]

Back to the OP:

Are there any books You wouldn't want your child to read? Should they be banned from school libraries?

These are two very different questions, 'Cakes. Absolutely, there are books I want my child to avoid until he is old enough (in my opinion) to understand them.

Should they be banned? Some schools keep a list of "restricted" books, which a child may only check out with parental approval. That sounds like it might work. But maybe not. Perhaps the best bet is for parents to provide reading materials that the school doesn't. And then to ensure that the child understands what he's reading.

But that might take a little too much parental involvement.

-andros-

[tomndebb]

Lumpy:Why not ban reruns of "Bewitched" while we're at it?
Did you post that knowing or not knowing that several fundy groups tried to organize protests against Sabrina for "making witchcraft look acceptable" to young teenagers?

------------------
Tom~

[AuraSeer]

Obligatory Pagan Interjection:
What's wrong with making witchcraft "look acceptable"? You might as well ban Fiddler On The Roof while you're at it, for making Judaism "look acceptable".

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread, already in progress.

[Jedi-667]

Please, God! Don't let them start banning books. The freedom of the press is a peice of the glue that holds this Country together!
If you don't want your children to read certain books...MONITOR what they read.
After all what would you ban?
books with: murder, adultry, magic, occult, and all out EVIL?
Guess what? You just helped ban the bible too! The same right that helps us keep our bible, also gives others the right to read what they please.
Banning books because a few people don't like the content, will not change a thing...only make them worse

[tomndebb]

Well, I object to making witchcraft look acceptable. Once you do that, where are kids going to turn in order to shock their parents? They're liable to start becoming Methodists or Catholics, for gosh sakes, just to irritate the old people!

------------------
Tom~

[David B]

Jedi said:If you don't want your children to read certain books...MONITOR what they read.
After all what would you ban?
books with: murder, adultry, magic, occult, and all out EVIL?
Guess what? You just helped ban the bible too!Ok, so you're saying there would be an upside...

[andros]

Jedi, I would think there would be a distinction between public libraries and school libraries.

Parents cannot directly monitor what their child reads at school.

-andros-

[tracer]

Jedi-667 wrote:

The same right that helps us keep our bible, also gives others the right to read what they please.

What do you mean "our bible"?

I would guess that he's speaking to fundamentalists who want the book banned who might be lurking. He does share the Bible with them.

Jedi seems to be a little out of depth and umm... fervrent... but he seems to be on your side in this one tracer.

I doubt that he assumes we're all Christians here, after Auraseer's post.

--John
Trying to keep down the flames.

[longhair75]

friend orangecakes,

you asked: Are there any books You wouldn't want your child to read? Should they be banned from school libraries?

while my children were in school, i discussed what they were reading (both in class and out)with them on a regular basis. the intent was not to censor their reading, but to help them understand what they were reading.

when books are banned, it leads me to wondering who is selecting these books, and why are they banning them. i am all in favor of you monitoring what your children read, but leave the rest of the kids alone.

a parent has the right, and the responsibilty to make decisions for their children, but why should their decisions be binding on my children? doesn't that interfere with my parental rights?



------------------
"don't get strung out by the way that i look, don't judge a book by it's cover" (tim curry as dr. franknfurter in rhps)

Oh no! David B.(my favorite moderator,wants to ban the bible! :( You just read it for the dirty parts,Dave ;)

longhaired one,you sum up my feelings perfectly. I don't want Anything banned(bookwise). Like I said,I'm a big John Waters fan.I do monitor my sons reading(he's only 6),but when he's older,I hope he'll show discernment(hopefully,no necronomicon!).

[tracer]

Oh, I dunno, I think the Necronomicon would provide quite a bit of entertaining reading!

(Too bad it doesn't really exist.)

[kaylasdad99]

Polycarp said:Oh, I dunno, I think the Necronomicon would provide quite a bit of entertaining reading!
(Too bad it doesn't really exist.)

That's odd. I could have sworn I saw an ad for it in Parade Magazine, years and years ago, being offered by the Franklin Mint, or one of those other "collectibles" mills.

I'd apologize for hijacking the thread, but I'm not even sure whether we're supposed to be discussing the relative harm-ful/-less-ness of Harry Potter, or the more general issue of banning books; FTR, I cast my vote already, and the recent mentions of the Necronomicon call to mind the post in which I did that. So, maybe I'm not hijacking the thread at all, but redirecting it toward its original purpose.

