More Harry Potter book burning. Yee-hah! “These books teach children how they can get into witchcraft and become a witch, wizard or warlock,” Brock said. Members sang “Amazing Grace” as…
More Harry Potter book burning. Yee-hah!
“These books teach children how they can get into witchcraft and become a witch, wizard or warlock,” Brock said. Members sang “Amazing Grace” as they threw Potter books, plus some other books and magazines, into the fire.
Yup. They show all the steps. All you have to do is get an invitation to Hogwarts via owl post, then make your way to Platform 9-3/4 at Kings Cross, and you’re all set to become a foul minion of Satan!
Yeesh.
This week’s Blogger Insider questions are from the Geekman. For my questions and his answers, check his site. 1. You write a lot about comic books, what do you think…
This week’s Blogger Insider questions are from the Geekman. For my questions and his answers, check his site.
1. You write a lot about comic books, what do you think are the top 5 comic books ever made? Why?
Oh, geez, it’s lots easier to critique others choices in this category than to actually come up with a list myself. The criterion of “top” is difficult, too. Best sales? Most influential? Most re-readable? Beyond which is the question of single stand-alone issues vs. story arcs, and other annoyances like that.
I’m gonna compromise here by IDing my favorite Trade Paperback Collections up
on my downstairs shelf. And I’m gonna compromise still further by choosing
six, and not giving any particular order:
The Books of Magic – Before Harry Potter, Neil Gaiman introduced Tim Hunter, an ordinary bespectacled boy in London who might grow up to be greatest wizard of all — if he chooses the path of Magic, as offered to him by four trenchcoated magical denizens of the DC world. Gaiman teamed up with art notables John Bolton, Charles Vess, Scott Hampton and Paul Johnson, to describe the many worlds of magic, and a young boy faced with a terrible decision. Great art, great writing.
The Watchmen – This twelve-part series let Alan Moore deconstruct the superhero genre into a tale of humans with strange abilities and funny costumes and dark passions. Dave Gibbons art complements this perfectly.
Preacher (Vol 6 – War in the Sun) – Garth Ennis’ tale of a Texas preacher with a past, out to find God and make Him answer for the pain in the world, is good through and through. But this particular volume, drawn as always by Steve Dillon (with a backup tale by Peter Snejbjerg), features the origins of Herr Starr and the Grail, some particularly passionate scenes between Jesse and Tulip, and the confrontation between the Saint of Killers and the US Army (not to mention Air Force). Great, over-the-top action.
The Sandman (Dream Country) – Reprinting issues 17-20 (and over a decade old now), this collection includes the marvelous one-shots “Calliope,” “A Dream of a Thousand Cats,” “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” and “Facade,” individual tales of dreams, horror, and hope, each with a differerent artist, but each with Gaiman’s particular writing touch. While the Sandman story arcs were fine, I liked the single issue stories even better.
Strangers in Paradise (Complete, Vol. 2) – I love this extended love triangle soap opera written and drawn by Terry Moore. This relatively early collection completes the first “crime story” arc.
Astro City (Life in the Big City) – The original collection, and still, to my ind, the best. Kurt Busiek — aided by the art of Brent Anderson — imbues his still-recognizeably Silver Age heroes with humanity. The stories are less about how Captain X Defeats the Evil Dr. Y, but about how Captain X spends his spare time, or what the folks watching all of this going on actually think and feel. Really good stuff, duh. Even if Busiek’s health has interfered with more recent production, his work stands for all time.
2. What�s the worst nickname you ever had?
In 7th Grade Orchestra class, two of the girls in class insisted on breaking into “The Ballad of Davy Crockett” whenever I arrived.
3. Assuming god exists and offered to truthfully answer any one question you asked, what would you ask?
Unfortunately, I suspect any of the questions I’d want answered would be beyond my understanding of the answer. But I’d probably still take a stab at, “Why is there suffering?”
4. What five things do you never want to hear your children say that you already know they will one day say?
– Go away.
– I never want to talk with you again.
– I don’t love you.
– And this is where I got the *other* piercing.
– Time for your meds, Dad.”
5. Assuming no time for preparation (they meet accidentally and without warning), who would win in a fight, Spiderman or Batman? Justify your answer.
Batman, no question. Brains over brawn. Not that Spidey is stupid — Bats is just too darned sneaky, and is used to dealing with guys who are stronger and faster than he is. Hell, the guy’s been hanging around with the JLA forever, standing up to folks who can take out Superman, Green Lantern, et al. Brains, m’man. Brains.
6. What’s the best insult/comeback you never got the chance to say?
Unfortunately, while I often think of better arguments or rhetorical rejoinders after the fact, I rarely think of insults in that way. I’m just
too nice of a guy.
