Why Does the Christian Right Hate Harry Potter?
Harry Potter Book Burning
Christ Community Church, 2001
Alamogordo, New Mexico
Photo: Neil Jacobs / Getty Images
This isn't just an academic exercise. If would-be authoritarian leaders think that there is something dangerous about the Harry Potter books, then there must be something in them which is antithetical to the authoritarian mindset and/or agenda. This, in turn, is almost certain to be something that is good for the rest of us. Regardless of what you might think about the stories or the books' literary merits, anything which frightens authoritarians is something what deserves a closer look.
Amanda Marcotte writes at Pandagon about the themes and ideas in the Harry Potter books which seem to be most likely to conflict with the ideology of the Christian Right:
Anti-authoritarianism and thinking for yourself. Not that there’s anything new in this; 99% of stories written nowadays outside of the Christian bookstore market preach the virtues of independent thought. Hell, even the authoritarians are trying to push lock-step conformity as the new rebellion—think of Wendy Shalit trying to push the idea that traditional feminine virginity is somehow counter-cultural.
If the Potter books are particularly offensive in this regard, it’s probably only because the books push the idea that thinking for yourself is a critical part of growing up. In each book, the children are given more and more freedom and this is portrayed as the right and proper way to grow up. I happen to agree, but under the conservative Christian view, rearing children is more about tearing down their will and only setting them free when you’re sure that they don’t have enough gumption left in their soul to start thinking for themselves once they’re out in the real world.
More knowledge is better than less knowledge. Perhaps the most frustrating narrative cheat Rowling uses is building tension by having the characters not sharing crucial information for badly explained reasons. Personally, I think that works okay in a children’s series, since a lot of it is a jab at adults who often are too stingy about sharing knowledge with children and teenagers, often because said adults are weak and scared.
You can probably see where I’m going with this; so much of the political activism of the religious right is about reducing knowledge acquisition for children and teenagers. It’s certainly true that by depriving people of knowledge of sex or science, you probably will maintain more control over their minds. In the Potter books, though, the denial of important knowledge is the source of much of the danger.
The banality of evil. In the real world, Dolores Umbridge would be humming “They Will Know We Are Christians By Our Love” while mutilating small children as punishment for imagined trangressions. Even the most willfully ignorant can’t miss that anvil.
I'm inclined to regard the anti-authoritarian nature of the books to be among the most significant problems for the Christian Right. So much of the Christian Right's "Culture War" on modernity is an assault on various forms of personal autonomy while the "solutions" being offered are ultimately authoritarian social structures. Whether we're talking about family, church, state, or anything else, the "solution" involves stricter hierarchies and more submission or obedience to authority figures.
One other problem for the Christian Right, though, is the use of magic in the Harry Potter books. Sara discusses this aspect at Orcinus in the context of fundamentalist anger over not just Harry Potter, but also Dungeons & Dragons, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Sabrina, Magic: The Gathering, and Kiki's Delivery Service:
The common thread that runs through all of these is magic. And that, I think, is the real burr that gets under fundamentalist saddles. In fundieland, magic is the most frightening and legitimate of all the competing myth systems -- the Devil's own preferred alternative to prayer and submission. Other belief systems (Buddhism, Hinduism, the Greek myths) are viewed as sad and rather pathetically delusional; but anything that smacks of magic is feared as actively Satanic.
What's particularly interesting, though, is how fundamentalist fear of stories with magic is intricately connected with the authoritarian attitude:
Why is magic such a hot button? The reasons go to the heart of fundamentalist theology. At their core, fundamentalists believe that humans are wretched creatures who aren't really even human unless touched by God's grace. (And, yes, this does mean that those of us who are unsaved can rightly be considered subhuman.) We cannot do anything right; we do not deserve to have control over our own affairs; and any notion that we have intrinsic power to achieve good in the world (or even the authority to define "good" or "bad" on our own terms) is a diabolical delusion. Left to our own devices, we will not only screw it up for ourselves; we will ultimately ensure the Devil his victory over the world -- including them -- as well.