[GuanoLad]

I wonder why they are concentrating on the Harry Potter books anyway? Apart from their obvious popularity. I mean, there are hundreds of fantasy books written for children every year, not least of which are Fairy Tales, which have, interestingly enough, been around forever! Why now is magic in a story considered evil?

Banning books (or anything) just seems to make people more determined to consume something! They are salaciously hungry to see what it was about the thing that was considered so nasty! My thoughts are they'll be sadly disappointed to see that in this case they're tales just like in any other (very entertaining) kid's book.

------------------
"Vyvyan! Where did you get that Howitzer?" "...I found it."

The Legend Of PigeonMan (http://www.hotkey.net.au/~guanolad/pigeonman/) - updates every Wed & Sat

[David B]

Yesterday's Chicago Tribune had a ltter to the editor that was very similar to the OP, but worse (and without the disclaimer about not banning the book). The writer obviously had not read it and was attacking the magic, etc.

[dramatoig]

Frankly, after hearing the segment on NPR this morning about the Potter books turning boys 7 to 9 onto reading, about how they are turning from the Potter books to longer, more complex novels by Orson Scott Card (well, at least the one kid they interviewed), I'm willing to believe Harry Potter is the Second Coming rather than the Anti-Christ. ;)

------------------
"But may I ask, at heart, are you an optimist or a pessimist? Those seem to be the only fashionable religions left to us nowadays."
--Oscar Wilde

I suppose they are on the Potter books because they are popular. And there IS a book called the necronomicon. My former boyfriend bought it in a bookstore(on Coventry,pl).I opened it,but I didn't want to read it. The Second Coming??Thats not til future book,Harry Potter,teenager! ;)

[pldennison]

And there IS a book called the necronomicon. My former boyfriend bought it in a bookstore(on Coventry,pl).

Mac's Backs, next door to Tommy's? I know it well! (Tommy's, BTW, has THE best vegetarian menu in NE Ohio, bar none. And they serve plenty of carnivore food, too.)

Anyway, the "Necronomicon" you find at bookstores is someone's idea to make a lot of money by fooling people who think stuff they read in Lovecraft stories really exists.

------------------
"I love God! He's so deliciously evil!" - Stewie Griffin, Family Guy

[Joel Mathis]

Long time lurker, first time poster who has to mention this.

There is the Necronomicon as written of by H.P. Lovecraft and then there's the Necronomicon (multiple versions actually) that are sold on bookshelves. The Necronomicon that people talk about is the one H.P. Lovecraft invented for his stories. Despite what some people claim there was no Necronomicon before he made it up. Later on several people got the idea that writing their own and publishing it would be a quick way to make a buck.

So, The Necronomicon doesn't exist, but people have hijacked the name in order to make a Necronomicon.

pl,no It was a bookstore across from Tommy's. Oh yes,I agree!I LOVE the falafel burgers and fresh fruit freezes there! Lets do lunch sometime! O.C.

[Polycarp]

Kaylasdad said that Polycarp said:
Oh, I dunno, I think the Necronomicon would provide quite a bit of entertaining reading!
(Too bad it doesn't really exist.)

That was Tracer. Nice guy, and I often agree with him. Not this time, though! Being torn limb from limb by invisible demons in broad daylight would ruin my entire day! :)

[kaylasdad99]

oops.

[GuanoLad]

Necrotelecomnicon
Telephone Book Of The Dead



------------------
"Vyvyan! Where did you get that Howitzer?" "...I found it."

The Legend Of PigeonMan (http://www.hotkey.net.au/~guanolad/pigeonman/) - updates every Wed & Sat

[AzRaek]

Orangecakes: your son is 6.5 (years I assume) and not reading "quite yet"?!? Please get him to start reading! I'll send you him old Dr Seuss books if you like.

------------------
I'll be there
Where I'll teach what I've been taught
And I've been taught...

[kaylasdad99]

Joel Mathis

Please don't interpret this as a personal flame. But I must raise a red flag that was inspired by your first line:Long time lurker, first time poster who has to mention this.

To all newbies: I'd rather not see this type of line in these GD threads. I doubt that I'm the only one who enjoys coming here because it bears so little resemblance to talk radio. ;)

As much as I wish to avoid appearing pompous, overbearing, and usurping of the prerogatives of the moderator, I couldn't resist getting that off my chest.

