Thanks, Sigune! I just wanted to thank you briefly for your response. If possible, I do think it would be better to actually outline this. It does worry me that it's so negative, in the end, because there were things in the book (like the doe patronus) that I actually thought were effective, and even lovely. As to blaming Rowling for not being Catholic - I do feel strongly about this, but I honestly wasn't trying to blame her for not sharing my beliefs! Rather, this is the way I was thinking:
The standard Christian model of virtue that we see illustrated in the story is Snape's story. You repent; you try to do better; you *act* to correct your mistakes. This is not just a Catholic model; Lewis was actually quite anti-Catholic (at least, until he met Tolkien, and even then he never quite overcame the prejudices of his youth. Lewis was an Ulster Protestant by birth and training and Anglican by conversion.) Another model is Harry's story. You are born special; everything you do is right, and you are marvellously protected even from your errors.
Harry succeeds, and Snape fails.
At least, that's how it struck me. It was hard not to sound anti-Calvinist, because this whole theory of virtue annoys me so much. And Rowling's religious imagery is obvious and begs to be discussed. But it's a touchy issue. I do have to be careful how I approach it. If only Rowling herself had been more careful and less divisive!
About being biased in favor of Snape - well, of course, I am, but I was trying hard to point out only what is in the text, and everything that is in the text. My thesis here (which I should be clearer about), is that Rowling's book actually is wiser than she is, so that the positive aspects of his character shine through even her attempts to diminish him.
But, in the end, as I said, neither he nor Harry work as Christ symbols. What's by far more frustrating is the lack of resolution to the conflict between them. I thought that was what the story was about.
And I completely, totally don't get why Rowling's magical world is supposed to be so wonderful. As to the rules of magic, I'm afraid that, if I were a citizen of this world, I'd be drawn to dark magic, too, because "the effects can't be reversed". In other words, it's real, and the other types of magic are just a game.
What it boils down to, in the end, is that I just *don't* understand the story Rowling was telling. What is the point of all of this ruckus? Because the tale seemed empty (unless we do take it as ironic), I found it deeply unsatisfying. Maybe that should be my thesis statement?
I will take all your comments under advisement and see what I can change. Thanks for reading!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-02 07:53 pm (UTC)The standard Christian model of virtue that we see illustrated in the story is Snape's story. You repent; you try to do better; you *act* to correct your mistakes. This is not just a Catholic model; Lewis was actually quite anti-Catholic (at least, until he met Tolkien, and even then he never quite overcame the prejudices of his youth. Lewis was an Ulster Protestant by birth and training and Anglican by conversion.)
Another model is Harry's story. You are born special; everything you do is right, and you are marvellously protected even from your errors.
Harry succeeds, and Snape fails.
At least, that's how it struck me. It was hard not to sound anti-Calvinist, because this whole theory of virtue annoys me so much. And Rowling's religious imagery is obvious and begs to be discussed. But it's a touchy issue. I do have to be careful how I approach it. If only Rowling herself had been more careful and less divisive!
About being biased in favor of Snape - well, of course, I am, but I was trying hard to point out only what is in the text, and everything that is in the text. My thesis here (which I should be clearer about), is that Rowling's book actually is wiser than she is, so that the positive aspects of his character shine through even her attempts to diminish him.
But, in the end, as I said, neither he nor Harry work as Christ symbols. What's by far more frustrating is the lack of resolution to the conflict between them. I thought that was what the story was about.
And I completely, totally don't get why Rowling's magical world is supposed to be so wonderful. As to the rules of magic, I'm afraid that, if I were a citizen of this world, I'd be drawn to dark magic, too, because "the effects can't be reversed". In other words, it's real, and the other types of magic are just a game.
What it boils down to, in the end, is that I just *don't* understand the story Rowling was telling. What is the point of all of this ruckus? Because the tale seemed empty (unless we do take it as ironic), I found it deeply unsatisfying. Maybe that should be my thesis statement?
I will take all your comments under advisement and see what I can change. Thanks for reading!