Implicit in this is the idea that all authority is necessarily, rightfully external. The fate of the entire world depends on how completely we can give up our desire to control our destinies, and submit to God and his appointed earthly overseers. This obsession with the need for external authority is, in a nutshell, is why fundamentalism is a form of religious authoritarianism. [emphasis added]
The problem with Harry Potter and similar books is that they depict people using magic and making their own choices based on their own values, needs, and beliefs. They don't stop to pray, to give their fates over the God's Will, or anything else which many Christians believe is absolutely necessary. Rather than submit to the authority of God (or at least God's self-proclaimed representatives here on Earth), they assert their own authority to make their own choices and decisions. They take control of their lives.
Granted, this is fiction, but what if readers got the idea that perhaps they could do the same thing in their own lives?
That's why we're hearing all the shrieking hysterics from the fundie side. Stories and games like Buffy and Harry and D&D put us in the shoes of heroes who take charge of their power and use it to shape their own realities -- and worse, to defy overweening, intrusive authority. They contain messages that undermine the power of external leaders, and encourage people to believe in their own limitless power to create change. They show us protagonists who overcome doubt, take risks, and gain confidence; and who make their world better without waiting around for God to act.
If everyone thought that way, where would we be then? We wouldn't follow our leaders. We'd try to rule ourselves. We might get the idea that our destinies were in our own hands. We might even entertain the delusion that we're somehow "free" people who don't have to answer to anyone but ourselves. And then where would God's designated regents -- the would-be dictators, oligarchs, and theocrats -- be? [emphasis added]
There are, of course, lots of books, movies, and television shows which depict characters making their own choices — sometimes even in the context of magic. The missing ingredient here may be the simplest: all the things which have inspired the most outrage and opposition are the ones which had managed to achieve the most popularity. Authoritarians are able to overlook products which are unpopular because they won't inspire resistance to the authoritarian agenda.
Harry Potter hasn't just been popular, though, it's been incredibly inspiring to young people all around the world. They read the books over and over, watch the movies, discuss the stories with friends, buy related products, and so forth. The Harry Potter books have become an integral part of modern popular culture and, as such, are a touchstone for the beliefs, attitudes, and ideas of the children who have grown up with these stories.
This is why the Harry Potter books have come to be perceived as a threat — there is a fear that kids will look to these stories for inspiration, role models, and ideas rather than to priests, ministers, the Bible, and other traditional religious sources. Harry Potter won't become a religion or a replacement for religion, but in some ways it replaces some of the functions of religion — like providing inspirational figures when one is trying to make a decision or facing a difficult task. That, of course, has been a dominant theme of all modern secular culture: providing alternatives to religion so that people have an easier time living fulfilling, happy, free lives without relying on religious institutions, religious authority figures, and religious traditions.
Harry Potter is thus arguably one more nail in the coffin of traditional religion.
Comments
I have not read any of the books and only capitulated and watched one of the movies well into the series’ existence (Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets) with reluctance. Pop culture and trends usually do not interest me but I was pleasantly surprised by the Potter movies. After a bit of research into what the series was all about, the general impression I found was that it was quite the Christian, or Christ-inspired, fable/parable/metaphor, whichever fits. Harry Potter himself comes across as Christlike at times…he is kind, gentle, self-sacrificing, has suffered unjustly, takes the moral high road, etc. Frankly I was amazed when I learned the fundies were freaked out and were burning him!
I’m surprised you didn’t comment about the enormous christian influence in the last book.
[SPOILERS]
Let’s see:
1. Harry’s mother sacrifices herself to save Harry and her blood has magical qualities.
2. Harry willing gives his own life to save everyone, and isn’t actually dead, but his sacrifice saves everyone.
Michael Czeiszperger I enjoyed the slide show.
I don’t disagree that the religious right wants to take away people’s power over their own lives, but I’m not sure how many object to stories of people making their own decision. My aunt is one of these people, and she’s a fan of High School Musical.
