You know that scene in Ratatouille where Anton Ego breaks in on a press conference? Linguini is happily -- arrogantly -- fielding questions when Ego's initimidating string bean of a body pushes through the crowd. Threats are made. Taunts are exchanged. And Linguini makes what he believes to be the parting shot:
"You're awfully thin for someone who likes food!"
The crowd gasps. Anton stops, turns, and spits out, "I don't *like* food. I love it. If I don't love it, I. Don't. Swallow."
I've been reading a lot lately. In fact, I've been procrastinating on a full introduction to solid foods because then Kekoa won't need to nurse as often, which means I won't get to read as often. Sad. :(
But the inevitable happens, as it always has in the past. I pick up a fabulous book. I remember how wonderful reading is. I go on a "reading binge," where I frequent the local library and read as if my life depended on it.
And then, that book happens.
You know, the book that has been highly touted and critically acclaimed. The book that is on every single "100 books you must read" list. The one about which you must be able to converse intelligently if you want intellectuals to give you the time of the day.
The book that bores you to tears.
You fight, you struggle, you claw your way to the end. Or maybe you don't - it doesn't really matter. Because when you finish, you are defeated. You are an un-intellectual (or worse, an anti-intellectual). You obviously do not appreciate great art when you read. Your soul must not be developed highly enough to understand, to commune with the truth you encountered.
The binge is over. You can go back to real life now. And when someone says, "Have you read _____?" You may or may not be able to say yes. But whether you finished it or not, you will be forced to hang your head in shame and mumble assent as they gush about how that book formed their soul.
And of course, to say that their soul was formed by an utterly dry, completely pointless, overly wordy piece of junk that somehow wormed its way into the classics wouldn't be at all nice.
This time around, the book for me is Catch-22. It's not that Heller isn't clever. It's that he thinks he is clever, and therefore feels the need to repeat his clever joke again. and again. You thought it was funny when one bureaucrat signs his name as "Washington Irving" to official documents? Well then, it must be twice as funny if TWO officials sign their names as Washington Irving. And maybe throw in a John Milton for good measure.
It's not that the book shouldn't have been written....it's just that the 450 pages could have been written in 100, and probably shouldn't have exceeded 200.
So anyway. I didn't finish it.
But! I am happy to report that I am still reading. Because at last, I have come to the place where I don't have to cram that dry lump of a book down my throat.
Because if I don't love it, then I don't have to swallow it.
Showing posts with label Literature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Literature. Show all posts
Monday, November 19, 2012
Saturday, August 11, 2012
In need of recommendations
I've found myself with a lot more time than I expected. Not time when I can actually do stuff, mind you. I'm talking about feeding times.
Most advice you read on breastfeeding seem to create two categories: women who prize breastfeeding as an almost spiritual experience and give their full and undivided attention at every feed, and women who view it as strictly business and can't wait for the day they wean.
The first is a little melodramatic and unrealistic, and the second is a little sad. I love the time I feed my baby, and I try to give Kekoa my full and undivided attention for a few feeds each day so that he will love it too. BUT every mom needs "me" time too, even if it means free time where I'm pinned down with a baby on my lap.
So I started reading. The Kindle only requires one hand to turn pages, so it's easy to manage without fumbling around. And I'm moving through books a lot faster than I expected!
When Josh started school, I made myself a list of books to read by the time he graduated. Below (italics are the ones I finished during his first year):
1. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (Baum)
2. The Deerslayer (Cooper)
3. The Hunt for Red October (Clancy)
4. A Rose for Emily (Faulkner)
5. The Man Who Knew Too Much (Chesterton)
6. The Face (Koontz)
7. Atlas Shrugged (Rand)
8. Love in the Ruins (Percy)
9. Of Mice and Men (Steinbeck)
10. The Greatest Man in the World (Thurber)
11. Slaughterhouse Five (Vonnegut)
12. Catcher in the Rye (Salinger)
13. For Whom the Bell Tolls (Hemingway)
14. How to Win Friends and Influence People (Carnegie)
15. Swiss Family Robinson (Wyss)
16. The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (Covey)
17. Catch-22 (Heller)
18. Into the Wild (Krakauer)
19. The Divine Comedy (Dante) - I've read Inferno, but not the others
20. East of Eden (Steinbeck)
21. The Thin Red Line (Jones)
22. His Dark Materials (Pullman)
23. Tess of the D'Ubervilles (Hardy)
24. Rebecca (Du Maurier)
25. The Time Traveller's Wife (Niffeneggar)
26. Gone with the Wind (Mitchell) - I have to admit, I started this one, but Scarlett annoyed me so much I put it down. Life is too short to spend it angry with books.
