Order of the Phoenix discussion-INCREDIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD!

[Epoetker]

First off, it looks like Mr. 'Hidden Key' was wrong about the person who dies, but quite right about the Christian direction the series would take-Nearly Headless Nick sealed it for me after describing the true nature of visible ghosts. (Something which George Lucas could have done, but noooooo....it took Timothy Zahn to knock the old Kenobi out of the picture with vaguely Christian afterlife notions and provide safeguard against the specter of the Emperor organizing yet another cabal of Dark Jedi.) Literary people get it, even if unconsciously, but this is just another example of why reincarnation as a philosophy just doesn't work.

Harry should learn to say SOMETHING to Snape. C'mon, sympathetic Occlumancy and similar childhood conditions should provide SOME recourse for civility. Get the feeling that Rowling's rubbing the wound raw just for the fact that any full cooperation between all of the Order would result in Voldemort getting himself Avada Kedavra-ed or 'something worse' during the first few weeks of the next school year.

Oh, and I salute Granger for figuring that Ginny Weasley is a much likelier choice than Cho Chang for Harry's love interest.(Dean Thomas-ha!)

Not to mention Rowling for finally placing any sort of fortune-telling firmly and irrevocably out of the study of unaided humans and back in the centaur 'astrologists' where they belong. (Thinking of Roonwit already, I see-more blatantly confirmed C.S. Lewis influence.) Also wanted to note this earlier, but since it's repeated in this book-ain't it interesting that Professor Trelawney-the foolish dabbler in foolish pop-psychic techniques-is the most susceptible to manifestation and control from mostly evil outside forces-a pawn to the consequences of a mind so emptied that most of her own consciousness has already slipped away from it? You couldn't find a more true-to-life depiction of the real and observed dangers of occultic involvement anywhere else.

[Epoetker]

Small afterthought-the UCI library is playing "Kyrie Eleison' even as I type this:joy:

[Piebald]

First off, it looks like Mr. 'Hidden Key' was wrong about the person who dies, but quite right about the Christian direction the series would take-Nearly Headless Nick sealed it for me after describing the true nature of visible ghosts.

I agree! :thumb:

Harry should learn to say SOMETHING to Snape. C'mon, sympathetic Occlumancy and similar childhood conditions should provide SOME recourse for civility.

I agree again - and I think that Rowling is setting it up that they will be somewhat "reconciled" in the future. Of course, it also draws a stark contrast between Harry and Snape.

[Piebald]

Sorry about the multi-posts, I hit return too fast!

Not to mention Rowling for finally placing any sort of fortune-telling firmly and irrevocably out of the study of unaided humans and back in the centaur 'astrologists' where they belong.

Double agree!


"Sibyll Trelawney may have SEen, I do not know," continued Firenze, and Harry heard the swishing of his tail again as he walked up and down before them, "but she wastes her time, in the main, on the self-flattering nonsense humans call fortune-telling."

...

His priority did not seem to teach them what he knew, but rather to impress upon them that nothing, not even centaurs' knowledge, was foolproof.

[Epoetker]

Now we have mythical creatures teaching the scientific method. Even Materialist Magicians can be redeemed into something better:cheers:

[Aravis]

Today @ 04:37 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=131772#post131772)
Epoetker:

First off, it looks like Mr. 'Hidden Key' was wrong about the person who dies,

I was right, and for once, sorry to be so.

but quite right about the Christian direction the series would take-Nearly Headless Nick sealed it for me after describing the true nature of visible ghosts. (Something which George Lucas could have done, but noooooo....it took Timothy Zahn to knock the old Kenobi out of the picture with vaguely Christian afterlife notions and provide safeguard against the specter of the Emperor organizing yet another cabal of Dark Jedi.) Literary people get it, even if unconsciously, but this is just another example of why reincarnation as a philosophy just doesn't work.

To completely ignore what you just said, it seems clear to me now that Harry's biggest challenge in Book 7 will be overcoming the temptation to turn dark. It will seem easier to defeat Voldemort if he uses the Dark Arts, but because Voldemort's hatred is greater, Harry can only win if he uses his own weapon, love. How that's a weapon, I don't know. But it seems repeatedly emphasized that to be against Voldemort does not make one good. Harry must choose whether to face him as another Dark Lord or as a powerful good wizard. Also, I wonder if Harry can defeat Voldemort without killing Tom Riddle...

Harry should learn to say SOMETHING to Snape. C'mon, sympathetic Occlumancy and similar childhood conditions should provide SOME recourse for civility. Get the feeling that Rowling's rubbing the wound raw just for the fact that any full cooperation between all of the Order would result in Voldemort getting himself Avada Kedavra-ed or 'something worse' during the first few weeks of the next school year.

I think Snape must ultimately become a sort of father-figure to Harry. Well, that may be overstating it. In any case, they still haven't learned to trust each other, and that's necessary.

