Not Another Harry Potter Debate

[Basilisa Marie]

 

People who really, really love Harry Potter are unable to view Harry Potter in any sort of potentially critical light. (At least coming from someone who admitted to believing HP to be inherently evil)

 

 

Um, no, untrue, I'm just saying that it makes it harder to be patient when someone keeps saying something you really love and enjoy is inherently evil and that you're sinful for enjoying it. 

 

Harry Potter magic isn't actual witchcraft.  People who practice actual witchcraft currently and those who have done so in the past but have converted have told me this.  It's nothing like actual witchcraft.  

Edited April 29, 2013 by Basilisa Marie

[EmilyAnn]

So you read no literature that involves characters or protagonists committing sins? For that matter, do you reject any art form that depicts sin? Is the Birth of Venus evil because it depicts a pagan goddess? Just because something depicts a sinful act does not mean it is sinful to appreciate it for its artistic merit. 

[fides' Jack]

Um, no, untrue, I'm just saying that it makes it harder to be patient when someone keeps saying something you really love and enjoy is inherently evil and that you're sinful for enjoying it. 

 

Harry Potter magic isn't actual witchcraft.  People who practice actual witchcraft currently and those who have done so in the past but have converted have told me this.  It's nothing like actual witchcraft.  

 

Um, no, untrue.  Nobody is saying anyone else is sinful for enjoying it.  Your problem is that you're taking everything personally, and that's why you're getting defensive about it.

 

So you read no literature that involves characters or protagonists committing sins? For that matter, do you reject any art form that depicts sin? Is the Birth of Venus evil because it depicts a pagan goddess? Just because something depicts a sinful act does not mean it is sinful to appreciate it for its artistic merit. 

 

Don't make a leap that isn't there.  Harry Potter glorifies the witchcraft inside.  You can enjoy art without enjoying the sin that is depicted in it.  You can't enjoy Harry Potter without finding the magic therein to be fun (which is the point).  You seemed to understand more at the beginning of this thread than some of the other posters, but now you're getting further away.

Edited April 29, 2013 by fides' Jack

[EmilyAnn]

Don't make a leap that isn't there.  Harry Potter glorifies the witchcraft inside.  You can enjoy art without enjoying the sin that is depicted in it.  You can't enjoy Harry Potter without finding the magic therein to be fun (which is the point).  You seemed to understand more at the beginning of this thread than some of the other posters, but now you're getting further away.

 

You have not read Harry Potter, so how can you know what others enjoy in it? I enjoy many of the themes of the book that having nothing to do with magic at all. You fail to see anything in Harry Potter other than magic. And as others have also pointed out, there is a big difference between magic as it exists in the world and fantasy. 

 

You are the one making leaps that aren't there. You are going in circles of the same argument without actually giving any real rebuttals to points others have made. This post is an example - you have not actually responded to anything that I said. 

[Basilisa Marie]

So wait, let me get this straight. You're contradicting yourself. It's either this: 

 

 

What I fear is the sin of reading Harry Potter itself.

 

or this:

 

 

Nobody is saying anyone else is sinful for enjoying it.

 

The first one tells me that you fear committing a sin by merely reading Harry Potter, because you're engaging with something that is inherently evil for personal enjoyment.  The second one tells me that you think it's not sinful for me to enjoy it...because somehow Harry Potter isn't inherently evil?  

 

Or are you saying it's possible to enjoy something which is inherently evil, and not be committing a sin? So by that logic I can watch pornography for personal enjoyment and not commit a sin? Either Harry Potter is indeed inherently evil, or it's not.  If Harry Potter is inherently evil, then reading it would be committing a sin.  If it's not, or just an occasion of sin, then it's not sinful.  

 

Or are you saying that I'm too ignorant about the true nature of Harry Potter to be committing a sin by reading it even though it's inherently evil?  But that doesn't make sense, because I've read all seven books multiple times and have seen all eight movies, plus you keep telling me how inherently evil it is.  

 

You can't say that Harry Potter is inherently evil and NOT accuse me of sinning by reading it at the same time. THAT is why this gets personal really quickly.  

 

It also gets really tedious because this feels like every "Catholics worship Mary!" argument ever.  

[Apotheoun]

I found the Harry Potter books entertaining.

