Smart Talk on Harry Potter
Christian Mythmaking: Why did Tolkien, Lewis, L’Engle, and Rowling create? How is story true? How does it make meaning? How does it place us in this world? The Christian “myth” is examined in light of fairy tale-tellers.
You can subscribe to the Hog’s Head PubCast through iTunes, and VOTE for the month of February at Podcast Alley (only 11 so far for February; Vote!).
Previous post: Poll Results and New Poll (Shades of Good)
Next post: Mythopoeic Award Challenge
Beth on Harry Potter – Great Literature?
revgeorge on Harry Potter – Great Literature?
SchoolMarm on The Seer Overheard, by revgeorge
Dave the Longwinded on Harry Potter – Great Literature?
Arabella Figg on Harry Potter – Great Literature?Dave the Longwinded on Harry Potter – Great Literature?Arabella Figg on The Seer Overheard, by revgeorgeDave the Longwinded on Harry Potter – Great Literature?Arabella Figg on Harry Potter – Great Literature?SchoolMarm on The Seer Overheard, by revgeorge
Loading ...
{ 26 comments… read them below or add one }
Another interesting episode, Travis. Although I’m a bit miffed that now I have to do a lot of background reading while I’m busy with Lent. I’ll have to go read Tolkien’s On Fairy Stories & Lewis’s Surprised By Joy. I might even drag in some Dostoevsky & Camus. Or I might end up not doing any of that. I usually get all sorts of grandiose ideas that come to naught. But the pubcasts are good, though, because they do spur a lot of additional thinking.
Sorry, but I’ve already voted for this month. I guess I could go on my wife’s computer & vote under her email address…
revgeorge, to add to that list, you need to read Lewis’s essays, “On Stories,” “On Three Ways of Writing for Children,” and “Sometimes Fairy Stories Say Best What’s to be Said.” They’re the first three essays of the small Of Other Worlds collection.
And, of course, L’Engle’s Walking on Water.
I have Lewis’s Of Other Worlds collection. Don’t have the one by L’Engle. Might pick it up later this month when my wife & I get near a Barnes & Noble again. Thanks, Travis.
Excellent PubCast. Quite informative…
It reminds me of a talk watched recently given by Jeffrey Overstreet at Seattle Pacific University which can be found on iTunes University. It’s called: “We Gotta Get Outta Here” – How Tolkien, Lewis, and L’Engle Help Us Hope. (The Tolkien talks can be found in the “Hot Topics” section on the SPU iTunes page)
Shane, yes, that’s a great talk. Love it.
Interesting but I wonder what you do with Philip Pullman in this discussion? Do you see him as relevant? See him as challenging? Personally, I found His Dark Materials overall and especially The Amber Spyglass to be a most profound discussion of religion God and humanity (in both senses) versus religion God and church. I was really impressed at the concepts and questions Pullman hands his readers to grapple with. No doubt I think that of the three, Pullman, Rolling and Lewis Pullman has the most respect for the intellect of children (I will admit—heresy here I know—-to not being overly fond of Lewis in general and Narnia in particular)
Bill F.,
I can’t comment too much on Pullman, as I’ve not read him. But from all I’ve read from others, I think he respects the intellect of his readers less because as the books go on he becomes more heavy handed with his agenda.
Plus, I don’t see him as challenging at all, because he’s essentially set up God & the church as straw men. And there’s nothing in his characterization of God & the church that orthodox Christians would agree with either.
But again, those are just my thoughts on what I’ve read about the series & from other’s comments. So, they may not be totally accurate of the works themselves. But since I don’t intend to ever read Pullman, it’s the best I can do. Others who’ve read the books will hopefully be able to answer your questions better than I.
Good questions, though.
Bill, thanks for your comments and questions. First, let me say that you’re perfectly free to not being “overly fond” of Lewis, though at places like this, you’ll certainly have to defend your position
I’d be interested to hear more about why.
