EagerReaders.com

• Ralph Moody
• Pinky Pye
• 101 Dalmatians
• Hilda van Stockum
• The Moffats
• G. A. Henty
• Books by Eleanor Estes
• Freddy the Pig
• Heinlein

• By Author
• Historical
• Domestic
• Adventure
• Mystery
• Dog
• Horse
• Other Animals
• Fantasy
• Science Fiction
• Fairy Tale
• Childhood Fantasy
• Fables
• Biography
• Humor
• Classical/Myth
• Vision Books
• Literary Classic
• Poetry
• Picture Books
• The Best
• Everything! (800+ titles)

We're not wild about Harry

EagerReaders.com Newsletter #2

July 31, 2000

WHAT WE THINK OF HARRY POTTER

J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter Books: Not Recommended

Though the Harry Potter books are not the worst books we've ever read, and may be relatively harmless (probably a step up from the vile "Goosebumps" series), they are basically junk.

The writing style is choppy, with short paragraphs which reflect the lack of development of setting and characters. The characters are two-dimensional, without depth or complexity. Harry's uncle, aunt, and cousin are especially cartoon-like. Harry, too, is viewed mostly from the outside.

The books are very much a reflection of our culture, and don't rise above it in any way. They are good examples of literature that talks down to kids in its choppy style, and by including elements, like the few "gross" parts, that the author thinks will appeal to an immature audience. We like books that respect children's minds, and challenge them with style and content, rather than giving them images of some of the "lowest common denominators" of our culture: very negative family relationships (much like what is found in Roald Dahl's "Matilda," a book I disliked very much), "gross" behavior, petty bickering and revenge in a school setting, and lying with impunity. We never recommend literature in which lying is portrayed as OK (another reflection of our culture).

Maybe the great popularity of the Harry Potter books comes from the fact that it is fantasy, and appeals to children who have not read a good fantasy. This is mediocre fantasy, at best, with shallow, undeveloped characters, some gigantic plot holes, and at least one glaringly direct Tolkien rip-off.

In fantasy, the good characters, even if flawed, usually aspire to an ideal, striving for some higher good. In the case of Harry Potter, the good and bad kids don't seem very different from each other; the "good" kids don't show a great deal of integrity or other admirable character traits. Harry seems to be fighting mainly for his own survival, not for some higher cause or principle.

Many parents are disturbed by the aspects of the occult and black magic contained in the books; however, we ourselves do not automatically exclude books just because they have such elements. Wizards, magic, and the presence of evil are typical themes in fantasy. Tolkien's books contain all of these things, and I would put them on my very short list of "greatest books ever written." For me, the key is that good must be shown as good, and evil must be portrayed as evil. When these labels get mixed-up, our culture is in trouble. With Harry Potter, as I noted above, the "good" aren't that good. But the occult issue is one you'll have to judge for yourself by reading the books. If you are really concerned about this, just say no to your kids if they want to read these books. They won't be missing anything, except being part of a fad, because they aren't very good, not even as page-turners.

Hand your child one of the hundreds of truly great children's books to read instead. Not only will he enjoy it, but it will nourish his mind with ideas, and feed his imagination with images of virtue and beauty. He will learn a great deal about lives and times different from, yet connected to, his own. Reading a good book will provide your child with a background of experiences, a perspective through which he can look at his own life, culture, and experience. He will not get this from Harry Potter.

• An excellent comparison of Tolkien and Rowling by Brian M. Carney appeared recently in the Wall Street Journal: "For all [Harry Potter's] charms, it comes close to moral fatuousness by reducing good and evil to naughty and nice. Tolkien did much more --- showing the ethical challenges we all face, as individuals and as nations. Unquestionably a writer for his times, Tolkien is also the better one for ours."
• You might also be interested in an article on Harry Potter by Michael O'Brien, author of A Landscape with Dragons, a useful and practical discussion on the difference between good and bad fantasy.