[CrossCuT]

 

People seem to think that I'm afraid that myself and/or my kids will be tempted to go practice magic if we read Harry Potter. (Nothing could be further from the truth)

 

 

 

See below: 

 

Youre an adult, Im pretty confident you wont succumb to their evil ways and it will give you a real perspective on the issue.

 

 

 

People who really, really love Harry Potter are unable to view Harry Potter in any sort of potentially critical light. (At least coming from someone who admitted to believing HP to be inherently evil)

 

 

 So everything we have been saying in your thread is just hot air to you? Lol

And regardless of ACTUAL knowledge of the text, it seems like if they dont agree with your regurgitated opinion on the subject you can write us off as "unable to view Harry Potter in any sort of potentially critical light"

 

Do you even literature?

 

Now I'll answer these ideas:

 

1.  This is the concept that's been creating confusion here.  If that were the case, then I can completely understand why everyone keeps saying that I should go read the books for myself - as if there is no problem with it other than simply being tempted to go practice witchcraft after reading it.

 

For the purposes of this post, I'll state it very plainly now: I'm not afraid of being tempted to sin by reading Harry Potter.  I'm not afraid that I'll go and start practicing witchcraft after reading Harry Potter (which is in itself sinful).  I'm not afraid of my kids trying to practice witchcraft after reading Harry Potter.  I know that I am Catholic enough that I won't be tempted to do any of these things.  I know that in my mind I can separate the fiction from reality.  I know (or at least pray, and strongly hope) that my kids won't be messed up so much that they would have trouble distinguishing the fiction in HP from reality.  

 

What I fear is the sin of reading Harry Potter itself.

 

Harry Potter is not a history book.  Nor is it a technical book.  It's a fantasy story.  It's meant for the reader to enjoy - to take part in the action, suspense, and the romance that exists in the struggle between good and evil.  The fact that Harry Potter provides these things well is the exact reason that they are enjoyable, and why people have come to love the books/movies.  It's also why they may survive as literary classics.  Naturally, I couldn't possibly read the stories without enjoying them to some degree.

 

Why is the practice of witchcraft/sorcery sinful?  It's because it breaks the 1st commandment of God - not to have strange gods before Him.  I'm sure entire books have been written on that subject, and so I won't try to explain (and any explanation I offer would likely be entirely inadequate, anyway).

 

My question is this: is it morally possible to allow ourselves to be entertained by the practice of something which (by its very nature) offends God?  Even in literary fiction?  My first gut instinct tells me no.  That's what I've held onto the last several years, which is what I mean when I say that I believe HP to be inherently evil.  The article posted at the beginning of the thread made me question that answer.  

 

Obviously here I'm thinking about the 3 "attributes" required for a morally good action (which I won't list out).  In the end it boils down to the circumstances - with one very glaring one: it is in no way necessary to read fiction of any kind.  To avoid indulging myself in it, then, especially when I really want to, is in some way giving up a part of myself (my desires) for the very simple reason that God might prefer it that way.  

 

 

AND...  now I don't have time to finish for #2 - so I'll stop here.

 

I do see your point.

In the real world, witchcraft is that of the devil. So how can it NOT be evil in this book?

Well, as you have stated before, it is fiction.

The author is using a prop to add texture to a story. It isnt suppose to be a good/bad thing inherently. Magic in the book is neutral however it CAN be used for good or evil depending on the person in the story.

I feel like you could swap out magic for cars or something. Hogwarts is a car racing school! Now the plot device would be car racing...in some super lame and boring way the author would work cars into a device to further the plot.

 

But again, youre ENTIRE mindset has been taken over by someone elses opinion on the subject. You have no genuine thoughts of your own (I dont mean to be rude at all) because the only material you have read on the issue has been the opinions of other people.

Throughout this whole thread you have been arguing someone elses stance and while that can be totally fine in certain circumstances (as we have attempted explaining numerous times had you read the things we said which Im not sure you did as you havent commented on them in any minute detail) in the case of Harry Potter we have been suggesting a more personal approach.

 

I do believe that if you sat down with the books (OR JUST THE MOVIES) and read/watched them honestly, your opinion might change.

And if this is a topic of serious concern to you in which you are having a difficult time finding the answer, maybe your next logical step would be to go to the source and stop reading silliness from the internet.

[fides' Jack]

You have not read Harry Potter, so how can you know what others enjoy in it? I enjoy many of the themes of the book that having nothing to do with magic at all. You fail to see anything in Harry Potter other than magic. And as others have also pointed out, there is a big difference between magic as it exists in the world and fantasy. 

