A few days ago, the Gwinnett County Board of Education met to decide the fate of Harry Potter in the public schools. I live in Gwinnett. It's a good-sized county, a mix of African-Americans and immigrants, transplanted Yankees and Old Guard natives. Mostly middle to upper class, with a fair amount of working class, it doesn't have the cachet of Old Money that Cobb County does, but it has a lot of over-priced real estate and McMansions that start at half a mil. And lots and lots of fundamentalist/evangelical Christians who vote Republican and believe God chose George Bush to be president. All the offices other than national ones in 2004 were Republicans running unopposed--I voted for Howdy Doody for those. So it was no surprise that a local mother would try and get poor Harry Potter removed from the shelves of county schools.
More below the fold.
Laura Mallory of Loganville filed an appeal last week to get the best-selling book series out of the schools' media centers. She is an evangelical Christian who has three children at J.C. Magill Elementary School.
"I think the anti-Christian bias -- it's just got to stop," Mallory said. "And if we don't say something, we'll just keep getting pushed out of the schools. And I pay taxes, too, and I think that gives me a voice to speak out about this."
What anti-Christian bias? I asked that myself. Having a few books that fundies don't like is hardly anti-Christian bias. It's called having a balanced collection. At least that's what they called it when I got my master's in library science thirty-three years ago. That used to be considered a good thing--having something that covers the spectrum of opinion and beliefs. Apparently that's no longer true. If ONE Christian objects to it, it MUST GO.
The problem is, the author of these books is just as much a Christian as Mallory is--a staunch member of the Church of Scotland. She is not any kind of a witch , Wiccan or otherwise, and her books show the characters celebrating CHRISTIAN holidays: Halloween, not Samhain; Christmas, not Yule or the Winter Solstice. There is NO mention of religion at all, but since the wizarding world co-exists with that of British Muggles, one assumes most are Protestants, just like most of the British, albeit far more polite about their faith than the Religious Right here. Religion just isn't talked about in England, I am told by British friend. It's considered too personal for casual conversation. Rowling's not mentioning it is simply a reflection of a culture that regards religion differently than we do Besides, religion has nothing to do with the plot, and any writer worth his or her salt will tell you that you leave out anything that doesn't advance the plot.
Most importantly, critics of children's books love the series. They are well-written, with strong characterizations (Harry is a deeply flawed hero whose temper gets him in trouble), an abiding sense of morality and admiration for critical thinking(there is a very definite difference between good and evil, but there's also a lot of gray areas; what it doesn't do is advocate blindly following rules just because they are rules) and a sense of humor. Moreover they appeal to boys, the hardest group to get interested in reading. Librarians and teachers love them for just that reason. They've won many awards, and are just good reads, whether you are a child or an adult. And they stand the test of re-reading--you can go back, read them again, and feel just as satisfied and content as you did the first time.
The opposition to this series is spurred by religious beliefs. Its opponents are Right-Wing Christians, and the conservative Catholics who still listen to the Nazi in the Vatican. I have many Catholic friends who love the books.
So what is so terrible about the boy with the lightning bolt scar ?
Mallory wrote on her appeal forms that she was objecting to the books because of their "evil themes, witchcraft, demonic activity, murder, evil blood sacrifice, spells and teaching children all of this."
Gee, I must have missed all the demonic activity and blood sacrifice when I read the books. Twice in all cases, three times in some. Yes, Lord Voldemort does some terrible things--but he's the damned VILLAIN, and one expects villains to do nasty, villainous things. It's in their job description if you look at page four of the Training Manual for Evil Wizards, Overlords, Witches and Sorcerers. The heroes--Dumbledore, Harry and his friends, the Weasleys, Remus Lupin, Professor McGoncicle -don't do any of those things The students learn DEFENSE Against the Dark Arts, which means they learn what the enemy might use against them so they're prepared to deal with it--but they are told firmly that working dark is wrong and evil. But there is NO mention of demons, just odd magical creatures. And if there were, you can bet Dumbledore would be taking a firm stand against playing with demons.
The mother of four said she was opposed to the messages of the books, which describe a young wizard's adventures in a school of magic. She said she had done much of her research online, reading a variety of Christian message boards and Harry Potter fan sites.
"Their thinking has changed. They're designed to think that witches and witchcraft and wizards and all this is just normal. And that it's OK. And that it's even good. I strongly disagree with that. I don't think it's OK, and I don't think it's good at all," Mallory said
I am a Wiccan--for the last 30 years. I can tell you with assurance that the magic of Hogwarts has nothing to do with Wicca. It's fairy tale magic, not all that different than what you see in Disney animation.