I’ve only read the first of Pullman’s trilogy; I’ve been told the agenda of the third book is a bit on the overwhelming side (even by non-Christians), but I do intend to eventually get around to it myself. Pullman, of course, is challenging to this particular thesis, but not as much as one might think. Some of the responses from thoughtful Christians to Pullman’s work has been, “So what? We don’t believe in that God either.” Though it’s certainly fair to say that there have been some institutional expressions of the faith that might be deserving of some of Pullman’s criticism.
But as for me, I’d have to finish the series in order to comment more intelligently on it.
I’m not as down on Lewis about children as many are. The whole Susan episode, for example, is terribly misunderstood, and to criticize it as being against kids growing up is to miss Lewis’s point there. I’m also a bit surprised that Lewis is criticized for not respecting children or thinking highly of them when they are portrayed unambiguously as heroes – though flawed – of Narnia. Furthermore, if you read his essays on fairy stories and children’s literature, he’s really saying very similar things to Tolkien – which is to say that he’s NOT being overly sentimental about children. He’s doing, rather, what folks like L’Engle and Tolkien do when they say that it’s a bad thing to “grow up” if that means losing appreciation for Faerie.
revgeorge:
I’m really sorry you don’t intend to read the books yourself. And I’m not being provocative, I serious think you are missing something special and that’s too bad. If you do decide to read them you might see what I mean, Pullman is hardly more heavyhanded with his “agenda” than Lewis. It is just a matter of which “agenda” you choose to buy into. Personally, I don’t understand not reading something because it may not sit comfortably with your world view. Often the reason for reading is to explore other points of view whether or not you ever “agree”
Perhaps that is why I am not fond of Lewis (although I should say my heresy comment was meant to be a joke and probably should have a emotion to that effect with it.) I’ve read Narnia a few times over the past 30 years and my first impression at twenty has not much changed. I understand what he is saying but I have never really agreed with it, I find Lewis heavyhanded in his agenda, to the point that the story gets lost in the allegory. I feel that too much of his message is pre-processed and handed to me complete. I want more involvement in the process of discovering the nuances of message.
As for Pullman and God, Pullman’s books are much more about CHURCH than about God. Pullman says over and over in interviews that religion is a universal part of the human condition. He is not denouncing religion per se, what he is writing about are thise dangerous time in human history when religion in the form of the institution of church gets hold of too much power, specifically the power of life and death. He has said he does not know if God exists or not but that if He out there, He may well be hiding His face in shame of what is being said and done in His name. If you read Amber Spy Glass objectively, the point is not that God is killed, the point is that the power of the church is undermined.
Travis:
‘Twas actually you (and Greg on HP Prognostications) that led me to finally get around to reading Pullman after your discussion. I may have to go back and re-listen to that podcast….I’m not sure y’all gave Pullman a fair shake
I really don’t want to spoil the books if someone who actually plans to read them but I think if you approach the second and third books objectively they share the same themes of love and sacrifice you find in the Potter books and, if you set aside their religious differences, in Narnia. Amber spyglass asks the same questions the Potter books ask about a mother’s sacrificial love albit set in a different voice (and a son’s love for his mother) . It visits the same question of how much one person gives up for the “greater good” and boiled down to it’s essence , like Harry, Dark Materials says “Love is the ultimate force that will save the world.”
I talked a bit already about Lewis. My difficulity with Lewis—and I am talking specifically about Narnia—is I think the moral lessons are too easy and the Christian parallels are too clear. Kids don’t have to work for answers. I think Harry Potter asks readers to brain stretch and ponder a bit more, and as I said earlier I think Pullman really make you stop–sometimes dead in your tracks—and decide what he is saying and how you react to it.