27. The Wind in the Willows (Grahame)
28. Emma (Austen)
29. Persuasion (Austen)
30. The Kite Runner (Hosseini)
31. Memoirs of a Geisha (Golden)
32. Winnie the Pooh (Milne)
33. One Hundred Years of Solitude (Marquez)
34. Life of Pi (Martel)
35. Love in the Time of Cholera (Marquez)
36. The Lovely Bones (Sebold)
37. The Secret Garden (Burnett) - how had I never read this one???? I read the Great Illustrated Classics when I was young.
38. The Little Prince (Saint-Exupery)
39. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (Dahl) - I still love the old movie the best, but reading the book helped me appreciate the new movie as well.
40. Five People You Meet in Heaven
41. The Sound and the Fury (Faulkner) - another I started and put down. Stream of consciousness drives me crazy.
42. Northanger Abbey (Austen)
43. The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (Doyle)
44. Kidnapped (Stevenson)
45. The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood (Pyle)
46. Flowers for Algernon (Keyes)
47. The Time Machine (Wells)
48. The War of the Worlds (Wells)
49. The Art of War (Sunzi)
50. Leaves of Grass (Whitman)
51. The Turn of the Screw (James)
52. The Hunger Games (Collins)
53. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (Hugo)
54. The House of the Spirits (Allende)
55. Fahrenheit 451 (Bradbury)
56. David Copperfield (Dickens)
57. Zorro (Allende)
58. Ask Jeeves (Wodehouse)
59. Three Men and a Maid (Wodehouse)
60. The Kingkiller Chronicles (the third book is not yet released, I've read the first two)
61. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (Kesey)
As you can see, the goal was to be as varied as possible - in writing style, era, topics, cultures, and viewpoints. These are all books I had never read. They made the list because (a) it sounded interesting and I wanted to read it; (b) it was recommended to me; (c) it is a classic and I wanted to be able to say I've read it :P (also, because classics are often referenced and I like understanding those references); or (d) it was free on the kindle.
When I got pregnant, I assumed that I probably wouldn't finish my list. I was okay with that. But I didn't anticipate the time I would have during feedings, and reading is far better than browsing youtube.
60 books. Three years. I've finished (or put down) 27 of them, which leaves me with 33 remaining. Some of them I know I'll love. Others are complete wild cards - I may hate them, love them, or not make it past the first chapter. With literally thousands of books in the world, I don't like to waste time on bad ones.
What I need from you are suggestions for a few more. I would like to reach 75 books total, which I think is reasonable (I worked full-time through most of Josh's first year, and not all the books I read were on this list. So 24 each year should be very doable).
Please, any favorites? Must-reads? Little-known discoveries?
Most advice you read on breastfeeding seem to create two categories: women who prize breastfeeding as an almost spiritual experience and give their full and undivided attention at every feed, and women who view it as strictly business and can't wait for the day they wean.
The first is a little melodramatic and unrealistic, and the second is a little sad. I love the time I feed my baby, and I try to give Kekoa my full and undivided attention for a few feeds each day so that he will love it too. BUT every mom needs "me" time too, even if it means free time where I'm pinned down with a baby on my lap.
So I started reading. The Kindle only requires one hand to turn pages, so it's easy to manage without fumbling around. And I'm moving through books a lot faster than I expected!
When Josh started school, I made myself a list of books to read by the time he graduated. Below (italics are the ones I finished during his first year):
1. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (Baum)
2. The Deerslayer (Cooper)
3. The Hunt for Red October (Clancy)
4. A Rose for Emily (Faulkner)
5. The Man Who Knew Too Much (Chesterton)
6. The Face (Koontz)
7. Atlas Shrugged (Rand)
8. Love in the Ruins (Percy)
9. Of Mice and Men (Steinbeck)
10. The Greatest Man in the World (Thurber)
11. Slaughterhouse Five (Vonnegut)
12. Catcher in the Rye (Salinger)
13. For Whom the Bell Tolls (Hemingway)
14. How to Win Friends and Influence People (Carnegie)
15. Swiss Family Robinson (Wyss)
16. The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (Covey)
17. Catch-22 (Heller)
18. Into the Wild (Krakauer)
19. The Divine Comedy (Dante) - I've read Inferno, but not the others
20. East of Eden (Steinbeck)
21. The Thin Red Line (Jones)
22. His Dark Materials (Pullman)
23. Tess of the D'Ubervilles (Hardy)
24. Rebecca (Du Maurier)
25. The Time Traveller's Wife (Niffeneggar)
27. The Wind in the Willows (Grahame)
28. Emma (Austen)
29. Persuasion (Austen)
30. The Kite Runner (Hosseini)
31. Memoirs of a Geisha (Golden)
32. Winnie the Pooh (Milne)
33. One Hundred Years of Solitude (Marquez)
34. Life of Pi (Martel)
35. Love in the Time of Cholera (Marquez)
36. The Lovely Bones (Sebold)
37. The Secret Garden (Burnett) - how had I never read this one???? I read the Great Illustrated Classics when I was young.