Not only does religion insist on submission to an unexamined authority, it doesn’t even pay off in the present. All the great flash and amazing miracles happened in the past to other people; the current worshippers are somehow impure or inferior or too sinful to see God, and people are supposed to be content with that? That’s a sure recipe for discontent and schisms as religious try to reset the calendar to the Year Zero. HARRY POTTER on the other hand shows how the lowest of the low, freshmen in a British boarding-school, end up doing amazing things. Though it is only entertainment and a sort of affirmation for kids, it goes against the grain of the whole Fundamentalist Christian enterprise: not only authoritarian but ultimately uneventful.
The books not only promote the value of knowledge, they also promote skepticism. Here is my favorite exchange in the entire series. [I don't believe that there are any serious spoilers here, but if you are concerned then skip the rest of the post.]
“All right,” said Hermione, disconcerted. “Say the Cloak existed… what about the stone, Mr. Lovegood? The thing you call the Resurrection Stone?”
“What of it?”
“Well, how can that be real?”
“Prove that it is not,” said Xenophilus.
Hermione looked outraged.
“But that’s – I’m sorry but that’s completely ridiculous! How can I possibly prove that it doesn’t exist? Do you expect me to get hold of – of all the pebbles in the world and test them? I mean, you could claim that anything’s real if the only basis for believing in it is that nobody’s proved it doesn’t exist!”
“Yes, you could,” said Xenophilius. “I’m glad to see that you are opening your mind a little.”
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, p 411-412. (Boldface added by me.)
This is the quintessential conversation between skeptics and true believers, and the absurdity of the true believer’s methodology is laid bare.
The representatives of religion certainly can’t overlook the theological implications of the statement that I put in boldface, and neither can they fail to notice which character Rowling chose to advocate each position.
It must make religious leaders crazy to realize that this book will spread the skepticism meme to more young minds that the writings of Hume, Russell, Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Htichens combined!
[Very minor SPOILER ahead]
This is the quintessential conversation between skeptics and true believers, and the absurdity of the true believer’s methodology is laid bare.
True, and the fact that it’s been established how Xenophilius believes all manner of silly things helps. However, in this case what he’s claiming is actually true. Hermoine’s skepticism turns out to be misplaced, at least in the sense that she is skeptical of something absolutely true. At no point is it made clear that while Hermoine turned out to be mistaken, her approach was correct. Thus I’m not sure that this passage promotes skepticism. It might even be argued that, given the importance of the Resurrection Stone, believing it exists was worth the cost of believing other silly things.
[SPOLIER]
Czeiszperger: Rowling did say that if people knew too much about her Christianity, then they would be able to guess what is coming at the end of the series. At least no one has to accept Harry Potter into their hearts in order to benefit from the protection his “death” provided. Unlike the Christian “gift” of salvation, this really is a free gift which requires absolutely nothing — not even thanks — from those who receive it.
Moreover, Harry was willing to make the sacrifice in the expectation that it would be final and genuine. That makes it a real sacrifice, unlike a deity “dying” for a couple of days and then coming back better than ever. I’ll take Harry Potter over Jesus Christ any day.
[SPOILER]
Two things:
1- In the story, Harry, like Xenophilius Lovegood, does think that Hermione is narrow-minded for not accepting the existence of the three Hallows.
2- Perhaps Xenophilius Lovegood is correct: in his magic world, unless something can be shown to not exist, it does exist. In Harry Potter, there are some exceptions to what can be created by magic: food, love, life, information, and ?. But these are exceptions.
My husband just finished the last book last night. He commented on how “closed minded” Hermoine is. He noted that she put down many of Harry’s hunches without any real cause. I have to say, skeptic that I am, if I live in a world filled with the magic of Harry Potter’s world, I would have to be far less skeptical than I am. Example: In Chamber of Secrets, Hermoine makes a comment that “hearing voices” isn’t a good thing–even in the wizarding world. Even in the wizarding world? Where people can be invisible, or speak from fire places, or talk to snakes, or where statues and ghosts can be verbally heard? Seriously–if I lived in Harry Potter’s world and heard voices, I might not consider I must be hallucinating until pretty far down in my list of “explanations.” Whereas, in my world, it would be pretty high up on my list of explanations.