What she is really afraid of here is that perhaps her children's eyes might be opened to the fact that for most people, the world isn't black and white. That her children might actually realize that Wiccans and pagans aren't evil.
We aren't. And most of us like Harry Potter but know that it has NOTHING to do with our religion. Because Wicca--which this woman lumps in with the dark side of magic and religion--is simply a reconstruction of the old Celtic earth-based religion, minus any sort of sacrifice at all. Yes, we do perform rituals and spells, but our Rede forbids doing harm, so the Dark Arts are right out. Our spells and rituals are a cross between prayer and mental imaging. And a lot of us get tired of having to explain the difference between Wicca, the religion, with its reverence for all that lives on the earth and in the cosmos, and the folk witchcraft that can be used for good or evil.
I think that Malloy fears the most is that her children might learn TOLERANCE for non-Christians.
Not all Christians agree with her. Out of the mouths of babes,or, in this case,1o year old Jessica Grimes...
"The books never at any time turned me into a wizard or witch," Grimes said. "I go to church every Sunday, go to Sunday school and never at any time did I think the books are true."
But here is the scariest part of the article.
She admitted that she has not read the book series partially because "they're really very long and I have four kids."
"I've put a lot of work into what I've studied and read. I think it would be hypocritical for me to read all the books, honestly. I don't agree with what's in them. I don't have to read an entire pornographic magazine to know it's obscene," Mallory said
In other words, she is condemning the series without even reading them. She is basing her decision completely upon what other people have told her. She is terrified of thinking for herself because it requires her to do some work.. She sees this as a virtue.
And this is typical.
I suspect that this sort of fundy-vangy is incapable of, or at last deeply fears, independent thought. They go to websites to decide about whether books or movies are acceptable. They go to Fox News to decide who to vote for and what to think about Bush and the war. They condemn Wicca without actually knowing what it teaches, relying on books written by so-called Christians, most of whom are really charlatans claiming to be ex-Wiccans, books filled with so many obvious and grotesque errors as to be hilarious to anyone who actually knows anything about the occult. But go to primary sources to learn the truth?
Heaven, pardon the pun, forbid. They might have to actually THINK about something and come to a conclusion on their little own. And that is a skill that was never taught to them, one indeed, which was utterly discouraged by their preachers. I believe strongly that before you condemn something, you should read or watch or listen to it YOURSELF, instead of buying into what others say.
Not surprisingly, the smartest comments in the article came from a sixteen year old Harry Potter fan named Jana Davis.
"Maybe parents should be parents and read the book first," Davis said. "If they find it fun, exciting and adventurous, like thousands of people across the world, then they should allow their children to read it, in school or out."
Where do I stand on this?
Solidly with Davis. I think parents have the right to censor--but only for their own children. They don't get to tell everyone else what their kids can read, watch, or listen to. And that is precisely what the Religious Reich tries to do on almost every issue: force the rest of us to conform to their very narrow, rigid, and unquestioning standards. Their idea of a fair and balanced collection is the same as that of Fox News: their views and only their views on the shelves.
And Malloy makes that very clear when she says :
On her complaint form, she suggested they be replaced by C.S. Lewis's "Chronicles of Narnia" series or Tim LaHaye's "Left Behind: the Kids" series.
In other words, she wants religiously neutral fantasy replaced by books with overtly Christian themes (I wonder if she knows that Lewis is had a long-standing affair with his landlady? That he was an Anglican, not a conservative Christian?). As far as she is concerned, no other religion or philosophy but hers deserves to be on the shelves of a PUBLIC school. The first amendment only applies to CHRISTIANS, after all--and only fundy-vangy Christians at that.
If I had a child in the school system, I would fill out a complaint requesting that the Bible be removed from the shelves because it encourages the bullying of Wiccan children. After all, the KJV says you must not suffer a witch to live. I would be terribly afraid that children would get the idea that it is acceptable to kill someone because their religious beliefs differ from yours. I know just how far such a complaint would get--round-filed as soon as it was read. But if one religion is permitted to demand books which offend them be removed, than members of all religions should have that same right.
What will happen? Probably nothing. A committee will examine the book, as they have complaints against R.L. Stine and Judy Blume, and will likely recommend that no action be taken, and Harry will stay on the shelves. Remember this book ALREADY had to be reviewed and approved by a committee of librarians But there is still a chance that the censors will win, because the last complaints was in 1997, before God appointed George Bush President. The fundy-vangies weren't quite so smug and sure of themselves, back then. And it's likely that there are many of them in the Board of Education who will end up on that committee.
One can only hope reason will prevail over bigotry.