38. The Little Prince (Saint-Exupery)
39. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (Dahl) - I still love the old movie the best, but reading the book helped me appreciate the new movie as well.
40. Five People You Meet in Heaven
42. Northanger Abbey (Austen)
43. The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (Doyle)
44. Kidnapped (Stevenson)
45. The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood (Pyle)
46. Flowers for Algernon (Keyes)
47. The Time Machine (Wells)
48. The War of the Worlds (Wells)
49. The Art of War (Sunzi)
50. Leaves of Grass (Whitman)
51. The Turn of the Screw (James)
52. The Hunger Games (Collins)
53. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (Hugo)
54. The House of the Spirits (Allende)
55. Fahrenheit 451 (Bradbury)
56. David Copperfield (Dickens)
57. Zorro (Allende)
58. Ask Jeeves (Wodehouse)
59. Three Men and a Maid (Wodehouse)
60. The Kingkiller Chronicles (the third book is not yet released, I've read the first two)
61. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (Kesey)
As you can see, the goal was to be as varied as possible - in writing style, era, topics, cultures, and viewpoints. These are all books I had never read. They made the list because (a) it sounded interesting and I wanted to read it; (b) it was recommended to me; (c) it is a classic and I wanted to be able to say I've read it :P (also, because classics are often referenced and I like understanding those references); or (d) it was free on the kindle.
When I got pregnant, I assumed that I probably wouldn't finish my list. I was okay with that. But I didn't anticipate the time I would have during feedings, and reading is far better than browsing youtube.
60 books. Three years. I've finished (or put down) 27 of them, which leaves me with 33 remaining. Some of them I know I'll love. Others are complete wild cards - I may hate them, love them, or not make it past the first chapter. With literally thousands of books in the world, I don't like to waste time on bad ones.
What I need from you are suggestions for a few more. I would like to reach 75 books total, which I think is reasonable (I worked full-time through most of Josh's first year, and not all the books I read were on this list. So 24 each year should be very doable).
Please, any favorites? Must-reads? Little-known discoveries?
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Why Hello, July
Wait. Where did that month go?
Or maybe the more accurate question would be, "wait, where did that blog go?" It got lost in the day-to-day whirlwind that is preparing for the fall. So I present to you, in five parts: Our July. It turned into a multi-theme month that is cultivating a lot of good habits.
FLYing all the way home
July has been a "get-the-apartment-in-order" month, Flylady style. Yes, the bane of our existence growing up who was always making us throw away old toys has been this month's theme as we prepare for our move.
It's been great. Not only is the apartment in apple-pie order, but we've gotten rid of so much junk. All those baggy clothes, old t-shirts in excess, single earrings, kitchenware that we have duplicates of, all those ratty old college twin bedsets - gone. Woohoo. I even got Josh to part with his terrible bright yellow and red tie.
Plus, we're practically packed for the move. Everything we're not planning on using in the next three weeks is packed away, labelled, and color-coded by room. So this is going to be a pretty easy move, I think, and all because we're spending ten minutes a day on preparations.
Returning to my first "love"
I compiled my book list for "books to get through while Josh is in grad school". There's about 90 books on my list, and so far this month I've read three. Currently I am working on "The Little Prince" in Spanish. After the post-college burnout, I read a little bit, but not a whole lot. Now I've remembered what it is to love reading again, and to spend hours curled up with a book. And Josh is reading right along with me!
