CCBC-Net Archives
Arbitrary Harry
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Sako Ikegami <tsike>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 21:41:28 +0100
Hello,
My two cents turned into a dissertation.
As to whether the magic in Harry is arbitrary or not, I believe it depends on which magic you're referring to. I'm sure all of us have noted that two types of magic come into play in these books-the wand-waving, spell-uttering kind, which never comes out right - and the kind of magic that all of us, Muggle and Wizard, are capable of, known under those oh-so-uncool names such as "mother love", "friendship" and
"honor". The former magic *is* arbitrary, just as Rowling intended-to further emphasize the potency of the latter type of magic, call it "mundane" if you wish.
I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion on HP, be it adoration or disdain or anything in between, but I do object to comments which show that the book hasn't been read carefully.
Harry isn't ordinary-except in the way that all healthy kids are
"ordinary". Similar to Will in Cooper's series, one day Harry wakes up to find himself a "chosen one" even though he's never consciously done anything to deserve it. Being labelled a hero may sound fine but consider the burden it can be for an "ordinary" eleven-year-old child, not to mention the ever present threat of inflation and hubris which can lead to the downfall not only of the child but often their entire world.
today's >society; Harry has essentially won the Lottery of life.
Come again? Losing both parents, spending the majority of one's formative years with the Dursleys and then suddenly being thrown into a world one knows nothing where he's labelled as a "hero" is winning the Lottery of Life? Find me an eleven-year-old who would be willing to trade life with two intact parents for a Gringotts vault full of Galleons and the latest in flying brooms and you'll be looking at a child who needs social/psychological intervention. Now in a fifteen-year-old, it would probably be perfectly normal .
Try reading the paragraph that starts in the middle of page 270 (U.S. edition) (or the bottom of p196 in the U.K. PB edition). It says
*exactly* why Harry is trying to prevent Voldemort from getting the stone. Oh yes, he mentions at the last-"He killed my parents" but the rest of what he says in this section proves his motivation isn't a personal vendetta - he's definitely out to fight evil because he understands what will happen if evil prevails - he considers it his duty to the wizard world - in this respect, Harry plays a much more active role in chasing down evil than Will in "The Dark is Rising" series. The whole latter half of the HP book describes the preoccupation of the three children with finding out what Snape is after and preventing him from doing what they suspect is evil - they don't even *know* about Voldemort's involvement at that point.
The book is deceptively simple and entertaining but the content is there for those who can see it. Why else is Harry a "Seeker" who is exceptionally gifted in "seeking out" and "capturing" the "Golden" Snitch-an elusive yet vital "ball" which "decides the game". What is the Philosopher's stone? Why has it been hidden in that particular magical object-note the name. Anyone with some knowledge of the philosophy of alchemy should be able to see the obvious symbolic meaning hidden within apparently "arbitrary" choices for names and settings.
Yes, alchemy is esoteric and far too complicated to be taught to children and the public at large. But Rowling has done the impossible. She has in essence created a Philosopher's stone which has brought her personal wealth (and perhaps immortality if HP does indeed become a classic), but better yet, it's also creating gold by teaching so many children the joy of the written word. So the reading public is now receiving a seven-year course in alchemy -I look forward to the next four installments.
Rowling has achieved perfection with her first novel-the ephemeral perfection of preadolescence that H.S. Sullivan describes as "the silent miracle of preadolescence"-now you know why Harry had to grow up with those awful Dursleys . But just as with the Philosopher's stone and preadolescence, it must be destroyed. Harry has another six years of chaos to suffer through before he recreates the stone and claims his uncontested position as child-saviour.
BTW, the Prisoner of Azkaban has been shortlisted for the Whitbread award and will not only be eligible for the children's award but if it wins, HP will be in the running for the Book of the Year award against writers in the other adult categories which includes the Nobel laureate Seamus Heaney with a new translation of Beowulf. (according to this article in the Independent)
Long-windedly yours, Sako Ikegami
*Voracious consumer and aspiring translator of children's books*
Received on Wed 10 Nov 1999 02:41:28 PM CST
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 21:41:28 +0100
Hello,
My two cents turned into a dissertation.
