Harry Potter and the School Library
A small battle, merely another iteration of one long-fought war, wages in Georgia over the banning of a certain boy wizard from the school library whose books, it is claimed, encourage others to pursue witchcraft.
It’s easy to look at this from one side and declare with absolute conviction that the novels written by J.K. Rowling are subversive, immoral, and ultimately evil.
Equally easy is to peer across from the opposite side and declare ad infinitum that the novels offer striking examples of courage, honor and virtue in the face of immorality and evil.
Or, we could look at this and shrink stubbornly into callous pretension by asking, “what sixth grader doesn’t have some kind of imbalance at that age anyway?”
The facts are these: Mallory is religious, and has read only portions of the books. We do not know what portions from what books, just that she considers some of what she read to be “demonic.” Susch, of whom we know almost nothing, became curious about casting spells after reading the first novel; two years later, she was involved in witchcraft, later felt depressed, and had suicidal thoughts. What we do not know is what occurred between her reading the book and feeling suicidal, what other materials she may have read, or other individuals she may have interacted with in that time.
Adolescence is a curious time of physical and emotional upheaval—kids become curious about who they are in relation to the world in which they live, and seek for ways to engage that world. Reading, therefore, requires a certain amount of responsibility, especially when the reader is young and in school, when parental involvement is crucial. Books inevitably influence young readers, sometimes subversively, sometimes virtuously. This calls for caution, and a healthy sense of accountability—again, something tempered by a responsible and present adult.
The religious fervor surrounding this particular incident, I believe, is spurned more from the ignorant outcries of protest that have come before more than it does an honest discerning evaluation of the material at hand. It gains attention because of its ignorance, and the publicity is ultimately hurtful for those of us called to engage the world. We do not discard a rose because of its thorns, nor do we simply pluck them away in favor of preserving the rose’s beauty. The thorns are part of the rose, just as humanity always struggles with aspects of its fallen nature, Christian or no. Were we to ban every book that gave some offense, our children would soon find themselves with nothing to read.
I admire that this woman wants to protect her children. And she’s right; there are probably better books for them to read. I’m not a kid lit critic and I’m unfamiliar with the genre. Critical and discerning readers find much in the Harry Potter novels to celebrate, and much in which to question. As the books progress, their intended audience grows up and matures as their subject matter grows increasingly complex. The conflict within takes many forms, and often, the books employ a curious balance between the conflict of good and evil, and conflict involving those abysmal gray areas which never sit well on a platter of absolutes. I have found that these aspects of the stories lend a kind of credibility to the narrative. Kids get into fights, they lie and they cheat. That they engage in this behavior doesn’t make it right. And when someone writes about kids and the conflicts they face, the least the author could do is give acknowledgement to this facet of growing up.
But witchcraft, itself a scourge and a forbidden practice in biblical text, strikes a mighty cord in this debate. What about…communication with the dead? Divination, perhaps? These too are forbidden in scripture. Still, J.R.R. Tolkien writes the character of Aragorn as obtaining the services of the army of the dead in The Lord of the Rings. C.S. Lewis writes of Lucy Pevensie as practicing divination in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. And, perhaps most shockingly of all, each of these actions leads to victorious and virtuous ends. Yet no one tries to remove these tomes from the shelves of school libraries. (Maybe sometimes, someone tries, but they’re not making the evening news.)
I suppose, in some roundabout way, I’m trying to say that, if parents are concerned about what children are reading, then parents ought to read what their children are reading, ask them questions, and engage. Involve others in the discussion as well. Maybe school libraries could set age limits on certain books if necessary—that’s what they did in my school. There are better ways to communicate concern, ways that won’t call into question a person’s integrity, or the integrity of other religious people.
H/T: Sword of Gryffindor for the First Coast News link.
Harry Potter has a new foe -- a Gwinnett County parent who wants the popular boy wizard books banned from Gwinnett County school libraries.
On Thursday afternoon, parents and students spoke at a hearing that will ultimately decide whether the books will stay or go.
People who love the books say they are happy that kids are reading the books as much as they are. They say that the books are ultimately about good versus evil. But opponents say that the books with their magic wands and spells are all about evil.