Staying fit and having fun
Each day we are spending 15-20 minutes working out. Three days a week this means cardio workouts - running, roller blading, ultimate frisbee, tennis. The other days it means strength training + easy cardio - walking, cleaning, etc. But the rule is to not let them be a "workout", but to be fun. We're playing tennis during our lunch break once a week, and now we're hitting the trails on roller blades on weekends. :)
A surprise improvement
Since I was about 9 and running track, I have always gotten a lot of headaches. I blamed this on computer time, allergies, sleep deprivation...all of the above. I never in a million years suspected dehydration, because I drink a lot of water. I carry a water bottle with me at all times and sip from it all day, drinking almost nothing else. For the past three years, I've been drinking the recommended amount of water of 64oz. a day - in fact, a little more.
So I thought my headaches weren't related to dehydration at all. But then early this month, I decided to drink until at no point during the day I was thirsty. If I'm thirsty, I drink until I no longer want anything to drink.
On the first day, I drank three liters (~101 ozs).
So for a week, I put three rubber bands on my water bottle and took one off each time I drank a liter.
NO HEADACHES!
All that time, I thought I was getting enough water because I was drinking the "recommended" amount. Turns out my body needs more water than that - just like it needs more sleep than the average person (yes, my body wants 10 hours of sleep to be truly happy). Now I'm drinking 3-4 liters a day, and I feel so much better.
So the moral of the story is you're probably dehydrated right now. Go drink some water.
A new era
Josh and I made a commitment that for the first year of our marriage, we would intentionally avoid making too many commitments and instead really focus on intentionally getting to know each other. And that year is over. It's been wonderful.
Josh starts grad school next month and we'll have less time together. If that had happened last fall, I feel certain our marriage would have been much less fun. I will miss him like crazy on those nights he is gone, but at least I know we had a fabulous year where our first priority was simply to get used to being married.
August: the Demise of the Photo Faker
So yes, Mom, I'm a photo faker. Maybe it was growing up with a mom who has a camera bag permanently attached to her shoulder. But I don't take pictures. Ever. If something noteworthy happens, someone else has a camera, right? And they'll post them on facebook, because that's all people do with pictures now anyway.
Next month, my theme will be to take a picture a day. And to post it. So it will be a blog post a day. Another two-fer. :)
That's all for now! A nice long post to make up for not posting ever. :P
Or maybe the more accurate question would be, "wait, where did that blog go?" It got lost in the day-to-day whirlwind that is preparing for the fall. So I present to you, in five parts: Our July. It turned into a multi-theme month that is cultivating a lot of good habits.
FLYing all the way home
July has been a "get-the-apartment-in-order" month, Flylady style. Yes, the bane of our existence growing up who was always making us throw away old toys has been this month's theme as we prepare for our move.
It's been great. Not only is the apartment in apple-pie order, but we've gotten rid of so much junk. All those baggy clothes, old t-shirts in excess, single earrings, kitchenware that we have duplicates of, all those ratty old college twin bedsets - gone. Woohoo. I even got Josh to part with his terrible bright yellow and red tie.
Plus, we're practically packed for the move. Everything we're not planning on using in the next three weeks is packed away, labelled, and color-coded by room. So this is going to be a pretty easy move, I think, and all because we're spending ten minutes a day on preparations.
Returning to my first "love"
I compiled my book list for "books to get through while Josh is in grad school". There's about 90 books on my list, and so far this month I've read three. Currently I am working on "The Little Prince" in Spanish. After the post-college burnout, I read a little bit, but not a whole lot. Now I've remembered what it is to love reading again, and to spend hours curled up with a book. And Josh is reading right along with me!
Staying fit and having fun
Each day we are spending 15-20 minutes working out. Three days a week this means cardio workouts - running, roller blading, ultimate frisbee, tennis. The other days it means strength training + easy cardio - walking, cleaning, etc. But the rule is to not let them be a "workout", but to be fun. We're playing tennis during our lunch break once a week, and now we're hitting the trails on roller blades on weekends. :)
A surprise improvement
Since I was about 9 and running track, I have always gotten a lot of headaches. I blamed this on computer time, allergies, sleep deprivation...all of the above. I never in a million years suspected dehydration, because I drink a lot of water. I carry a water bottle with me at all times and sip from it all day, drinking almost nothing else. For the past three years, I've been drinking the recommended amount of water of 64oz. a day - in fact, a little more.
So I thought my headaches weren't related to dehydration at all. But then early this month, I decided to drink until at no point during the day I was thirsty. If I'm thirsty, I drink until I no longer want anything to drink.
On the first day, I drank three liters (~101 ozs).
So for a week, I put three rubber bands on my water bottle and took one off each time I drank a liter.
