I guess I would consider myself to be a fairly liberal Conservative, for when I read the section of chapter 5 entitled "Muggles for Harry Potter," I found myself continually rolling my eyes at the extreme views of the Fundamentalist Christians (FC) fighting like hell against the distribution and consumption of the ideas and subjects of the Harry Potter series. I realize, after reading the entire chapter, that it seems as though the reasons FC hold as to why they are so against the story result in their having absolutely no faith (no pun intended) in their Christian brethren. FC essentially believe that people are not capable of distinguishing harmful and evil concepts that lead to darkness from FICTION. Some fear that exposure will prevent children from being "able to distinguish fact and fantasy" (Convergence Culture 201). However, lack of exposure to a fantastical world will prevent children from identifying that there is a distinction between the two in the first place. FC discuss Harry Potter paraphernalia as "lures and doorways to deeper involvement with the accult" (202). The main problem with this is the loss of faith in, well, faith - the idea that God will lead one out of darkness if one believes.
I am so thankful for the subsequent section, "What Would Jesus Do with Harry Potter" (209-216). Showing Christians as actually appreciating the message that Harry Potter provides to children and adults alike sheds light on an important group of much less extremists. Many Christian groups have even embraced the series, allowing Harry and his friends to play out important moral lessons for people. Embracing the story is imperative because, to be honest, Harry Potter is not going anywhere any time soon. It is so ingrained into people's lives that to try and separate oneself from it is naive and pointless.
Jenkins missed a major point, though, in this chapter. That is, the entire plot of the Harry Potter series revolves around Harry and his friends fighting and ultimately defeating Voldemort. While I am not necessarily saying that the book is a satire for the ongoing battle between right and wrong, good and evil, the motivation for the story most certainly revolves around the dichotomy and juxtaposition of the two. No FC can ignore that the ultimate message and outcome of the book are positive ones - good triumphs over evil, and the world is a better and peaceful place.
The focus you put on the dichotomy of good and evil is definitely an important point; groups that are pointed out as detractors or opponents of literature like Harry Potter definitely settle on superficial aspects and assume that their peers are too superficial to dig beyond them. Unfortunately, I can't see this changing. It was unfair of Jenkins to generalize conservatives in the way he did; there are people from all different types of groups that reject anything that isn't squarely in tune with their beliefs. However, as soon as this rejection infringes on a pretty fundamental right (i.e. education), there definitely is some cause for concern, as you bring up.
ReplyDeleteThe main issue I think Christians would take with the similarity between the storylines is that Harry is a false prophet. It is the same reason Christians (most of them) believe Buddhism undermines their belief, despite the fact it is a philosophy and not a religion.
ReplyDeleteI do think it is wrong to ban Harry Potter from schools or infringe upon it's distribution-- I do not buy that it is depriving kids of education. When I was in middle school I preferred to read novels by Plath, Hemingway, and Hesse. I am not so excited by the popularity of pop culture books (Harry Potter, Twilight, etc.) as a substitute for other, more educational and satisfying books.
I didn't read this section as a conflict between fundamental Christians and Rowling supporters, but rather as an example of what happens when a disconnect occurs between a well-networked community (the Rowling supporters) and a more "traditional" community that has a one-way intake via radio, television, etc.
ReplyDeleteEverything you said here about why Harry Potter shouldn't be banned was doubtlessly said early on in the conflict between the two groups. However, chances are these counterpoints were made online and discussed online, whereas most fundamentalist Christians (my parents included) simply heard the argument against the books from their pastor and Christian news sources, never once stopping to fact-check or discuss the validity of these claims amongst themselves. "Conservatives" in this sense doesn't refer to right-wingers and Christians who reject anything that doesn't fall in line with their beliefs, but rather refers to people who simply have not "opened up" to new forms of interaction with one another (i.e., online discussions) that may have made them change their minds.