Comments on: Lev Grossman Strikes Again

By: GL

GL — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 12:46:53 +0000

Travis,
In the blogosphere, as you know, this is known as “fisking”. You fisked Lev Grossman. I wonder if he murmured “Ouch” to himself as he read this. Game, set, match to Travis.

By: korg20000bc

korg20000bc — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:56:46 +0000

TMM,

That’s a great image for it. Thinking that sweet flowers are “stable filth”!

Well Done.

Matthew

By: The Mighty Musnud

The Mighty Musnud — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:50:18 +0000

Grossman’s inability to see the reality of Rowling’s writing reminds me of the dwarves at the end of Lewis’s “The Last Battle” who were convinced that they were inside a stable (even though they had entered the new Narnia).

By: Sally Scheusner

Sally Scheusner — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:09:04 +0000

Thank you, thank you, thank you, all of you! for your comments and for putting into words what I feft after reading Grossman’s article in Time. I do believe the man has missed the whole point of Harry Potter and his universe, or maybe he just likes to stir up controversy. And, as I recall from my Christian youth, Jesus was called the God of love, so I don’t see how love triumphing can kill God, but what do I know.

By: John Granger

John Granger — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:11:06 +0000

http://www.getreligion.org/?p=2550
Discussion of Grossman’s piece on the “Get Religion” journalism and Religion site.

By: HogwartsProfessor.com » Blog Archive » Lev Grossman, atheist, on record again that Ms. Rowling is a Secular Artist

Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:05:38 +0000

[...] and that he has an atheistic agenda. Travis Prinzi, as usual, has stepped to the plate over at Sword of Gryffindor to reveal the nonsense Mr. Grossman has served up. Mr. Prinzi’s analysis deserves your [...]

By: Reyhan

Reyhan — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 17:56:32 +0000

OK, delete my last comment. I went on NerdWorld and found a comment by Grossman on his article:

‘I think some people are reading this piece as an attack on Rowling for being overly secular. Which isn’t really what it says. And not that it really matters, but I am in fact an atheist, so being secular is A-OK #1 with me. Her non-godliness is one of the many things I personally like about JKR’s work.’

and

‘But she’s framing the story in a non-spiritual way that’s very new. Not a bad thing or a good thing. Just something to think about.’

I guess I missed his point.

I guess I missed his point because he didn’t make it very clearly. Either he’s a very subtle writer – in which case I’d argue Time magazine is not the place for such refined subtley – or he doesn’t have the cojones to come out and make his point directly. What’s wrong with saying: I notice a lack of organized religion and spirituality in the works of JKR, and this is a shift from Lewis and Tolkien, who were much more spiritual, and I think this shows people’s values and beliefs are changing and that pyschology and technology have taken over religion and spirituality?

What this misses is the sneer.

I think the reason I missed his point was that he sneers at everything, Rowling, Lewis, Tolkien, religion, spirituality, love, and most unforgivably, Hermione.

The man is entitled to his beliefs. I object to his tone.

By: Mia

Mia — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 17:43:48 +0000

Falkirk, I donâ€™t really get it either. Why this author, why this book? There are so many other stories about magic that arenâ€™t so different from Rowlingâ€™s story. Why do the critics take issues with her and why are some of their reactions so extreme?

I think, part of it has to do with the enormous success of the books, thatâ€™s practically unprecedented in literary history and we the online community are a part of it. Rowling has clearly hit a nerve of our time and there is a rising interest in religious topics, Christianity, spirituality in general. Fundamentalists become more outspoken, then there are some atheists, who feel that their worldview is under attack.

In my opinion this whole debate has little or nothing to do with Harry Potter, the books just happen to be the catalyst for people to express their beliefs.

By: Reyhan

Reyhan — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 17:28:12 +0000

Travis, I re-read the article. And I just don’t see where Grossman is saying that the absence of God is a good thing.

Do you see it in the article? Or from his previous writings?

By: Travis Prinzi

Travis Prinzi — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 17:18:32 +0000

I just want to clarify that I don’t think Grossman is “attacking” Rowling. I think he thinks that the supposed absence of God from the books is a good thing.