NO HEADACHES!
All that time, I thought I was getting enough water because I was drinking the "recommended" amount. Turns out my body needs more water than that - just like it needs more sleep than the average person (yes, my body wants 10 hours of sleep to be truly happy). Now I'm drinking 3-4 liters a day, and I feel so much better.
So the moral of the story is you're probably dehydrated right now. Go drink some water.
A new era
Josh and I made a commitment that for the first year of our marriage, we would intentionally avoid making too many commitments and instead really focus on intentionally getting to know each other. And that year is over. It's been wonderful.
Josh starts grad school next month and we'll have less time together. If that had happened last fall, I feel certain our marriage would have been much less fun. I will miss him like crazy on those nights he is gone, but at least I know we had a fabulous year where our first priority was simply to get used to being married.
August: the Demise of the Photo Faker
So yes, Mom, I'm a photo faker. Maybe it was growing up with a mom who has a camera bag permanently attached to her shoulder. But I don't take pictures. Ever. If something noteworthy happens, someone else has a camera, right? And they'll post them on facebook, because that's all people do with pictures now anyway.
Next month, my theme will be to take a picture a day. And to post it. So it will be a blog post a day. Another two-fer. :)
That's all for now! A nice long post to make up for not posting ever. :P
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Harry Potter
Harry Potter has taken a lot of flak for being about wizards and witches and the so-called "mark of the beast" that appears on Harry's forehead. Surprisingly enough, I found that the worldview was the best element of the Harry Potter books.
In a world that has an ever-increasing vacuum of spiritual lessons and moral compasses, Harry Potter was refreshing to me. It has its weaknesses, but the magic used in it isn't the type of magic used to communicate with the devil. Wizards and witches in Harry Potter are simply people who live in a different world--the equivalent of Narnia's Talking Beasts or Gandalf's rise from the dead. The mere presence of magic isn't enough to discard a book. There has to be a philosophical element connected to the magic that is objectionable, and Harry Potter is much more healthy philosophically than most books written today--in fact, it's better philosophically than many so-called Christian books.*
Good and Evil
From Book 1, there is a very clear distinction between good and evil. The good are brave, loyal, and just. The evil are power-grabbers, self-seekers, and lovers of inflicting pain on others. The characters themselves are more complex--Harry is good, but he has a temper problem and sometimes wonders what it would be like to be great--but there is an obvious distinction.
Additionally, you can choose to work against your evil nature. When Harry remembers some of his desire to be great and his potential for evil, Dumbledore tells him that he can choose to work for good instead. Even though he has tendencies to evil, he does not use that as an excuse to just give in and do it; he fights it.
Love and Sacrifice
Love is one of the main themes of the series. Harry's mother died trying to save his life, and the love that she showed in her self-sacrificial act saves his life again in the first book. Sacrificial love is shown to have more power than evil, and Voldemort--the evil wizard--is thwarted time and time again because he fails to recognize that power.
Other characters who demonstrate sacrificial love are Snape, who loved Harry's mother and risked his life protecting Harry for her sake, and Harry himself who [spoiler alert] turns himself in to Voldemort because it will stop the bloodshed and ultimately lead to a victory for good. His act of love protects others from Voldemort's stronger spells.
Second Chances
Although good and evil are always clearly defined, people are given second chances whenever possible. Dumbledore particularly is willing to give others another shot. Sirius Black, convicted of helping for the murder of Harry's parents, is given the chance to prove his innocence. Snape, a former Voldemort supporter, is allowed to teach at the school and join the Order dedicated to defeating Voldemort. Harry, Ron, and Hermoine are constantly having adolescent squabbles, but learn in the end to give each other grace. Draco Malfoy, the son of a Voldemort supporter, attempts to kill Dumbledore. But Dumbledore is willing to die in order to save Draco's life. Even when he tries to kill Harry and his friends, Harry risks his own life to save him from a fire. Unknowingly, the life of Draco saved Harry's life later on when his mother could have betrayed Harry but doesn't when Harry assures her that Draco is still alive. The belief seems to be that every person deserves a second chance. Dumbledore could have refused to teach the children of Voldemort supporters, but he gives an equal shot to everyone.
Witchcraft
Yes, Harry Potter is full of wizards and witches and spells and magic. If you are offended by that right of the bat, then do your conscience a favor and stop reading now. Far be it from be to cause you to stumble.