"Unauthorized Thread! You are entering Cuban airspace! Reverse course immediately, or be prepared to be escorted to a landing at our airbase, followed by immediate detention and confiscation of your craft!"

Yes,he is in the process of learning to read. He started first grade in Sept. I read To him all the time,he has 30 books. He's spelling sentences now,on his own! He wrote no smoking and stuck it in an elevator. Can't resist: he spells just as good as heatherlee! :D (i love ya,heath)

[Persephone]

I haven't read the Harry Potter books (my kids are waaaaay too young yet), but I've got to put my opinion in here.

I will monitor my kids' reading material, as my parents monitored mine. That's in my job specs as "parent." I have no trouble with this. The thought of someone else telling my kids what they can and cannot read, though, pisses me off to no end.

From what I understand, kids who don't like to read are snapping this book up, and right quick. What's the problem here? Let 'em read it. PLEASE!

[Surgoshan]

Huh. My mom got me this book and I said, "Hey, Harry Potter! I saw this on" and she said "Yeah, it's getting really popular." I thought to myself "popular with 7 and 8 year olds, I heard." Shrug, I may be 18 but I'm desperate for reading material.

So far as I can this book is not evil. Far from it! It draws very clear distinctions between good and evil, with its own devil figure (You-Know-Who, AKA Voldemorte: BTW, I'd like an etymology on that name, I can see death, but not the first part). Anyway, the only thing I can see that would really get anyone's backs up is that Harry seems posited as a Messiah figure and, of course, the use of magic.

As for the magic, I'm 260 pages into the 300 page book, and it's only showed up as a background force Harry's not too concerned with (except for the riding of brooms).

As for the Messiah figure. Well, his very nature seems to have defeated the devil figure, back when he was an infant.

Otherwise, he's a kid determined to get back at jerks and fight the devil. What's so bad about that?

[kaylasdad99]

Sorry, Surgoshan, but it would not be fair to you to provide you with anything resembling a clue as to the origin of Voldemort's name. You will find out why I say this when you read a subsequent book. (As I'm sure you're going to do ;))

[kaylasdad99]

Ah, what the hell. It's only going to be a red herring anyway. Also, it's a WAG. Vol+de could be pronounced in some ME dialect as Fol+de, and translated as full of; hence, Voldemort could mean "full of death". It could also mean "Fool of Death" (a member at the court for the King of Death?). The whole thing is complicated by the fact that, as a writer of fantasy, J.K. Rowling is not constrained by the rules that tend to bind actual etymologists and philologists.

In other words, try not to lose any sleep over it. Understanding will come to you in time, always provided that you continue to read the books.

[Hello Again]

Orangecakes,

One thing that always jumps to my mind when I hear people go off on Harry as being satanistic in some way -- he has to take "Defense Against the Dark Arts" as one of his required subjects! The "magic" is strictly of the "white" variety -- the wizards don't use any technology (ie they don't own or use cars). Anyway, it's just a background to the larger story. ok, this was rambling.


------------------
This space intentionally left blank

[tracer]

Polycarp wrote:

That was Tracer. Nice guy,

Heh heh heh. To quote Bugs Bunny (who was probably quoting some radio personality), "He don't know me vewwy well, do he?"

[CatInHat]

FWIW, there was an article in yesterday's New York Times on this subject. Let's see if I can make the URL code work:

Don't Give Us Little Wizards, the Anti-Potter Parents Cry (http://search.nytimes.com/search/daily/bin/fastweb?getdoc+site+site+81031+8+wAAA+harry%7Epotter)

You need to sign up as a "subscriber" to read the NYTimes on the web, but it doesn't cost anything.

------------------
Never attribute to malice anything that can be attributed to stupidity.
-- Unknown

[Surgoshan]

You know, the book shows clear rewards for values I think most Christians would appreciate. In the end, Harry is rewarded for "pure nerve and outstanding courage" and his friends are rewarded for "the best game of chess seen in many years" (in which the best player sacrificed himself so the others could win), the bravery to stand up to one's friends, and "cool logic in the face of fire."

I can't see how they'd object to any of those (except maybe logic :)).

[copy ed]

Actually, parent complained to education officials in S.C. about the chess game part you mentioned, along the lines of children being used as chess pieces and put in danger devalues human life. She also objected to magic, wizardry in books.
I can't agree. Many great (and not so great) books show children in danger. Isn't dramatic tension part of plotting a novel?