7. What profession, other than your own, would you most like to try?
Professional philanthropist, giving away reasonable chunks of my vast fortune to good causes.
Or maybe an accountant. I think I’d make a good accountant.
8. What one thing would you want your children to remember you for?
Teaching them, by example, how to be a good person.
9. What’s the stupidest/silliest/most trivial lie you ever got caught in? Why did you tell it? How did you get caught?
I was probably 6. My mom was giving violin lessons in the front room. I decided to get my 3-year-old brother in trouble (which needs no further explanation), and went and sprinkled salt and pepper all over the kitchen counters, then ran out to tell my mom. She proceeded to banish my brother to his room.
Not leaving well enough alone, I repeated the trick, adding sugar to the mix. Unbeknownst to me, my mom could see what I was doing in the reflection from the breakfront’s glass doors. So when I went to narc on my brother for not only such a high crime, but for his breaking out of his banishment … well, in retrospect, hilarity ensued.
10. What’s the funniest thing you ever did when no one was around to see?
Damn. I’m not good at remembering things like that. Cop-out, I know, but there you go.
11. What song most encapsulates your idea of true love?
John Barry’s “Moviola”. It has no lyrics, it’s just orchestral, but it’s broad, sweeping, nostalgic, inspirational, complex, and utterly romantic. We used it at the end of our wedding video.
12. Every material item in your home will be disintegrated at the touch of a button. You are allowed to save one thing from this horrendous fate. What item would you chose and why?
Gah! Probably a piece of art. Much of our photography is duped elsewhere — on-line, or with other people — and so could be replaced. My notebook is backed up. So probably art. Maybe the Mauro over the fireplace.
Or maybe the “lock box” of stuff that should really be in a safe deposit box but is not yet. How annoyingly pragmatic.
13. Name three things your S.O. does on purpose just to get on your nerves.
I can’t even name one. Really. She doesn’t play those sorts of games. There are occasional things she does that get on my nerves, especially when I’m already feeling peevish. But intentionally — no, not really.
14. Do you believe that it’s possible a child can do something so bad that a spanking is necessary? Why or why not?
Yes.
Spanking is not, IMO, an awful, evil thing. I think it’s an appropriate response, usually a last resort for older kids, to providing some immediate painful consequence to an action that’s dangerous (but which you don’t want to actually make good on its danger).
I’ve been known to flick Katherine’s hand with my forefinger when she keeps reaching up for something that she should not get into, and won’t listen to “No!”
The point being, of course, that spanking is not meant to inflict injury, nor to make Mom or Dad feel better, but to be part of the balance in teaching kids between “carrots,” simply withdrawing them from the unwanted situation, and “the stick.” It’s certainly something that can be done to excess, to harm — but the same can be said for any tactics you use to help bring up a child.
15. What makes something worthy of being blogged on your site?
It’s got to move me (humorously, irritatingly, absurdly) enough that I want to share it with others. That’s I think the underlying bit here — this is all stuff I want to communicate to others. So I do.
Chris Henning, in the Sydney Morning Herald opines that children’s tales such as the Harry Potter series or the Lord of the Rings, are “fundamentally racist,” and appeal to us…
Chris Henning, in the Sydney Morning Herald opines that children’s tales such as the Harry Potter series or the Lord of the Rings, are “fundamentally racist,” and appeal to us on that basis.
Yeah. Of course. It’s obvious now that he mentions it.
The appeal of the Lord of the Rings is fundamentally racist. Middle Earth is inhabited by races of creature deeply marked off from one another by language, physical appearance, and behaviour. It is almost a parody of a Hitlerian vision: orcs are ugly, disgusting, brutal, violent – without exception; elves are a beautiful, lordly, cultured elite; in between are hobbits, short, hairy, ordinary, a bit limited, but lovable and loyal and brave when they have to be.
Individuals within races don’t vary from the pattern. To know one is to know all. The races are either dangerous or they are benign. An orc – any orc – is without question an enemy. A hobbit would never side with an orc.
Okay, let’s consider this.
There’s a certain, shallow accuracy to what Henning writes. We don’t see any orcs turning coat and helping the good guys.
However, the sides are not quite as monolithic as that. There’s conflict in the Shire — with some hobbits siding with Saruman when he shows up there, and others working hand-in-glove with the Ringwraiths. The elves are divided, too — intervene or stay aloof or just high-tail it. The humans are certainly divided amongst different camps.
The “good guys” also fight between themselves. Elves and dwarves have an ancient conflict. Hobbits mistrust humans. Humans mistrust elves. Heck, in The Hobbit, the whole kit-n-kaboodle get into a big battle.