I remember in Book One, Dumbledore introduced an analogy: Snape's relationship to James Potter is comparable to Harry's relationship with Draco Malfoy. It wasn't until this book that I cam to the conclusion that the correct pairing is Snape:James = Harry:Draco. Someday, Snape and Harry must realize just how much they have in common.

Oh, and I salute Granger for figuring that Ginny Weasley is a much likelier choice than Cho Chang for Harry's love interest.
(Dean Thomas-ha!)

Rowling certainly made efforts in this book to establish that Ginny, who previously seemed rather meek, is quite cool enough to be Harry's girlfriend. Eventually.

Hey, Dean Thomas is cool... very artistic, apparently.

[b]Not to mention Rowling for finally placing any sort of fortune-telling firmly and irrevocably out of the study of unaided humans and back in the centaur 'astrologists' where they belong. (Thinking of Roonwit already, I see-more blatantly confirmed C.S. Lewis influence.) Also wanted to note this earlier, but since it's repeated in this book-ain't it interesting that Professor Trelawney-the foolish dabbler in foolish pop-psychic techniques-is the most susceptible to manifestation and control from mostly evil outside forces-a pawn to the consequences of a mind so emptied that most of her own consciousness has already slipped away from it? You couldn't find a more true-to-life depiction of the real and observed dangers of occultic involvement anywhere else.

I hadn't really thought about that... but then, wasn't Harry the one most susceptible to control from evil outside forces?

[Epoetker]

Apparently possessing Harry caused Voldemort considerable anguish. And Snape is rather different from Draco. Braver and more resourceful, for one thing. Malfoy is still his father's son; i.e: goes along with whoever shows the most power, whether they be Dark wizards or Ministry bureaucrats(the model for Umbridge seems to be that N.I.C.E. woman from That Hideous Strength.) Something in Snape values craft much more than raw power. He's most likely of the school of thought that says that only constant adversity can educate someone successfully, and if he were any nicer to Harry Potter, he'd get lax on the skills necessary for his purpose in life. Because he most definitely does need to learn to kill his emotions at the proper time quite irrespective of Occlumancy lessons. I wouldn't be surprised if he mentions in an offhand way later on that the reason he publicly favors Draco Malfoy is to make sure that one so resolutely disposed to power-mongering never gets the training required to do magic with any great skill. He may be nasty, but consider the raw material he had to work with. Slytherin has to have someone that can keep its nature alive without succumbing to the Dark tendencies within it.

[The Laughing Man]

Is this an actual quote from the book?

"Harry longed to bite the man. . . but he must master the impulse. He had more important work to do. But the man was stirring. . . Harry saw his vibrant, blurred outline towering above him, saw a wand withdrawn from a belt. . . . He had no choice. . . . He reared high from the floor and struck once, twice, three times, plunging his fangs deeply into the man’s flesh, feeling his ribs splinter beneath his jaws, feeling the warm gush of blood. . .
The man was yelling in pain. . . then he fell silent. . . . He slumped backward against the wall... . Blood was splattering onto the floor.... His forehead hurt terribly." (p. 463)

If so, are people serious that this is a good book for kids? This is the kind of violent imagery you'd expect in a Stephen King novel, not something for young children.

[Aravis]

Harry Potter is read by a lot of children, but they aren't really children's books. Each book is appropriate to the age that Harry is in that book. I'd call them young adult books, fantastic for adults, too.

And yes, that quote is real. . . but it might make more sense in the context. Harry, because of his scar, has a mental connection to Voldemort, and Voldemort, after possessing a snake, was the one who bit the man. It's rough, but not gratuitously so.

[Piebald]

Agreed, I think about 15 (or maybe as young as 13) is the appropriate age for the latest book. I can't imagine a 7 year old reading a 900 page book with words in it I had to look up. :teeth:

[The Laughing Man]

And yet it is children as young as 7 (8 or 9 might be more likely, but parents are reading these books to younger children) who are drawn to these books. Harry Potter toys and other products are aimed at them and there are always tie-ins with the new books. It frightens me that people are focusing on the short-term results (e.g. interesting in and enjoyment of reading, etc.) for the long-term dangers (i.e. they can't see the forest for the trees.)

And if anyone truly thinks "plunging his fangs deeply into the man’s flesh, feeling his ribs splinter beneath his jaws, feeling the warm gush of blood" isn't gratuitous, I weep for them and their children. Do these books come with a ratings system like movies or at least a warning on the cover?

Hmm... I wonder how many people who whinge that "the Bible is violent" hypocritically support the reading of the new Harry Potter book for kids. Probably quite a few.

[Piebald]

Interesting quote:


Last year, {Rowling} told a reporter the fact she is a Christian "seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said 'yes,' because I do.

"But no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me. If I talk too freely about that, I think the intelligent reader – whether 10 or 60 – will be able to guess what is coming in the books," she said.


She is a member of the Church of Scotland ("In good standing") ... anyone know where I can find their statement of faith?

