House of Eratosthenes

For years and years, now, it’s been like an itch I can’t scratch. I’m not simply disinterested in Harry Potter, I don’t think; there’s something about the entire franchise that I loathe. It isn’t the occult, and it isn’t the cartoonishness or kid-friendliness or the silly names. It’s something else. Something I have not quite been able to put my finger on.

Until this morning.

THE TROUBLE WITH HARRY
NO CHALLENGES, NO MORALS — POTTER IS THE PERFECT HERO FOR AN ENTITLED GENERATION

…Harry might be the blandest superhero ever conceived. He simply follows the trail, learns the spells and saves the day. Kids love to be in Harry’s shoes: all zapping bad guys, no taking out the trash.

Compare Luke Skywalker, who has to conquer his own vanity, laziness and anger in order to earn his powers. Harry, like many of his generation, is the Cosseted One from an early age. He’s told that he’s special, that he’s got awesome gifts, that those who don’t understand this are blind to the plain facts. Deploying his powers involves no more character or soul-searching than following a recipe. [emphasis mine]

Bulls-eye.

This is such an important distinction to be made in terms of how an individual goes about recognizing the world around him, and responding to it. That this is a profound disservice being done to the generation just coming up right now, is demonstrated easily through the observation that the distinction pries open that meaningful gap between one half of us and the other half of us, in just about everything that captures our passions.

Let’s take, as just one example, global warming — you’ve heard of it, it’s the doctrine that says the world is in awful danger from human activity and we can only save it by taxing ourselves. Half of us say “you know, that sounds to me like a scam, before we even get to the science part of it.” Sounds like a scam…to those who have been scammed before. Which means they’ve been living life, making stupid mistakes, and learning from them because nobody was around to protect them.

What is the retort from the other side? Who are you to dare to say such a thing? It’s the Harry Potter mindset. We have these designated people who have the “power” to solve the riddle, and everyone else is just a Muggle. All this stuff about what-proves-what and what-leaves-what-question-unsettled, is just a whole lot of static to them, because they’ve been brought up to think of the central question of life as not a what at all, but a who. This guy says that thing over there is good. That guy over there says this thing over here is bad. Those guys over there disagree…but they’re just a bunch of Bible-and-gun-hugging riff raff, pay no attention to them. That’s all we need to know. Put the right guys in the right places and you don’t need to think about anything ever again — sound familiar, Obama fans?

And to figure out who’s supposed to be in charge, you just keep your antenna up to figure out what the “scriptwriter wants to have happen.” Pick up that “vibe”; know the things everyone else knows, that they know because their everyone-else also knows about it.

To be fair about it, I’ve seen very little of Harry Potter. But this does jive with what I’ve seen. From the moment I first saw Dumbledore deliver his most meaningful speeches, he was abusing his schoolmaster authority to take points away from the other kids and give them to Harry & crew…and that was perfectly alright because Harry & crew were supposed to win.

Is there any commodity that surrounds us in such abundance and has effected for us such mind-boggling damage, that nevertheless consumes such a powerful energy in the manufacturing of an even greater toxic surplus of it, than the entitlement-minded generation?

Hat tip to Webutante.

Update: Didn’t realize this last night…it was just about the last thing I typed in before I went to bed, and the furthest thing from my mind this morning. But there’s a connection here, isn’t there?

The hypotheticals with which readers are challenged, have to do with taking off from work for a year or two. For cryin’ in the sink. For twenty-four months, you think the business concern won’t be facing some kind of a crisis? The prospective female boss takes off, goes home, does that “tough” work [of being a Mom]…Meanwhile, back at the office there’s a crisis. You’re not there. Someone else is. And it’s no fun for them…but there are some tough decisions to be made, decisions that require a real education about what’s goin’ on day to day, and a real personal sacrifice to get that education. Someone will be there to get it all done, while you’re being a Mom…and at the end of two years of that, you just want to show up and take “your” place at the top of the org chart? What. The. Hell.