And that’s where this thesis begins to fall apart further. Tolkien’s message, in both The Hobbit (at the Battle of Five Armies) and in LotR is that we of good will must hang together, or else we shall surely hang separately. The Fellowship itself represents an unprecedented alliance of elves and dwarves (who work through their racial differences to become the fastest of friends), along with humans of different factions, and, of course, hobbits. When they work together, they succeed. When they fight amongst themselves, they fail.
Is there some “black and white” thinking in LotR? Well, yes, orcs are evil, and, as “corrupted” elves, that’s all they really can be. You can call that racist if you want, but you might as well call the fixation on Aragorn’s bloodline as being racist, too. It’s a standard element of myth, folks, and perhaps it’s an antequated version of “Us vs. Them,” with the orcs as Them/Outsiders/Enemies, but I don’t know that the LotR would have been any better, or more meaningful, had one of the orcs turned out to be a lover of flowers and elves and trees.
What about Harry?
But … but … Harry and his friends are members of an elite. They are not a race, but their powers are handed down the generations from parents to children. The skills must be inherited before they are developed with teaching at Hogwarts. The reader quickly identifies with this genetic elite, the wizards such as Harry, and despises the talentless, boorish muggles.
How we laugh when the Dursleys get into difficulties! They deserve it. They are, after all, just muggles – hapless, fat, brutal and stupid. They’re all like that. Go on, Harry, hit them again and watch them cry.
Where to begin, where to begin …?
Okay, as a parody of English boarding schools, there’s going to be a certain measure of “eliteness” about the setting. That having been said, everything in the series counters Henning’s thesis. The Dursley’s aren’t despised because they’re magic-less muggles. They’re despised because they are cheap, petty tyrants and spoiled brats, oppressing Harry because he is special.
Indeed, much of the magical behind-the-scenes society seems designed to help protect muggles. Magic is not to be used among them, for example. Muggles, and those wizards who come from “mixed” families, are looked down on — but only by the elitists like Draco Malfoy, who is clearly painted as an undesireable, hateful character.
Without attributing too much profundity to the Potter series, it seems that it’s designed more as a glorification of the Everyman than of the elite. Harry’s just a normal kid, raised amongst muggles. Ron’s family, though magical, is poor, and he has to face that challenge against the rich Malfoys of the world.
Are the wizards of Hogwarts an elite? Well, they certainly have talent and skills — some inherited, some trained. But that’s life. My mother has both talent and skill as a violinist — some native, some trained (and practiced, and practiced, and practiced …). That makes her an “elite” in some way, but a book that glorified the wonders of life at a music academy wouldn’t be accused of racism, would it?
Does holding the idea that some people have special talents in some areas that others do not make one elitist, or racist? I sure hope not.
Harry and the hobbits, with their takeaway racism, offer the same comfort for the whole world: join our tribe, be special with us, despise our subhumans.
I’d say Mr. Henning is trying to read his own political message into these books — and the books belie him at every turn.
(Via Xkot’s Discussion Board)
Harry Potter Sorting Hat: HufflepuffHarry Potter Sorting Hat v.2: Hufflepuff Harry Potter House Selector*: Ravenclaw What’s Your Hogwarts House?*: Ravenclaw Hogwarts Sorting Hat*: Ravenclaw Harry Potter Sorting Hat (#2)*: Gryffindor…
*This site actually looks like a place where you can design your own tests. Interesting.
Not quite sure what it means, but …
(Via Trance Gemini)
Brian Carney in the WSJ analyzes two tales of magic that are on the screens this winter, and determines that Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings is much more sophisticated and…
Brian Carney in the WSJ analyzes two tales of magic that are on the screens this winter, and determines that Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings is much more sophisticated and moral than Rowling’s Harry Potter.
This kind of moral complexity is simply absent from Ms. Rowling’s books. Contrast Tolkien’s careful use of the ring with Ms. Rowling’s rather flip use of another great artifact of legend, the philosopher’s stone. Alchemists believed the stone would turn lead into gold. As a bonus, it was also thought to confer eternal life. The conceit of “Harry Potter” is that such a stone has been made and the bad guy wants it.
This is a setup worthy of Tolkien; indeed, it mimics his tale in vital respects. But Ms. Rowling’s story manages to bring to light none of the moral dilemmas–of mortality, wealth, power–that the existence of the stone naturally suggests. The reader simply accepts as given that both sides want it, no particular importance is assigned to its powers and Harry never shows any interest in using it. He merely wants to keep it away from the bad guy. Once that’s accomplished, the stone drops out of the story, like a token at the end of some video game.
In Tolkien’s world the temptation of evil is one that all, or nearly all, of his characters must confront. The argument of Tolkien’s tale–controversial, to be sure–is that, while intentions matter, the way we act is far more important than why we act. His story, for all its narrative brio, presents a serious rebuttal to the idea that good ends justify using evil means.
Well, duh.