But I do think that the distinction between witchcraft and Harry Potter's wizardry is an important one. God condemned witchcraft in the Bible not because it dealt with unexplainable magical forces. He condemned it because witches -- mediums, they were called -- communicated with evil spirits in order to cause magic.
Harry Potter's magic is unexplainable and does assume a larger force. But that force is one overpowered by love, something that does not exist in the evil realm. The characters are wizards by birth, not by evil intentions. There are no evil spirits behind magic. That's a far cry from the wizardry declaimed in the Bible.
The "Unforgiveables"
The evil side fights with Unforgiveable curses, one which makes people robots to do your bidding, one which causes unbearable pain, and one which kills instantly without leaving a mark. Voldemort uses all of them without hesitation. When Harry tries to use one in the sixth book, in extreme anguish over Dumbledore's death, a former teacher tells him he cannot because he doesn't mean it. He doesn't mean to cause that pain. While the evil side uses all of these curses, the good does not. In fact, people questions Harry's tendency to disarm his opponents instead of trying to kill them, since they are trying to kill him and it would only be self-defense. But at the end of the series, we find that Harry kills no one...he disarms them, or they self-destruct.
It is a weakness on the part of the book, however, that Harry does use the Imperius and Cruciatus curses in the seventh novel, as does Professor McGonagall. While it may have been the only way, they does use evil means for the cause of good and that is a less-than-satisfactory element.
The AfterLife
The spiritual is dealt with time and time again when the subject of death comes up. There are ghosts, yes. Harry sees the ghost of his parents once when Voldemort's wand malfunctions and once when he uses a stone to bring people back from the dead. He also sees the ghosts of Dumbledore, a dead schoolmate, a former teacher, and his godfather. But while the nature of the afterlife is not discussed in detail, Dumbledore and Harry do talk about the life after death. The result is stunningly not-postmodern; there is clearly an afterlife that makes death less scary. Also, the bringing back of ghosts is implied to be less than desireable; Harry finds comfort in the shadows of his parents when he is about to die, but later decides never to bring them back again.
The Biblical concept of ghosts is not entirely conclusive; Samuelis brought back by a medium and the rich man begs to go back to warn his brothers. Obviously there is some truth to the concept of ghosts, but it is a negative one. Harry concludes the same--ghosts exist, and the local Hogwarts haunts prove useful to solving mysteries. But they are not seen as pleasant. The search to be in control of death is shown to be useless and soul damaging, and Harry determines to live his life peacefully, and when it is time to face death then.
The Soul
The soul is spoken of throughout the series often. Harry is said to have a soul that is brave and pure, one that Voldemort cannot stand to be in contact with.Voldemort, on the other hand, has split his soul into eight pieces. He did that in an attempt to be immortal, but the means by which he did it are telltale of the moral compass of the series. To split one's soul, one has to murder someone. The act, so cruel and pointless, is enough to eternally desecrate the soul and tear it apart. Voldemort chooses that brand of evil because he wants to live forever. But the book sees that as pure evil of an unparalleled level.
The "Mark"
The scar on Harry's forehead has been overanalyzed, but misunderstood. The mark of the beast that it is so often compared is the mark of a follower of the Antichrist. Harry's scar is a tie to Voldemort, but it does not link him to that evil. If anything, Harry's scar makes him passionate to fight evil instead of succumbing to it, especially since he gained the scar as Voldemort killed his parents and tried to kill him. As the one person who Voldemort would like to kill more than any other, Harry is forced to recognize the danger of his position and fight it with that much more good. His scar is magical--like so many elements of the book--but it is a tangible brand of evil similar to the permanent brand of evil that our sin natures are to us.
But....
While I find the Harry Potter series to be engaging, fun, and philosophically interesting, there are a few flaws that would cause me to have caution when giving them to my children. I would give the books to the older audience, with guided discussion.
First, there is little respect for authority. Harry and his friends disrespect Snape and are very suspicious of him, thinking that he has tried to kill Harry. Their hatred for him is undisguised, and while it is reciprocated on the part of Snape, uncalled for. They also break rules constantly and are rarely punished. On the other hand, the head of their own dorm, Gryffindor, does punish them adequately. But other teachers who try to punish them are often portrayed as unjust.
Second, there is open hatred and students have a long tradition of hating students from certain other houses (such as Slytherin).