I’m really not trying to be provocative, honest!! but I think to some extent the problem some folks are having with Pullman is that they have heard he is the “anti-Lewis” and they set out reading His Dark Materials as if they were reading Lewis’ Narnia. If you do that you are going to miss a great deal, especially as the series moves ahead to the second and third books. And if you set out to read his religion alone, pro or con, you loose the story. And it is a great and epic story! I think that is true of Narnia too by the way. The times I have enjoyed Narnia most have been thise when I can put aside the message and just read the story.
I’ve probably said far too much. Really not looking to stir things up, honest! I would just like to see Pullman’s work included in discussions without the assumptions and the …what is your term Travis? Culture wars? that always seem associated with him.
Bill, thanks for your comments! Please know I don’t intend to meet you with hostility on this. So no worries…I know you’re not trying to pick a fight!
A few thoughts:
You’re probably quite correct that I didn’t give Pullman “a fair shake” on the HP Progs show, primarily because I had just finished Golden Compass and not progressed to the others yet. I have to admit – you’re the first person I’ve ever met who’s said the following two books get better, and as I said previously, I’m not just referring to Christians. I know folks who are not approaching Pullman from the bias that you have rightly put your finger on who were still quite turned aside by Pullman’s heavyhandedness.
But, again, I haven’t read it, so I’m basically just reporting for others
On a few points you’re definitely correct. Pullman is approached with definite hostility by Christian C.S. Lewis fans. There’s a built-in bias there, one I’m trying to avoid because I know what certain biases did for me when it came to Harry Potter (when I first heard about it, that is). Also, everything I’ve heard agrees with your comment that Pullman is carrying on with the theme of self-sacrificial love – something that leads some Christian critics to actually argue Pullman’s telling a Christian (though at points misguided) story.
I have to say that in the Pullman interviews I’ve read, he’s been quite clear: “Christians are wrong. There is no god.” But I’d love a pointer to an interview that says otherwise. He does fully admit that the Church of England is in him for good, which I’m sure contributes to the elements of the books that might coincide with the message of Lewis.
But back to Lewis. I’ve yet to hear of a kid who wasn’t prepped for Narnia (”Now, Johnny, this is a Christian story…”) who came away feeling like they were evangelized, like the gospel was just plainly laid out without any subtlety. And I also think you might consider intended audience: Lewis was clearly writing children’s books. I think Pullman’s work should be categorized as “Young Adult.” So, by nature, Pullman will be more nuanced and expect more of readers.
But even then – and this may just come down to personal responses – I am 29 years old, and I am personally challenged every single time I read Naria. Tears, desire to be a better person, the whole gamut. I’ve not come across many things in literature as profound as the Aslan moments of the Narnia series. The plotlines are oversimplified and have their issues; this is no problem for me. MacDonald was pleasantly simple as well. You probably have to be a Christian already to fully appreciate it – but when I encounter Aslan in the text, I find that a LOT is required of me, even though I’m not a kid anymore.
So, to risk the use of a dichotomy I don’t usually prefer: I might suggest that if Pullman requires more from the intellect, Lewis requires more of the heart.
Anyway, I rambled on there quite a bit. In any event, I agree with you – I’d like to think about Pullman outside of the culture wars and on its own literary merits, which I’ll do when I finally get to the point of reading the other two.
Bill,
Just a quick response: I don’t plan on reading Pullman not just because I disagree with his views. I read plenty of stuff that I don’t necessarily agree with or would support in the real life. I just have never felt particularly drawn to read Pullman.
From what I’ve read Pullman sees anything that has an ideology as religion & thus bad. When pointed out in a interview that political ideologies have probably killed more people in the past century than all past religious conflicts, Pullman said, well, their politics are their religion. So, he can condemn religion all around. It’s SOP really. I believe in God, but I just refuse to acknowledge anything to which I may be held accountable. So, all authority is thrown out.
Pullman may make some valid criticisms of the church, but orthodox Christians have been making those same criticisms way before Pullman ever did.