I mean, Rowling was out to write a good story. Tolkien drew on grand themes, intentionally creating an epic with profound ethical implications. Both succeeded, but to compare the two is like comparing … well, Goldfinger and Lawrence of Arabia.
Still, it’s an interesting article. And it made me want to catch the first installment of LotR even more. Got to arrange a sitter for the 19th ….
(Via InstaPundit)
USS Clueless, who lambastes people who see the success of the war so far only terms of the disasters to come, laments over the success of the Harry Potter movie:…
USS Clueless, who lambastes people who see the success of the war so far only terms of the disasters to come, laments over the success of the Harry Potter movie:
The one thing that Hollywood never seems to twig on: good movies are based on good scripts. Big name actors and lots of explosions and special effects cannot retrieve a lousy script. But rather than learning the lesson that “Harry Potter is a winner because it’s a good story, so let’s go find some more good stories” it’s a sure thing that in about 9 months we’re going t be drenched with Potter-alikes, because Hollywood will think that the lesson is “Stories about kids and magic are winners now.” And they’re almost all sure to be execrable.
And there’s a damned good chance that we’ll see a Potter-alike TV show next year. And it will be done with American actors, and it’s going to suck.
I know far better than to predict that he’s wrong, however.
While I like the concept that soft drinks (soda pop, cokes, whatever they call them in your part of the country) are “liquid candy,” I don’t think that this site,…
While I like the concept that soft drinks (soda pop, cokes, whatever they call them in your part of the country) are “liquid candy,” I don’t think that this site, begging J.K. Rowlings to somehow break Coke’s sponsorship contract with Warner Bros. to promote/be promoted with the Harry Potter movie, is likely to have much impact?
Why not?
Well, Rowling’s characters don’t eschew the occasional sweet. I seem to recall a very popular candy store in the neighboring village, in fact. And, when taken to excess, Rowling portrays the problems which ensue. That’s one reason.
For another reason … these folks are nuts.
(I was amused to find out that Pepsi One has as much caffeine as Mountain Dew. Though, of course, we now know that caffeine makes you smarter, stronger, and less prone to arthritis. It also drives chicks wild.)
Both Margie and I grew up in households were sodas were not a regular part of the regular menu. But we drink them — in moderation — now. We will probably cut back some when Katherine is growing up and drinking such things. But — hey, that “moderation” word is probably not a bad idea. There are much greater threats to children in the world than soft drinks or their advertising.
(Via Dynamist)
(That having been said, I think I’ll go see Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone tonight. And have a large root beer.)
(And, yes, I know the American title is … and the Sorcerer’s Stone, on the movie and book both. I reject the proposition that Americans should not recognize the term “philosopher’s stone,” or, if they don’t, shouldn’t learn it. This has been your Official Pedantic Moment for Today.)
(According to IMDB, the references to the stone were filmed looped with both names during the production, so that the Brits, at least, can hear the “real” name.)
Margie and I have sitters for two outings this weekend. Tomorrow night: Harry Potter Saturday night: Church dinner get-together. I expect to have fun at both — and to enjoy…
Margie and I have sitters for two outings this weekend.
Tomorrow night: Harry Potter
Saturday night: Church dinner get-together.
I expect to have fun at both — and to enjoy the brief interval of Squiglessness.
USS Clueless is not new in observing that one of the benefits of a free society is that the “horse laugh test” (can you listen to something without bursting into…
USS Clueless is not new in observing that one of the benefits of a free society is that the “horse laugh test” (can you listen to something without bursting into one?) is a usable mechanism for determining whether someone or their their ideas are, ah, worth listening to. But he points out some good examples today from the Left (see the previous entry) and the Right (folks getting up in arms over Harry Potter and the Threat of Satanism Taking Over Our Tots).
The Potter books top the banned book listing for 2000, compiled by the American Library Association. Some have called for the books to be banned from public school libraries, claiming stories about witches and wizards violate church-state separation. Others have staged book burnings or circulated phony reports that claim the novels inspired thousands of children to join satanic cults.
A Kansas library recently canceled a reading of the books due to complaints about magical content. Some children in Jacksonville, Fla., must now present parental permission slips to read the books at school libraries.
“Satan is up to his old tricks again and the main focus is the children of the world,” wrote Jon Watkins, a Baptist activist. “The whole purpose of these (Potter) books is to desensitize readers and introduce them to the occult.”
Next up, “Activist Groups Claim Winnie the Pooh Causing Obsesity in Children.”
Pirated software is more popular on search sites than porn or Harry Potter, according to this story. I’m sure that says something about the Internet community, but I’d just as…
Pirated software is more popular on search sites than porn or Harry Potter, according to this story.
I’m sure that says something about the Internet community, but I’d just as soon not speculate what. All I know is that that’s probably not how I would order my own searches …