 

You are the one making leaps that aren't there. You are going in circles of the same argument without actually giving any real rebuttals to points others have made. This post is an example - you have not actually responded to anything that I said. 

 

I never said magic was the only thing enjoyed in the books.  Actually, I pointed out that a lot of it has to do with the struggle between good and evil.

 

My debate is not about what is good in Harry Potter.  I fully admit that there is good there.  But that doesn't make a difference.

 

EmilyAnn, with you specifically I've tried to answer everything you've said, because at the beginning of this thread you did seem to understand more.  Rather than trying to defend Harry Potter from an attack that wasn't there, you instead looked for holes in the article's logic about the distinctions between Harry Potter and LOTR and Narnia.  You brought up several good points about the supposed differences between Narnia and Harry Potter and suggested those differences did not exist.  That's what I was looking for when I started this thread.  And you're the only one so far from the pro-HP side who actually did that. CrossCuT made an attempt, but it didn't speak to the point of this thread, and actually she helped to further prove the articles points.

 

You are right, though - I am going in circles - because I'm trying to get a very simple point across that few people here seem to understand, and if they do they're not talking.  I've stated the point several times, so there's no use in continuing to say it.  Some people will never understand, and some people will get it in there own time.

 

What have you said that I didn't respond to?  I have avoided several statements that are off-topic (trying to choose my own battles), such as the idea that the magic in HP is neither good nor evil (which has no bearing on the subject at hand, since it doesn't make a difference in the end).  

[fides' Jack]

So wait, let me get this straight. You're contradicting yourself. It's either this: 

 

 

or this:

 

 

The first one tells me that you fear committing a sin by merely reading Harry Potter, because you're engaging with something that is inherently evil for personal enjoyment.  The second one tells me that you think it's not sinful for me to enjoy it...because somehow Harry Potter isn't inherently evil?  

 

Or are you saying it's possible to enjoy something which is inherently evil, and not be committing a sin? So by that logic I can watch pornography for personal enjoyment and not commit a sin? Either Harry Potter is indeed inherently evil, or it's not.  If Harry Potter is inherently evil, then reading it would be committing a sin.  If it's not, or just an occasion of sin, then it's not sinful.  

 

Or are you saying that I'm too ignorant about the true nature of Harry Potter to be committing a sin by reading it even though it's inherently evil?  But that doesn't make sense, because I've read all seven books multiple times and have seen all eight movies, plus you keep telling me how inherently evil it is.  

 

You can't say that Harry Potter is inherently evil and NOT accuse me of sinning by reading it at the same time. THAT is why this gets personal really quickly.  

 

It also gets really tedious because this feels like every "Catholics worship Mary!" argument ever.  

 

Actually, you're correct for pointing out my contradiction.  But it's that same contradiction that illustrates the fence I'm on right now.  On one hand, I can view HP as inherently evil and watching it is sinful, and on the other I can view HP as nothing more than a good read with some hazy morals (either way, if I get my information from posters here or from the article, it's still a second-hand source - so I'll take it from the article, which at least appears less defensive than people here).

 

However, I never said that HP is absolutely inherently evil.  I said that I believe it is, but I don't extend that belief far enough as to affect my opinion of whether or not others sin by watching it.  And in that way, I am not accusing anyone of sinning by reading it.  In general, I reserve the affirmation of the presence of sin to myself, unless it is absolutely clear that someone else is engaging in it.  That's not the case here.

 

What is absolutely clear here, though, is that it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion about anything which raises potential concerns about Harry Potter on Phatmass.

 

Can a mod close this thread?  Does this count as Catholic vs. Catholic debate?  (I don't know what the actual rule means)

[fides' Jack]

See below: 

 

 

[...]

 

The only belief concerning Harry Potter that I've put forth here is that Harry Potter is evil.

 

Since I don't have any opinions of my own, tell me where I got that idea from.

[CrossCuT]

You got it from reading nonsense! :(

 

You are taking the words of very silly articles that are overly critical of evidence that is unsubstantial at best. But you are unable to know the difference because you do not have any personal knowledge of the subject in which to contrast your adopted information from.

I have already said this before, but you probably didnt read it in my last comment.  

 

Just like all insane harry potter fans are unable to think critically as you noted, I think all those with harry potter phobia are unable to think logically about the literary value of the book. 

