Criticism of Harry Potter
A popular critic of the Harry Potter books is Richard Abanes. In Harry Potter and the Bible, he writes:
- “Rowling’s characters (the “good” ones) consistently make “choices” that have very little to do with living as a “good human being.” ...Harry and his friends routinely steal, lie, cheat and seek revenge with clear consciences. While it is true that unrighteous acts play a part in many fairy tales and fantasy adventures, there is usually at least an implied understanding that the characters involved are either: a) “evil” characters; or b) “good” characters undergoing a deep internal struggle over their actions.... Throughout Rowling’s works...“good” characters show no remorse over their “evil” actions.”
Abanes argues that Rowling diverts attention away from the immorality of the good characters by putting the focus on the much worse behavior of the evil characters. The leading characters may behave badly in the name of good, but they are never as bad as the evil people and thus appear “good” in contrast despite not truly deserving such a label. In fact, the characters themselves use the worse behavior of their evil opponents as an excuse for their own immorality.
- “Rowling has made Voldemort, Pettigrew, and the Death Eaters so repulsive that the immoral deeds of Harry and the other “good” characters have an appearance of benevolence, fun, and virtue. The result is a tacit acceptance of less evil characters as simply “good” ones.”
The specifically Christian critique is that Harry Potter and his friends are using sin to defeat sin, but sin can never be used for good and therefore the Harry Potter books are promoting sin. The more general ethical complaint is that the Harry Potter books promote a highly relativistic view of morality where there is nothing inherently wrong with actions like stealing or lying — all that matters is why you are doing it. This, in turn, fails to provide children with a stable and reliable moral compass.
Defense of Harry Potter
The argument offered by people like Abanes depends upon the assumption that consequences and/or one’s intentions are irrelevant to the morality of an action. This, however, is not generally accepted except among adherents of something like a Divine Command Theory of ethics which few are able or willing to promote.
It’s easy to come up with examples of situations where a general rule should be violated in pursuit of some higher ethical goal. If you lived in Nazi Germany and knew where Jews were hiding, would you tell the truth if asked by the Gestapo about fugitive Jews? Abanes’ argument would suggest that you should because it’s wrong to lie, but most people recognize that lying in this case is not only ethically permissible, but in fact mandated. The situations Harry Potter finds himself in are not so extreme, but it remains true that breaking a generally applicable rule for the sake of a higher ethical duty can be justified.
Such ethical dilemmas are more common than most realize. Rarely are the choices that face us simple, black and white options. Navigating our ethical universe requires skills in weighing one good another, weighing one evil against another, and evaluating the best course of action from among many viable alternatives. If the ethical universe portrayed by Harry Potter is complex, showing good people breaking rules for good causes, then it merely reflects reality and thereby may help children learn what they need.
This isn’t contrary to Christian standards of ethics. Abanes lists among the “unbiblical attitudes” in the Harry Potter books drunkenness, lying, cheating, stealing and rule-breaking, all of which can all be found among biblical heros. Even Jesus, in Mark 2:23-28, favorably compares himself and his disciples to David when he lied in order to obtain food. Jesus didn’t condemn David for lying; instead, he was making a point that it is always better to do good and save life even if it means breaking human rules.
Resolution
The idea that doing an otherwise unethical action for some higher ethical good is always unwarranted cannot be justified either under most ethical theories or even within most understandings of Christian ethics. It is, therefore, a mistake to attack children’s books which present kids facing such issues and wrestling both with the ethical problems and the consequences of their choices.
The Harry Potter books are not simplistic morality tales or tales which are most appropriate for only the youngest children who are still developing their basic moral reasoning. Once children reach a certain age, they need to learn to navigate an ethically complex world where choices are rarely as easy as they appear in childhood stories.
If it is inappropriate to attack the Harry Potter books for depicting characters lying or breaking rules in order to achieve some higher good, it’s not inappropriate to look closely at how those decisions are made and whether the characters make the right choices.
The most serious objection is that the characters often don’t seem to take breaking the rules very seriously. Such actions shouldn’t be taken lightly, even when done for a higher cause, and more respect for the reasons why rules exist should be shown. Even Hermione, the character most concerned with rules, seems to follow them for their own sake rather than for the reasons they were originally created.
Critics are right to point out that if you get used to breaking the rules in order to get what you want, it can become difficult to stop, and a person who does this without serious reflection or recrimination may not be the best role model.