“I’m a true example of how Harry Potter books can open your life to witchcraft,” said Jordan Susch.
Susch says she read the first Harry Potter novel when she was in the fourth grade. Two years later, she says, she and her friends were practicing witchcraft.
“We wanted to know if spells, potions and curses worked. By the seventh grade, I was so depressed, I set a date to kill myself,” Susch said.
Susch has joined Laura Mallory’s fight to get the novels removed from the Gwinnett County Schools’ shelves.
“I want to protect my kids, children and others from evil,” Mallory said. “Not fill their minds with it.”
It’s easy to look at this from one side and declare with absolute conviction that the novels written by J.K. Rowling are subversive, immoral, and ultimately evil.
Equally easy is to peer across from the opposite side and declare ad infinitum that the novels offer striking examples of courage, honor and virtue in the face of immorality and evil.
Or, we could look at this and shrink stubbornly into callous pretension by asking, “what sixth grader doesn’t have some kind of imbalance at that age anyway?”
The facts are these: Mallory is religious, and has read only portions of the books. We do not know what portions from what books, just that she considers some of what she read to be “demonic.” Susch, of whom we know almost nothing, became curious about casting spells after reading the first novel; two years later, she was involved in witchcraft, later felt depressed, and had suicidal thoughts. What we do not know is what occurred between her reading the book and feeling suicidal, what other materials she may have read, or other individuals she may have interacted with in that time.
Adolescence is a curious time of physical and emotional upheaval—kids become curious about who they are in relation to the world in which they live, and seek for ways to engage that world. Reading, therefore, requires a certain amount of responsibility, especially when the reader is young and in school, when parental involvement is crucial. Books inevitably influence young readers, sometimes subversively, sometimes virtuously. This calls for caution, and a healthy sense of accountability—again, something tempered by a responsible and present adult.
The religious fervor surrounding this particular incident, I believe, is spurned more from the ignorant outcries of protest that have come before more than it does an honest discerning evaluation of the material at hand. It gains attention because of its ignorance, and the publicity is ultimately hurtful for those of us called to engage the world. We do not discard a rose because of its thorns, nor do we simply pluck them away in favor of preserving the rose’s beauty. The thorns are part of the rose, just as humanity always struggles with aspects of its fallen nature, Christian or no. Were we to ban every book that gave some offense, our children would soon find themselves with nothing to read.
I admire that this woman wants to protect her children. And she’s right; there are probably better books for them to read. I’m not a kid lit critic and I’m unfamiliar with the genre. Critical and discerning readers find much in the Harry Potter novels to celebrate, and much in which to question. As the books progress, their intended audience grows up and matures as their subject matter grows increasingly complex. The conflict within takes many forms, and often, the books employ a curious balance between the conflict of good and evil, and conflict involving those abysmal gray areas which never sit well on a platter of absolutes. I have found that these aspects of the stories lend a kind of credibility to the narrative. Kids get into fights, they lie and they cheat. That they engage in this behavior doesn’t make it right. And when someone writes about kids and the conflicts they face, the least the author could do is give acknowledgement to this facet of growing up.
But witchcraft, itself a scourge and a forbidden practice in biblical text, strikes a mighty cord in this debate. What about…communication with the dead? Divination, perhaps? These too are forbidden in scripture. Still, J.R.R. Tolkien writes the character of Aragorn as obtaining the services of the army of the dead in The Lord of the Rings. C.S. Lewis writes of Lucy Pevensie as practicing divination in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. And, perhaps most shockingly of all, each of these actions leads to victorious and virtuous ends. Yet no one tries to remove these tomes from the shelves of school libraries. (Maybe sometimes, someone tries, but they’re not making the evening news.)
I suppose, in some roundabout way, I’m trying to say that, if parents are concerned about what children are reading, then parents ought to read what their children are reading, ask them questions, and engage. Involve others in the discussion as well. Maybe school libraries could set age limits on certain books if necessary—that’s what they did in my school. There are better ways to communicate concern, ways that won’t call into question a person’s integrity, or the integrity of other religious people.
H/T: Sword of Gryffindor for the First Coast News link.
posted by TAJ at
9:41 PM