Jack Welch dares to imply that Mahogany Row is filled up with people who have been learning the trade, doing work, making decisions and being present to make them — you don’t get to catapult yourself into the corner office after taking two years off for Mommy-hood. And for this, the feminists who normally are last in line to form any kinship with Mommy-hood, engage in their well-practiced screeching and How-Dare-You and Help-Me-Hate-This.

Perhaps it never was about motherhood at all. Perhaps it’s all got to do with Harry-Potter-ness. Nice to see everybody after two years, well done all you Muggles; now I’ve hired a Nanny, and I’m here to take my place.

Kinda gets back to What’s Wrong With The World, ya know? That whole thing I went on about, being-over-doing. Some of us think our value is in the things we do, and others seem to think the doing isn’t all that important because we’re all here just to fill some kind of role…to be, and not to do. Throughout all age brackets, these Harry Potter wannabe folks have a special hatred they can, uh, “conjure up” at a moment’s notice. Not just at the implication they should do some actual stuff, and/or be measured by the presence or absence of records of things done…but toward any statement to the effect that anybody else should either. Nope — the only thing being done is that Obama is gonna clean up Bush’s mess, and the rest of us are all gonna watch Him do it. That’s enough of this infernal “doing” for anybody. We’re just pieces on a chess board, without a game in play, just standing in our designated spots and being something.

Nah, that’s not my take at all on Harry Potter, though I’ve heard that take before. I actually heard it from my brother, who’d never read one of the books or seen a movie. He’d just read it somewhere else. I think it comes from Über Christians who don’t like the witchcraft theme. The term that relates here, I think I read in Reason magazine like 20 years ago … is “Bullcrit”. It’s basically when you write a review/critique of a book or article based on what you’ve heard from others. Not unlike writing instructions to believe.

Me, I like the Harry Potter stories. It does have morals, there are consequences to bad actions and poor choices. It teaches loyalty, duty, and honor — three very good things to teach kids. It also teaches that first impressions aren’t everything. And the Good wizards do not look down on Muggles. In general, whenever the kids “cheat” with magic it catches up to them, so I can’t even give it bad marks for that.

And besides, it’s fantasy/fiction. It’s escapism. It’s mom & dad’s role to make sure the kid gets the trash taken out before he goes and reads more Harry Potter. Zapping bad guys is a kind of taking out the trash. At least it teaches that there is good and evil.

I have no problems with the stories.
- philmon | 07/20/2009 @ 10:53
All right then, I’ll keep an open mind.

I did see the first movie though, and there certainly was something there to this effect. And the article linked has its own bits of evidence to present about this.

My favorite bit of contrast to provide, would be Shane. Gunfighter first, ranch-hand second…and yet, far from being some kind of Chosen One with a birthmark on his head, Shane spent a great deal of the movie working hard to avoid the inevitable bloodshed at the end. Luke Skywalker’s “destiny” at the very beginning was nothing more glamorous than giving droids a bath and going to Toshi Station to pick up some power converters. Like Shane, he had to make a conscious decision to go rescuing princesses and confronting evil.

The young man I saw in the Harry Potter movie, had his “destiny” pretty much brought to him courtesy of Mr. Coltrane. The comment about “blandest superhero” does carry with it some merit, from what I can gather…
- mkfreeberg | 07/20/2009 @ 11:07
Shane is classic. But it never occurred to me to compare the two. It’s like comparing ice cream and steak.

I read the bit about Harry getting the book “with all the answers in it”. That’s not quite what happens.

Harry and Ron are told to enroll in this class late, and they haven’t had a chance to buy the books. The instructor says “that’s ok, you’ll find some in the cupboard” and they both go back to the cupboard. There’s a shiny, new book, and a tattered, older one. The impression I got is that the scuffled over the shiny, new book and Harry lost, ending up with the tattered old, very noticibly used one. Which turns out to be the better book. You might say because it is experienced — it had “collected” wisdom. Or think of Indiana Jones III (one of my favorite lines “He chose …. poorly” … and it’s counterpart “You chose wisely” …). even though in this case the lesson was not taught quite that way… they both chose poorly, but Harry lucked out by “losing”. The last shall be first and the first shall be last… these are not bad themes.