I guess my point is that the world HP inhabits doesn’t really lend itself to skeptical thinking–even though Hermoine is generally portrayed as being quite clever. But even her hunch about Trelawney turns out to be wrong. The professor is an actual sybil who can give accurate prophesies and does so at least twice in the books that we know of.
And SPOILER:
…my interpretation is that Harry did die. Dumbledore tells him he doesn’t have to “go back”–go back where? Harry died–he was communing with his dead principal in some ethereal nether-region (in his head–but “real”?). But he was permitted to return. That was how I read it. I think he was clearly a Christ figure in the tale (which is a common literary theme). His willingness to die saved everyone.
I have to say that when I was a child, being reared in the church, I’m not sure I would have picked up on the anti-Xian undertones of the text.
I recall that I was a classic Star Trek fanatic. But only years after becoming an atheist did I recognize the many, MANY anti-religious overtones in the series. There are so many episodes that deal directly with skepticism and destroying “deity” that it boggles. But as a kid, all that went straight over my head. (Not saying all kids are as dense as me–but kids can be pretty selective about their interpretations–just as many adults).
Voodoo Christians need devils to keep them in line.
The whole critique of the Christian right is done without quoting what they say. It is not as if they are silent on the subject. I think it is clear that what they don’t like is the featuring of a set of competing spooks not contemplated by Christianity, and Harry defeating them without divine assistance. It is simply a competing myth that has been broadly applauded. The Christian Right does not like successful competing myths.
The story does portray defiance of authority, but that has long been a theme in books and other media. It is an important ingredient in appealing to children who are old enough to read. Picking that theme out of the story is arbitrary. One might as well suppose that the Christian Right is incensed by boarding schools or dark forests. Because an element is present does not establish cause and effect.
The Christian Right is opposed to independent moral authority. Harry maintains traditional standards of good and evil and sticks by them religiously throughout. The extreme Left despises conformance to moral tradition but has no problem with authoritarian govetnment, which what the CR despises. So Harry has more of a rightist attitude on that score.
Was there so much xtian indignation & outrage exhibited at things like “Bedknobs & Broomsticks” or “Bewitched” or “Mary Poppins” or “Peter Pan” or “The Sword in the Stone” or “Beauty & the Beast” or “Snow White” or “The Ghost & Mrs. Muir” or My Favorite Martian” or “My Mother the Car”… etc. etc.?…
… I don’t remember any…
… or is it simply that xtians (following certain outspoken leadership) just need a new target every now & again…
… up till now, have they been too busy fighting Rock & Roll, “The Last Temptation”, evolution… ?…
… or did they just need a fresh fight to breath life into their movement…
These people need to get a life. How can they think that in this day and age, people will prefer church over Harry Potter? They don’t. I don’t. Let us think what we want to think and you guys can stick to your sad little world of following someone else’s ideas…. we will make our own choices and be happy with them….
I don’t agree with the final line of the article. I would say that Mr. Potter is one more nail in the coffin of dogmatic Christian (or any religion’s) fundamentalism and those who believe as narrowly as possible.
Deathly Hallows is not common Christian teaching but Calvinism and I reject Calvinism because it´s a merciless cult!
Harry Potter books are simply that, books, they reflect one womans imagination and just because the books are loved by many old and young there is no reason that they should be banned, or burned or even taken out of our schools. Show me where in the books that is it trying to corrupt people? as someone who has worn out all the books cover to cover, believe me, it doesnt say that anywhere.
First of all, Harry Potter is my favorite series ever.
Secondly, I’d just like to say wow, you have a pretty warped understanding of the Chriatian right. I’ve heard their reasoning (a lot) and it honestly boils down to the fear that this book draws people into the occult (which it never has and never will). That said, I find you rather alarmist view of the Christian right to show about as much ignorance as they show towards HP. Next time try some research (please any at all) before posting your idea.
Well, if you think there are errors in what I have written, feel free to identify them. Simply insisting that I am wrong and haven’t done any research isn’t sufficient.