Third, all of the characters have character flaws that are never addresses. Harry has a horrible temper and often slacks off on his homework. The three teens have frequent petty arguments and jealousies, and as they get older, start to use poor language. There are some sexual references, although limited to kissing ("snogging") and Ron asking his sister if Harry has a tatoo on his chest (suggesting that she would have seen him shirtless). There are also family resentments in Ron's family, and annoying relatives are disrespected.
Conclusion
These character flaws, however, appear to be the weakest point in Harry Potter. Like any book, it requires discernment and careful reading, and I would probably guide high schoolers through it. But I think it is a good sign that Harry Potter is so popular, because it shows an appetite for books dealing with spiritual things rather than vacuous self-gratification. The element of magic by itself is not enough to dismiss an otherwise morally and philosophically sound series.
*I am not intending to discuss technical aspects of Harry Potter such as plot development, writing style, and other such techniques. That would be beyond the scope of my knowledge and time.
In a world that has an ever-increasing vacuum of spiritual lessons and moral compasses, Harry Potter was refreshing to me. It has its weaknesses, but the magic used in it isn't the type of magic used to communicate with the devil. Wizards and witches in Harry Potter are simply people who live in a different world--the equivalent of Narnia's Talking Beasts or Gandalf's rise from the dead. The mere presence of magic isn't enough to discard a book. There has to be a philosophical element connected to the magic that is objectionable, and Harry Potter is much more healthy philosophically than most books written today--in fact, it's better philosophically than many so-called Christian books.*
Good and Evil
From Book 1, there is a very clear distinction between good and evil. The good are brave, loyal, and just. The evil are power-grabbers, self-seekers, and lovers of inflicting pain on others. The characters themselves are more complex--Harry is good, but he has a temper problem and sometimes wonders what it would be like to be great--but there is an obvious distinction.
Additionally, you can choose to work against your evil nature. When Harry remembers some of his desire to be great and his potential for evil, Dumbledore tells him that he can choose to work for good instead. Even though he has tendencies to evil, he does not use that as an excuse to just give in and do it; he fights it.
Love and Sacrifice
Love is one of the main themes of the series. Harry's mother died trying to save his life, and the love that she showed in her self-sacrificial act saves his life again in the first book. Sacrificial love is shown to have more power than evil, and Voldemort--the evil wizard--is thwarted time and time again because he fails to recognize that power.
Other characters who demonstrate sacrificial love are Snape, who loved Harry's mother and risked his life protecting Harry for her sake, and Harry himself who [spoiler alert] turns himself in to Voldemort because it will stop the bloodshed and ultimately lead to a victory for good. His act of love protects others from Voldemort's stronger spells.
Second Chances
Although good and evil are always clearly defined, people are given second chances whenever possible. Dumbledore particularly is willing to give others another shot. Sirius Black, convicted of helping for the murder of Harry's parents, is given the chance to prove his innocence. Snape, a former Voldemort supporter, is allowed to teach at the school and join the Order dedicated to defeating Voldemort. Harry, Ron, and Hermoine are constantly having adolescent squabbles, but learn in the end to give each other grace. Draco Malfoy, the son of a Voldemort supporter, attempts to kill Dumbledore. But Dumbledore is willing to die in order to save Draco's life. Even when he tries to kill Harry and his friends, Harry risks his own life to save him from a fire. Unknowingly, the life of Draco saved Harry's life later on when his mother could have betrayed Harry but doesn't when Harry assures her that Draco is still alive. The belief seems to be that every person deserves a second chance. Dumbledore could have refused to teach the children of Voldemort supporters, but he gives an equal shot to everyone.
Witchcraft
Yes, Harry Potter is full of wizards and witches and spells and magic. If you are offended by that right of the bat, then do your conscience a favor and stop reading now. Far be it from be to cause you to stumble.
But I do think that the distinction between witchcraft and Harry Potter's wizardry is an important one. God condemned witchcraft in the Bible not because it dealt with unexplainable magical forces. He condemned it because witches -- mediums, they were called -- communicated with evil spirits in order to cause magic.
Harry Potter's magic is unexplainable and does assume a larger force. But that force is one overpowered by love, something that does not exist in the evil realm. The characters are wizards by birth, not by evil intentions. There are no evil spirits behind magic. That's a far cry from the wizardry declaimed in the Bible.
