http://blog.ancientpythoness.com/?p=356

I should not have said, “John Granger’s four levels of meaning,” implying that it is his system. I just think of it that way because I leaned of it from him. It actually refers to the four levels of meaning that Dante and many other authors develop in their work. The first level is the literal story. The second is the moral message. The third is the allegorical meaing. (I know Harris writing on this level because Bill and Sookie’s romance is the story of Cupid and Psyche) The fourth level is the anagogical where Harris uses the monomyth and alchemy.

Arabella Figg
Thanks for the tip off to alchemy in ‘The Hunger Games.’ It’s sitting in my car waiting for some free time to get read. Now I’ll know what to watch for the first time through.

I’ve been exploring the alchemy in the Sookie books. A friend who didn’t quite believe me posed the question of alchemy to Charlaine Harris on her website. Her assistant answered that Harris didn’t use it like Rowling did (Who does?) and had never really put that name to it, but she said it could be described that way because Harris was employing the same transformative process for Sookie that Rowling put Harry through.

My comment was never intended as dismissive to Mr. Granger and I don’t believe it was. I stated I did not know his books – I stated that I would probably read his book to understand Twilight. And I assume that Mr. Granger is not writing these books for free and as an educated person, he knows something about this series that I do not. Renee’s comments reminded me of the posts of Mr. Granger’s previous analysis of Twilight on this site and I recognized it as such even before Renee mentioned Mr. Granger. I still think that critcal analysis can take on many styles of literary criticism and I appreciate Mr. Granger’s style, from what I’ve read. I have not disparaged his contrubutions to the Harry Potter phenom. My intentions were not unkind, my comment was my opinion, and I still stand by the content.

John is hardly making a living off of his books. He’s not using literary tools he’s created. And everyone who loves Harry Potter owes a great deal to John, who opened up the books (and other Great Books) to us in a way no one else did. He was ridiculed for years for his accurate and insightful contributions to understanding Harry Potter, now accepted as basic. Yet his humility still shines.

Those of us who have participated at HogPro since its inception and read his books know that if John Granger says there must be “something more” to a book, then there is something more to be found. This is why “an educated grown man” is interested in Twilight. Even a regular here, always ready to find (or create ) opportunity to bash Twlight has bought Spotlight; you don’t have to like a book or series to find appreciation for an author’s artistry. Your dismissive comment is unkind.

I hope you will read John’s books; you’ll find it an illuminating adventure. He has always been ahead of his time.

Renee, good for you in your search of the Sookie Stackhouse series to see if “there is something more.” While I only read the first one, I would be doing the same kind of thing. I recently read the book The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, and thanks to John’s tutelage, discovered that it was alchemical (with a Romeo/Juliet angle). I’ve just gotten the second book and am quite eager to see what I find there. I applaud your efforts in using the literary analysis tools John has given us to look at Harris’ books with an eagle eye. And Harris has a Christian background. In her Aurora Teagarden books, faith and church are plot points.

But there is no doubting that relationships are pretty important in the stories. They are not the main focus – which is a mixture of fantasy-horror-sci-fi adventure – but they are a major focus.

Revgeorge – I think the books get better.

Beyond the boyfriends, the saga of the supes is really engrossing, especially the natural history, organizational heirarchy and the power politics. I am also intrigued by Sookie’s movement from innocence towards knowledge and experience.

In the end of course, you need to please only yourself. All I can say is that the series have given me a lot of reading pleasure.

I finished Dead Until Dark on Monday night. Brief thoughts: Well, it’s much, much better than a particular other vampire book that seems popular… Real characters, real plot, more fully realized characters & motivations, better written, more imaginative, more captivating. Am I leaving anything out? I don’t know if I’ll go on to read any more of the books in the Sookie series but I feel like I would enjoy doing so & I have a little bit of an inclination to do so, if I didn’t think it sounded like it got too soap-operaish. As opposed to that other series, where I felt absolutely no desire whatsoever to read the remaining books.