Don’t get me wrong, though. I’m not upset or angry at you or think you’re being provocative. I think you’re making some excellent points & asking some good questions. Plus, I don’t mind whether you like Lewis’s writings or not. To each his own, after all. I just think Lewis should be treated fairly. Which I don’t think Pullman does.
Hello, I have heard so much about this from the HP Prognosticators that when I saw your comment there I had a link to follow and listened in for the 1st time. For shooting from the hip and putting your thoughts together as you go it was pretty good.
Touchy subject religion, The only thing I would be qualified to feel comfortable adding a comment on would be the part of why we w`rite mythology and how in the last 100 years due to wars and terrorism it has become more common. I think when you look at recorded history that wars and terrorism have always ben a part of our lives. It may not seem as important because we or our close relatives in memory may not have lived though them and as such they seem to be as much a story to us as the ones you spoke of.
Looking at the Bible you can find many examples of confirmable history especially when decribing wars and kings that are way older than 100 years. Greek and Norse along with other cultural mythology also describe wars and heros that probably have some historical truths behind them. I think the main difference is that writing and reading in the last 100 years has become a much more common skill than in the past and with the booming information age of computers it is exciting to think where we may be in another 100 years.
I don’t want to take anything away from what you said as it was all very good but when it comes to the why I believe it is as simple as we all love a good story where the good guys win and that can be more common in myth than true history. As far as using the tales to make statements politically and religously I agree with you 100% and would add that both being touchy subjects a view expressed in a myth or fairy tale is done because the fiction of the tale makes for a somewhat safer less threating platform for such views.
Hope I didn’t ramble as I am famous for, great show !
Bill F,
I love Lewis as he was one of the first fantasy writers that I read- actually listened to them on casette read by Sir Michael Horden (a great British actor). I hit them the same time I started playing Dungeons & Dragons and an excellent game on the Texas Instrunments TI99/4a computer called Tunnels of Doom (I still play it on a PC emulator)- about 11 years old.
Anyway, I don’t have a problem with people having a problem with… Narnia, I’m assuming, not all Lewis’ writing.
The Narnia stories being deliberately children’s stories need not require children to have a cathartic experience. I mean, children need to be shown what is right before right can be expected of them. I think the rolemodels that Lewis provides are positive, relatable and admirable. I think a difference is that some other writers’ characters struggle to KNOW what is right, many of Lewis’ characters struggle to DO what is right. This is no less of a struggle, at least for myslef. I am often absolutely certain what is right but doing it is such a battle- often failed. I feel that this struggle to know what is right is a reflection of current Western culture. We are currently bombarded with the message that some other group’s opinions or beliefs are just as valid as our own- how dare we think (let alone say) that we are right and someone else wrong? How’s a kid to learn anything other than confusion if conflicting ideas both have to be right or acceptable? I suggest its by reading stuff like the Narnia stories where right and wrong, good and evil are easily identifiable and the characters make clear, sound decisions without enlessly agonising over them.
Matthew
Aaron, I’m glad you found the site! Thanks for your comment. I think you’re absolutely correct, and I think you’ve just hit on one of the fallbacks of my “sit down and record without much planning” way of doing some podcasts; I should have given more time to precisely why I was making the point about war in the last century.
I think when the wars of the last century are tied to the fact that as a society, we’ve been moving more towards a mythless way of thinking (or at least some would want us to go that way), the fact that many turned to myth and not to rationalism for comfort during times of war demonstrates the necessity of mythmaking.
In other words, even in the midst of “enlightenment,” anti-supernaturalist trends in culture, during times of pain and suffering, comfort and meaning has been found in myth and fairy stories, and that’s a very good thing!
Travis, I hope I wasn’t sounding critical as I think you do a much better job of collecting your thoughts on the fly than I ever could. You just made me think which when my mind probably should remain dormant.