The book is not a teachers copy at all. It belonged to a very bright student in the past who wrote his own notes in the book, noting where the book wasn’t quite right about something or he found better ways to do things in the “labs” and had written in the magins. And Harry takes advantage of this.

But he gets kind of obsessed with it, and his friends go from being jealous about it to becoming concerned for their friend. Finally, his girlfriend convinces him that he needs to get rid of it and she takes it from him and hides it in an attic (I guess they figure it shouldn’t be destroyed – the wife says the books go into much more detail than the movies) so that he will not be able to find it again, and that is the end of the bit about the book.

As a matter of fact, most times I can think of that they come across an object like this, like one might in a computer role-playing game, it’s over-use or mis-use becomes dangerous or unhealthy, not unlike Bilbo/Frodo and the ring in Lord of the Rings, or giving in to the dark side of the force a-la Star Wars.

I don’t know what it is that people don’t like about the movies. Yeah, he’s the chosen one, but it’s not like he gloats about it (quite the opposite — he’s not even altogether happy about it. The reluctant chosen one is a common thing in fantasy novels. Frodo. Bilbo. Neo. Skywalker. As a matter of fact, just about every fantasy series I ever read or watched.)

I’m not sure where the bug up this guy’s butt came from. There’s the constant Star Wars vs Star Trek type of SciFi/Fantasy preference battle, where it KIND of sounds like he’s coming from. And like I said long ago some Über Christians decided that the whole thing was evil because the whole theme was witchcraft (even though they celebrate Christmas, which I always appreciated) and started looking for things wrong with it.

And Things I Know #16. says, When people look too hard for evidence of something, they usually find it whether it’s there or not.

There’s also a sad phenomenon that goes on that people will reject anything that’s popular as a substitute for showing intellectual independence. But rejecting the popular because it’s popular is no more intellectually useful than accepting the poplular just because it’s popular. As a matter of fact, it’s my belief that most progressive activists, down on the “foot soldier” level … new college students, high school students, etc, are engaging in this kind of behavior. You know, “I’m a vegetarian now.” Or “I’m a Communist now.” Or “I’m not a Christian anymore.” Fine if you arrive at those conclusions on your own, but doing it because you think it’s cool to be contrary is just as bad as the opposite. As Things I Know #11 says: Anti-fashion is still fashion.

Is it on par with The Lord of the Rings? Hardly. But it’s still entertaining. And everybody has their own taste, so your mileage may vary.
- philmon | 07/20/2009 @ 11:34
that is not my take on it. It does teaches morals,responsibility and honor and that there are bad actions and poor choices . I think a lot of it come from Christians that don’t like the witchcraft part of it..
only the bad look down on Muggles
Harry Potter had his “destiny” he really is not to happy about it and he don’t gloats about it .
I think some people don’t like thing just because there popular, read the books watch the movie and see what you think.
- Danswoman | 07/21/2009 @ 09:28
Now, the two of you are both calling out two specific assaults for your defenses, that aren’t really in the piece: That Harry Potter is excessively popular, and the theme with the occult is contrary to the teachings in the Bible. Which article did you read?

I’ve heard Harry Potter apologists lapse into this kind of straw-man argument before. Actually, it seems they always go after those two, anytime anyone says a word against the franchise…regardless of the words that were really used.
- mkfreeberg | 07/21/2009 @ 10:03
Those two “arguments” are really me, and I imagine Danswoman, trying to venture a guess as to why these people’s versions of Harry Potter are so much at odds with are. They aren’t arguments at all, they’re just WTFs. Part of my actual argument I included in my longer post — where I pointed out the author’s version of what happened and what really happened are at odds.

I laid it out quite clearly. The guy was wrong in his example about what happened in the plotline. He spun it and left out important details, leaving a false impression of what happened. You know, kind of like Barack Obama does daily.