As to whether the magic in Harry is arbitrary or not, I believe it depends on which magic you're referring to. I'm sure all of us have noted that two types of magic come into play in these books-the wand-waving, spell-uttering kind, which never comes out right - and the kind of magic that all of us, Muggle and Wizard, are capable of, known under those oh-so-uncool names such as "mother love", "friendship" and
"honor". The former magic *is* arbitrary, just as Rowling intended-to further emphasize the potency of the latter type of magic, call it "mundane" if you wish.
I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion on HP, be it adoration or disdain or anything in between, but I do object to comments which show that the book hasn't been read carefully.
Harry isn't ordinary-except in the way that all healthy kids are
"ordinary". Similar to Will in Cooper's series, one day Harry wakes up to find himself a "chosen one" even though he's never consciously done anything to deserve it. Being labelled a hero may sound fine but consider the burden it can be for an "ordinary" eleven-year-old child, not to mention the ever present threat of inflation and hubris which can lead to the downfall not only of the child but often their entire world.
today's >society; Harry has essentially won the Lottery of life.
Come again? Losing both parents, spending the majority of one's formative years with the Dursleys and then suddenly being thrown into a world one knows nothing where he's labelled as a "hero" is winning the Lottery of Life? Find me an eleven-year-old who would be willing to trade life with two intact parents for a Gringotts vault full of Galleons and the latest in flying brooms and you'll be looking at a child who needs social/psychological intervention. Now in a fifteen-year-old, it would probably be perfectly normal .
Try reading the paragraph that starts in the middle of page 270 (U.S. edition) (or the bottom of p196 in the U.K. PB edition). It says
*exactly* why Harry is trying to prevent Voldemort from getting the stone. Oh yes, he mentions at the last-"He killed my parents" but the rest of what he says in this section proves his motivation isn't a personal vendetta - he's definitely out to fight evil because he understands what will happen if evil prevails - he considers it his duty to the wizard world - in this respect, Harry plays a much more active role in chasing down evil than Will in "The Dark is Rising" series. The whole latter half of the HP book describes the preoccupation of the three children with finding out what Snape is after and preventing him from doing what they suspect is evil - they don't even *know* about Voldemort's involvement at that point.
The book is deceptively simple and entertaining but the content is there for those who can see it. Why else is Harry a "Seeker" who is exceptionally gifted in "seeking out" and "capturing" the "Golden" Snitch-an elusive yet vital "ball" which "decides the game". What is the Philosopher's stone? Why has it been hidden in that particular magical object-note the name. Anyone with some knowledge of the philosophy of alchemy should be able to see the obvious symbolic meaning hidden within apparently "arbitrary" choices for names and settings.
Yes, alchemy is esoteric and far too complicated to be taught to children and the public at large. But Rowling has done the impossible. She has in essence created a Philosopher's stone which has brought her personal wealth (and perhaps immortality if HP does indeed become a classic), but better yet, it's also creating gold by teaching so many children the joy of the written word. So the reading public is now receiving a seven-year course in alchemy -I look forward to the next four installments.
Rowling has achieved perfection with her first novel-the ephemeral perfection of preadolescence that H.S. Sullivan describes as "the silent miracle of preadolescence"-now you know why Harry had to grow up with those awful Dursleys . But just as with the Philosopher's stone and preadolescence, it must be destroyed. Harry has another six years of chaos to suffer through before he recreates the stone and claims his uncontested position as child-saviour.
BTW, the Prisoner of Azkaban has been shortlisted for the Whitbread award and will not only be eligible for the children's award but if it wins, HP will be in the running for the Book of the Year award against writers in the other adult categories which includes the Nobel laureate Seamus Heaney with a new translation of Beowulf. (according to this article in the Independent)
Long-windedly yours, Sako Ikegami
*Voracious consumer and aspiring translator of children's books*
Received on Wed 10 Nov 1999 02:41:28 PM CST