 

[fides' Jack]

What nonsense are you talking about?  Seriously - point me to something that you know for a fact that I've read that says what I stated I believe.  Give me specifics, or your comments are nothing more than personal attacks.  Do you mean "unsubstantial" or "unsubstantiated"?  Seriously - I'm confused.

 

You're still holding onto the baseless idea that unless I read the Harry Potter books, I can't determine for myself whether or not they're bad.  That's just stupid logic.  Someone else made the distinction with another title - was it 50 Shades of Grey ? (or something like that)  Which they said they didn't need to see to know that it was bad because it glorifies explicit sex.  I would agree - do you not?

 

So, your problem is just that I draw that line in a different place than you - is that correct?

 

I never said there was no literary value in HP.

Edited April 30, 2013 by fides' Jack

[Basilisa Marie]

Actually, you're correct for pointing out my contradiction.  But it's that same contradiction that illustrates the fence I'm on right now.  On one hand, I can view HP as inherently evil and watching it is sinful, and on the other I can view HP as nothing more than a good read with some hazy morals (either way, if I get my information from posters here or from the article, it's still a second-hand source - so I'll take it from the article, which at least appears less defensive than people here).

 

However, I never said that HP is absolutely inherently evil.  I said that I believe it is, but I don't extend that belief far enough as to affect my opinion of whether or not others sin by watching it.  And in that way, I am not accusing anyone of sinning by reading it.  In general, I reserve the affirmation of the presence of sin to myself, unless it is absolutely clear that someone else is engaging in it.  That's not the case here.

 

What is absolutely clear here, though, is that it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion about anything which raises potential concerns about Harry Potter on Phatmass.

 

Can a mod close this thread?  Does this count as Catholic vs. Catholic debate?  (I don't know what the actual rule means)

 

It probably doesn't count because it's the Debate Table and it's a subject where lots of Catholics have a wide range of opinions.  It's not like we're arguing about the Real Presence or something. :)

 

Ah, I see.  Well, thank you for clarifying that for me. That makes more sense.  

 

I think the responsibility for reasonable discussion goes both ways.  My side is usually pretty defensive, but your side doesn't ever pull punches with the strong language.  There's blame to go around.  

[Basilisa Marie]

What nonsense are you talking about?  Seriously - point me to something that you know for a fact that I've read that says what I stated I believe.  Give me specifics, or your comments are nothing more than personal attacks.  Do you mean "unsubstantial" or "unsubstantiated"?  Seriously - I'm confused.

 

You're still holding onto the baseless idea that unless I read the Harry Potter books, I can't determine for myself whether or not they're bad.  That's just stupid logic.  Someone else made the distinction with another title - was it 50 Shades of Grey ? (or something like that)  Which they said they didn't need to see to know that it was bad because it glorifies explicit sex.  I would agree - do you not?

 

So, your problem is just that I draw that line in a different place than you - is that correct?

 

I never said there was no literary value in HP.

 

I made that analogy. The analogy was that the situation could be like any one of two situations.

 

50 Shades: The claim is that it glorifies an evil (explicit sex). Both fans and critics of the series agree that it does this, so it's safe to say that this claim is true without reading it. 

Twilight: The claim is that it glorifies an evil (emotionally abusive relationship). Fans and critics disagree over whether or not the relationship is abusive, so you can't make the claim for yourself that one or the other is true unless you read them and decide for yourself.

 

I was trying to say that the situation with Harry Potter is like the relationship in Twilight, not like the sex in 50 Shades, because while critics say the magic in HP is glorifies evil, fans argue that the "magic" isn't like that.  So that's why I'm saying the most prudent decision is to read the books to find out for yourself, because there's an inherent critical discrepancy in how people are understanding the books. 

 

 

Anywho.  So yeah, that's what I was getting at with that.  :)

Edited April 30, 2013 by Basilisa Marie

[fides' Jack]

It probably doesn't count because it's the Debate Table and it's a subject where lots of Catholics have a wide range of opinions.  It's not like we're arguing about the Real Presence or something. :)

 

Ah, I see.  Well, thank you for clarifying that for me. That makes more sense.  

 

I think the responsibility for reasonable discussion goes both ways.  My side is usually pretty defensive, but your side doesn't ever pull punches with the strong language.  There's blame to go around.  

 

Thank you for the even-minded post!