[Surgoshan]

Well, the point of this was not to build suspense because of the danger to children ( a bit deep for a children's novel). Instead it's supposed to be kids doing marvelous things (like beating a wizard and a wizard's puzzles, when it's just kids!).

And don't they believe that it's a good thing for the children to throw their lives away for a greater cause (god, country, sex)?

------------------
Draft me and I'll AWOL. Imprison me and I'll run. Shoot me and I won't die, just to annoy you.

[PunditLisa]

I think the Chronicles of Narnia are far darker than the Harry Potter books. They have lots of magic in them, too, and Lewis was a *Christian* writer. I'll encourage my daughters to read the Narnia books when they're a bit older.

The HP books are much tamer than the Narnia Chronicles, and I'll let my 7 year read it when she shows an interest. And I'm pretty conservative with what I let my kids see and watch...

[Surgoshan]

Yeah for you, Lisa! But, what if your kids, when they're a bit older, want to read something you don't approve of (I'm talking 15 years old, reading Zarathustra or something like that). Please please PLEASE don't take any offense to this...

------------------
Draft me and I'll AWOL. Imprison me and I'll run. Shoot me and I won't die, just to annoy you.

[SoulFrost]

Just some links that may help enhance this discussion:

Banned: Little Red Riding Hood, Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, The Story of Doctor Dolittle, and Locke's Essey Concerning Human Understanding
http://digital.library.upenn.edu/books/banned-books.html

Challenged: Of Mice and Men, The Catcher in the Rye, Christine, The Lord of the Flies, Slaughterhouse-Five, The Grapes of Wrath, The Color Purple, etc.
http://www.st-charles.lib.il.us/low/bannedtoo.htm

The Necronomicon Anti-FAQ:
http://www.digital-brilliance.com/necron/necron.htm

-David

[PunditLisa]

As my kids get older, they'll be able to exercise their own judgment a bit more. I'd say at 17 or 18 they'd be able to read whatever they wanted (within reason - obviously I wouldn't allow them to get a Penthouse subscription).

At an earlier age, I'd hope they'd at least know that I wouldn't approve and attempt to hide it, like I did! :) But if it's really inappropriate for their age (e.g. an Erica Jong book) and I see them reading it, I'd probably confiscate it and tell them why I was doing it.

Truly, though, I think "dirty" books will be the least of my problems, with the internet handing them the world at their fingertips. Reading Erica Jong is nothing compared to them interacting with people who I can't see and I don't know. Now THAT concerns me.

[Surgoshan]

I can only say that it's refreshing to see someone so honest "I'd hope they'd at least know that I wouldn't approve and attempt to hide it." I love it!! :)

[sunbear]

I have read parts of it to my son (8). We take turns, so I don't have the whole plot.My problem with these English authors (Dahl, for example) is that they want to stick Oliver Twist in every book involving children.James and the G peach, Willy Wonka, etc etc.Some sort of very mean family with the protagonist overcoming all the meanness or otherwise a very poor family. The Adrian Mole books I enjoyed, but they are not for young children.

[tomndebb]

For better or worse, a lot of Dahl's stuff seems to be fantasy-autobiographical. I haven't heard that he was actually abused as a kid, but he went off to a British public school at a fairly young age at a time when harsh discipline and a fairly rigid system of hazing and bullying were part and parcel of the curriculum. I read one of his non-fiction efforts (can't remember the name--it wasn't really an autobiography) that he wrote prior to his kid stories and was struck by the number of times that an anecdote from his life was repeated in one of the later kid books.

I got the impression that he used his stories for children in order to fantasize how he'd have like to have changed the ending to his own stories.

------------------
Tom~

[Cooper]

As has been pointed out - there are plenty of books that should be banned if we banned all books that met the same criteria Potter's met. Has anyone considered whether this could be a publicity stunt? I mean, all press is good press.

[tomndebb]

Nah.
A) The books are selling like hotcakes; they don't need the little bit of extra publicity this would bring.
B) The group calling for the ban in Alabama is connected with one of the Fundamentalist Christian groups that does perceive any reference to "magic" as an opening for Satan (not ours). (The groups in Georgia and California have similar ties.) These are actual groups with stated goals, not publisher's shills.

------------------
Tom~