I can’t recall where, because it was years ago — that I read some — and remember I myself am a Christian Apologist, so nothing against Christians in general, quite the contrary … but there are these Über Christians that really take some things far too seriously, and many of them were all over the Harry Potter stuff with how evil it is (I imagine some google searching will turn lots of this up) and boycotted it, etc. Then I watched the first movie and thought, “are they really talking about the same story I just saw?” as far as the lack of morals and the like… it’s bullshit and anybody whose read the books or seen the movies knows it. Yes, it deals with magic and wizards and witchcraft themes, but so, frankly, does The Lord of the Rings … which was written by a devout Catholic and used these themes to illustrate Christian themes — as, by and large, does Rowling (who I doubt is a devout Catholic, but that’s beside the point. One cannot separate Western moral themes from Christian ones, and she’s a westerner, through and through.)
- philmon | 07/21/2009 @ 10:25
Well, for what it’s worth I would agree that the “occult” angle is kind of a load. In fact, I have the impression that those who have some of their ego invested in Harry Potter gaining wider acceptance, flock to this argument as their “straw man” because it is one of the most fragile criticisms against Master Potter.

When I was a wee one, there was this hot fashion craze going through Hollywood about “debilmovees,” set off I guess by The Exorcist. It was a lot more than just Exorcist-Omen-and-then-you’re-done. It went right down to the fly-by-night, cheap and easy quick & dirty made-for-teevee stuff. And it endured. Amityville I through IV was all part of that…

Easily more offensive to the “pure” fundamentalist Christian than Harry Potter ever wanted to be.
- mkfreeberg | 07/21/2009 @ 10:33
One question I do have, though — for readers of the book (my wife, who’s read them all isn’t sure) — regarding this flap about Dumbledore being gay.

It’s not in the books, but after the last book was written, quite outside the story line, Rowling said in an interview that Dumbledore (the equivalent of Gandalf for you LoTR-ers) is gay. Which I thought was a stupid thing to do, but I imagine she did it from a sudden attack of Goodperson Fever™ making a plug for “gay rights”). Big flap in the press and blogosphere.

And here’s my question. In this last movie, there’s a minor detail at the end of a scene where, as they’re leaving a house, Dumbledore asks if he can take “this magazine” — holds it up. It’s some needlepoint magazine, and he says something like “I do so love needlepoint.”

Which I wonder if that was actually in any of the books — or if it was inserted into the movie as a little jab like Lucas putting Jar Jar Binks in the next Star Wars movie after everyone said they hated him.

Not that there’s anything necessarily “gay” about a guy liking needle point. But it would be considered an indicator if one were trying to assess which way someone “went”.
- philmon | 07/21/2009 @ 10:33
[…] Picky With Words No Higher Office in Sight Taranto Eulogizes Cronkite Home Renovation Shows The Trouble with Harry No Such Thing as Work-Life Balance His Blank Slate V Braveheart Wept Daphne, Her Husband, Roissy, […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 07/21/2009 @ 21:05
Look, I’m a Christian and I love Harry Potter. I read a lot of sci-fi and fantasy. I, like most Christians (including my children), can tell the difference between reality and fantasy.

If you haven’t read the books, you don’t really know the story. Harry Potter faces all sorts of challenges, not least from being an adolescent and an outsider. Outside of a small circle of close friends, no one really likes him. He has to make his own place at the table, so to speak, all the while under attack by his arch-enemy, who very few people believe is real, at least at first. He doesn’t just learn the spells, he learns how to live, who he can trust, how to deal with alienation (remember, orphan) and just how burdensome being a savior can be. At first, he’s a curiosity, the Boy Who Lived, then he’s an annoyance, always insisting that people believe that the attacks by evil are real, and then a liability, as he gets blamed when evil does show up. That never happens in the real world, now does it?

J.K. Rowling may not be the most elegant writer, but she knows character, and she can spin a good yarn. The books resonated with adults and especially teens because of the growth of the characters throughout the books, all within a framework of awkward adolescence and coming of age. Harry Potter is a reluctant hero, alternately being shielded by adults and then exposed.

Don’t sell these books short based on the movies. If you never read The Lord of The Rings and only saw the films, you haven’t really gotten all of what Tolkien was trying to express.
- chunt31854 | 07/23/2009 @ 15:35

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

The Trouble with HarryMonday, July 20th, 2009

The Trouble with Harry
Monday, July 20th, 2009