The "Unforgiveables"
The evil side fights with Unforgiveable curses, one which makes people robots to do your bidding, one which causes unbearable pain, and one which kills instantly without leaving a mark. Voldemort uses all of them without hesitation. When Harry tries to use one in the sixth book, in extreme anguish over Dumbledore's death, a former teacher tells him he cannot because he doesn't mean it. He doesn't mean to cause that pain. While the evil side uses all of these curses, the good does not. In fact, people questions Harry's tendency to disarm his opponents instead of trying to kill them, since they are trying to kill him and it would only be self-defense. But at the end of the series, we find that Harry kills no one...he disarms them, or they self-destruct.
It is a weakness on the part of the book, however, that Harry does use the Imperius and Cruciatus curses in the seventh novel, as does Professor McGonagall. While it may have been the only way, they does use evil means for the cause of good and that is a less-than-satisfactory element.
The AfterLife
The spiritual is dealt with time and time again when the subject of death comes up. There are ghosts, yes. Harry sees the ghost of his parents once when Voldemort's wand malfunctions and once when he uses a stone to bring people back from the dead. He also sees the ghosts of Dumbledore, a dead schoolmate, a former teacher, and his godfather. But while the nature of the afterlife is not discussed in detail, Dumbledore and Harry do talk about the life after death. The result is stunningly not-postmodern; there is clearly an afterlife that makes death less scary. Also, the bringing back of ghosts is implied to be less than desireable; Harry finds comfort in the shadows of his parents when he is about to die, but later decides never to bring them back again.
The Biblical concept of ghosts is not entirely conclusive; Samuelis brought back by a medium and the rich man begs to go back to warn his brothers. Obviously there is some truth to the concept of ghosts, but it is a negative one. Harry concludes the same--ghosts exist, and the local Hogwarts haunts prove useful to solving mysteries. But they are not seen as pleasant. The search to be in control of death is shown to be useless and soul damaging, and Harry determines to live his life peacefully, and when it is time to face death then.
The Soul
The soul is spoken of throughout the series often. Harry is said to have a soul that is brave and pure, one that Voldemort cannot stand to be in contact with.Voldemort, on the other hand, has split his soul into eight pieces. He did that in an attempt to be immortal, but the means by which he did it are telltale of the moral compass of the series. To split one's soul, one has to murder someone. The act, so cruel and pointless, is enough to eternally desecrate the soul and tear it apart. Voldemort chooses that brand of evil because he wants to live forever. But the book sees that as pure evil of an unparalleled level.
The "Mark"
The scar on Harry's forehead has been overanalyzed, but misunderstood. The mark of the beast that it is so often compared is the mark of a follower of the Antichrist. Harry's scar is a tie to Voldemort, but it does not link him to that evil. If anything, Harry's scar makes him passionate to fight evil instead of succumbing to it, especially since he gained the scar as Voldemort killed his parents and tried to kill him. As the one person who Voldemort would like to kill more than any other, Harry is forced to recognize the danger of his position and fight it with that much more good. His scar is magical--like so many elements of the book--but it is a tangible brand of evil similar to the permanent brand of evil that our sin natures are to us.
But....
While I find the Harry Potter series to be engaging, fun, and philosophically interesting, there are a few flaws that would cause me to have caution when giving them to my children. I would give the books to the older audience, with guided discussion.
First, there is little respect for authority. Harry and his friends disrespect Snape and are very suspicious of him, thinking that he has tried to kill Harry. Their hatred for him is undisguised, and while it is reciprocated on the part of Snape, uncalled for. They also break rules constantly and are rarely punished. On the other hand, the head of their own dorm, Gryffindor, does punish them adequately. But other teachers who try to punish them are often portrayed as unjust.
Second, there is open hatred and students have a long tradition of hating students from certain other houses (such as Slytherin).
Third, all of the characters have character flaws that are never addresses. Harry has a horrible temper and often slacks off on his homework. The three teens have frequent petty arguments and jealousies, and as they get older, start to use poor language. There are some sexual references, although limited to kissing ("snogging") and Ron asking his sister if Harry has a tatoo on his chest (suggesting that she would have seen him shirtless). There are also family resentments in Ron's family, and annoying relatives are disrespected.
Conclusion
These character flaws, however, appear to be the weakest point in Harry Potter. Like any book, it requires discernment and careful reading, and I would probably guide high schoolers through it. But I think it is a good sign that Harry Potter is so popular, because it shows an appetite for books dealing with spiritual things rather than vacuous self-gratification. The element of magic by itself is not enough to dismiss an otherwise morally and philosophically sound series.
*I am not intending to discuss technical aspects of Harry Potter such as plot development, writing style, and other such techniques. That would be beyond the scope of my knowledge and time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)