[Piebald]

Another Rowling quote:

"I made a very conscious decision right at the beginning that I was writing about someone evil, and I wasn't going to tell a lie. I wasn't going to pretend that an evil person is a paper cutout and no one really gets hurt. OK, if you're writing about evil, I think generally you have a responsibility to show what that means, and that's the way I'm writing them. I think they're quite, well actually, I think they're very moral books,"


I understand where she's saying, but that doesn't mean her books are still apropriate for the under 13 crowd.

[Epoetker]

Probably likely. Heck, I wouldn't think even J.R.R. Tolkein would be good at that age, though I might have gone on a hunger strike to see the movie if I had read it that early:smile:

[Epoetker]

Those who have read the book will appreciate this Derbyshire quote much more:

THAT WINSTON SMITH FEELING
Nellie Derbyshire (4th grade) plays in her school orchestra. This month they had a concert. As well as the orchestra, the concert included the school band and the school choir. The first piece the band played was that old jazz classic "When the Saints Go Marching In"... except that they had changed the title. It was printed on the program, and announced by the music director, as: "When the Band Goes Marching In." I guess saints are just too intolerably elitist to be mentioned in polite company nowadays.

I am sufficiently self-aware to know when my emotions are dragging me off the sweet paths of reason, and I know that the uncontrollable fury I feel when confronted with these petty adjustments of the familiar — these tamperings with the past — is out of all proportion to the gravity of the offense. Probably some mild-mannered schoolmistress, a plump, sweet-natured mother of three, made that change without giving it more than a moment's thought. Why is it that I should be glad to see that person burned at the stake, after having first been dragged through the streets of Huntington behind a tumbril while the populace pelted her with rotten fruit?

Dolores Umbridge lives, and it's Rowling's (and Lewis's)prescription for those types that's the real controversy of these books. I strongly urge Jinx to read the entire series, just to gain context for the last one's scathing indictment of the education system.

[Piebald]

From The Silver Chair, by C.S. Lewis:


She was crying because they had been bullying her. This is not going to be a school story, so I shall say as little as possible about Jill's school, which is not a pleasant subject. It was "Co-educational," a school for both boys and girls, what used to be called a "mixed" school; some said it was not nearly so mixed as the minds of the people who ran it. These people had the idea that boys and girls should be allowed to do what they liked. And unfortunately what ten or fifteen of the biggest boys and girls liked best was bullying the others. All sorts of things, horrid things, went on which at an ordinary school would have been found out and stopped in half a term; but at this school they weren't. Or even if they were, the people who did them were not expelled or punished. The Head said they were interesting psychological cases and sent for them and talked to them for hours. And if you knew the right sort of things to say to the Head, the main result was that you became rather a favourite than otherwise.

...

(When I was at school one would have said, "I swear by the Bible." But Bibles were not encouraged at Experiment House.)


"Experiment House" being the school


And then the Head (who was, by the way, a woman) came running out to see what was happening. And when she saw the lion and the broken wall and Caspian and Jill and Eustace (whom she quite failed to recognize) she had hysterics and went back to the house and began ringing up the police with stories about a lion escaped from a circus, and escaped convicts who broke down walls and carried drawn swords. In the midst of all this fuss Jill and Eustace slipped quietly indoors and changed out of their bright clothes into ordinary things, and Caspian went back into his own world. And the wall, at Aslan's word, was made whole again. When the police arrived and found no lion, no broken wall, and no convicts, and the Head behaving like a lunatic, there was an inquiry into the whole thing. And in the inquiry all sorts of things about Experiment House came out, and about ten people got expelled. After that, the Head's friends saw that the Head was no use as a Head, so they got her made an Inspector to interfere with other Heads. And when they found she wasn't much good even at that, they got her into Parliament where she lived happily ever after.

[RumTumTugger]

Hamster: She is a member of the Church of Scotland ("In good standing") ... anyone know where I can find their statement of faith?

I think if you look up the Westminister statement of faith. Church of Scotland may have it's roots in the Presbyterian{sp} church(at least that was what my ancestors from scotland were.)

I hope this helps.

[Epoetker]

*Epo notes that Dolores Umbridge had posts as School Headmaster, a High Inquisitor to interfere with the real Heads of their classes, and a member in good standing at the Parlaiment-style Ministry of Magic.*

[kiwimac]

Ms. Umbridge was a REAL piece of work wasn't she? As for Fudge, the man is losing it big style. Any comments about Percy? will the revealing of Voldemort force a reconciliation in the Weasley household?

What about Hermione and Ron?


Kiwimac

[Em7add11]

What's going to happen to the people who Potter names as being Death Eaters?

[Epoetker]

Have you read Order of the Phoenix yet? Otherwise we can't tell you.

[Em7add11]

Yes, I read it...but not all of the Death Eaters were rounded up in the Department of Mysteries. Are the aurors going to be raiding homes at some point?

[Epoetker]

Most of the Death Eaters were re-sent to Azkaban, remember? Although I don't see how they're going to stay with loose dementors on their side. (refer to Potter's last discussion with Malfoy the Younger.) As far as home-raiding goes, I think the escaped ones are going to have the sense not to inhabit their usual haunts.