The anti-supernaturalist trends in our times I am assuming are people who look for scientific facts in stead of faith or imagination? I would have to say such trends seem to be making a comeback. Perhaps not in clubs and practices of formal education but the #1 nighttime radio show is Coast to Coast with subjects and callers that seem to revolve around a discussion modern myths. Of course that would strengthen your point about myths being used as a source of comfort in crisis.
Actually the real modern myth you show is people thinking they can be rational. That is as big an illusion as anything Chris Angel performs. Thanks I’ll be listening.
Aaron, agreed – there is definitely a comeback for myth, and philosophical trends are showing a definite move back towards supernaturalism (even as folks like Dawkins get more shrill in their denouncement of religion).
Dawkins is only shrill in his denouncement of the Christian religion. He fails to see how his belief in macro evolution is a religion in itself. After all, Darwin started off looking for a way to get God out of the picture, & his disciples have learned well from him. But you don’t end up with no God, you simply replace Him with something else. It’s all a 1st Commandment issue.
Dawkins wouldn’t see it that way, of course. And he does, in general, oppose all religion, though you’re right that he’s particularly fierce when it comes to Christian theology.
Have you read McGrath’s new book, The Dawkins Delusion? McGrath is the expert at tackling Dawkins on his own terms. Brilliant stuff.
No, I haven’t read it, but I do have some Amazon gift cards I need to use, so maybe I’ll put that on my list.
Yes, I’m certain Dawkins wouldn’t see things that way, which is why the book is aptly titled ‘delusion.’ Thanks, Travis.
When I think about how things have changed in the last 100 years, I have to include how media for entertainment and communicating have changed. The written word, art and theatre have been supplimented by radio, movies, television and now the information highway. Never before in history have so many avenues of expression and entertainment been available to so many. Now out of those when you think of all the fictional fairy tales and political statements we are bombarded with daily is it any wonder that a good book even one meant as a childrens story offers a means of escape to a less evolved time.
Wow, there are lots of comments since last I checked! I’m a frequent reader of the comments and a very INFREQUENT commenter, but I had to throw in a quote I came across after listening to this podcast on myth-making and it’s ability to help us grow and take in truth. (Loved the talk by J. Overstreet; thanks for the recommendation, by the way!)
Anyway, here’s what I found from Clyde Kilby…
“We intellectualize in order to know, but paradoxically, intellectualization tends to destroy its object. The harder we grasp at the thing, the more its reality moves away. So what is to be done? Man finds in himself…imagination, by which he can transcend statements and systems. By some magic, imagination is able to disengage our habitual discursive and system-making and send us on a journey toward gestures, pictures, images, rhythms, metaphor, symbol, and at the peak of all, myth. Systematizing drives essentiality away, but successful creativity attracts it. While the basic requirement of systematizing is abstracting, myth is concerned not so much with parts as with wholes. Myth is necessary because reality is so much larger than rationality. Not that myth is irrational but that it easily accommodates the rational while rising above it.
Systematizing flattens, but myth rounds out. Systematizing drains away color and life, but myth restores.”
This is a bit lengthy and a bit of a departure from the current flow of the comments but it’s been on my mind and I wanted to throw it out there.
Thanks so much!
Leanne,
Great quote from Kilby. In today’s sense of the word, we look at myths as being not true, although they might tell a truth. But really they can go beyond that, in that they might comprehend the ‘truth’ much better than any systematic explanation. Great stuff.
It also lets me plug again Lewis’s Till We Have Faces, which is subtitled A Myth Retold.
revgeorge, I agree! I love Till we Have Faces! It’s one of my favorites.
Leanne, I’m really glad you commented! That’s a great quote, and one I’ll probably translate into some of my theological discussions as well (concerning systematic vs. narrative theology).
Thank you Travis! I really enjoyed this podcast. I would like to second the recomendation of living the liturgical calendar. It really does make present the ‘True Myth’ again and again (incidentally LOTR’s plot follows the litrugical calendar–is that where you will be going in the book?)