There has been a balancing act going on for many years between a lack
of parent involvement in schools and parents who wish to run the
school. Some parents refuse to be involved in their child’s education
even to the point of ignoring the needs of the child. Other parents feel
right at home making decisions for their children and some even try to
make decisions for teachers. The most pronounced and visible cases of
this come in the form of book censorship. This has become a focus for
the media in the last year because of the undeniable success and
controversy that surrounds J. K. Rowlings Harry Potter series. The Harry
Potter series, according to the American Library Association’s Office
for Intellectual Freedom, was named the most challenged on the list of
top ten most challenged books in 1999 (Oder).
J. K.
Rowlings is a British author so it might seem odd that I am focusing on
her in a project for an American literature survey class. The
controversy, though, is happening in America. I am not sure where the
first contention came from but it is clearly a big issue from the number
of articles I found on the debate. Many different people and groups
give many different warnings about Harry Potter. One, Family Friendly
Libraries (FFL), warns that the "Harry Potter books are not appropriate
for the public school classroom, because of occult themes, violent
content, and antifamily bias" (Rogers). Of course, anytime there are
such a large number of people yelling so loudly about one topic their
arguments tend to come from all sides. The FFL criticizes Harry Potter
because the books present an "antifamily bias." Christine Schoefer says
that Harry Potter supports a strong a patriarchy. While not being
exactly on opposite sides of the fence these two arguments certainly
don’t concur.
There is also a more intellectual
argument against books like Harry Potter. Some say that the loss of "the
classics" in the classroom is why so many people are turned off to and
cannot understand literature. One such protestor is Francine Prose
(specifically from her article, "I Know Why the Caged Bird Cannot
Read"). While not specifically addressing Harry Potter (she does talk
about other sci-fi and fantasy works), Prose’s distrust of anything
other than a classic work would probably cause her to respond to such
works similarly. Her argument is that teaching contemporary works that
were written with no concern for the intricacies of language cause these
books to be taught with no emphasis on close reading (line by line
interpretation).
The largest united front against Harry Potter has
come from Christianity. The magic and "occult" images in the books has
conservative Christians thumping their Bibles and pointing fingers. And
some of the religious opposition comes from the students themselves.
Third grader Jean-Paul goes to the library during reading time because
of Harry Potter; he says, "In the Bible it says not to do witchcraft"
(Keim). Even with all this opposition I don’t think that Harry Potter
will be banned from any school.
As I said earlier it is
very difficult for such a large opposition to be united. This is also
true of the Christian argument that the books support cult activity. An
article in the Christian Science Monitor even praises Harry Potter:
"When
Harry was in trouble, he had to remember something that made him happy.
Prayer often goes a lot deeper than just remembering something that
makes us happy. But it always puts us on line with God. I noticed that
Harry did have to have complete concentration. He couldn’t think happy
thoughts and fearful thoughts at the same time. And it’s that way with
prayer as well." (C.S.M.)
And the presence of wizards
and magic do not automatically mean that a work of literature is
supporting anti-Christian beliefs. A supervisor of Cult activity, Bob
Waldrep says, "I don’t think it’s a strong enough case to say a book
should be pulled because it has witches and wizards and violence in it.
Based on those criteria, how many books would be in the schools?"
(Keim). And that is probably the most important reason why Harry Potter
and similar books will remain in the schools.
If we
look at what would be viewed as perfectly acceptable pieces of
literature to teach, you would find stories like Beowulf, Sir Gawain and
the Green Knight and many other stories (like all the Arthurian
legends) that use magic and "occult" themes and ideas. "Wizardry has
played an acceptable role in British literature for centuries. The
Arthurian legend gave a preeminent place to Merlin, the beneficent court
magician, and to the evil sorceress Morgan le Fay, Arthur’s sister and
rival for his throne" (Ballard).
There have been many
modern books that contain elements of fantasy that have not been
ridiculed; the Oz books, and The Chronicles of Narnia are just a few
(Ballard). Many of Shakespeare’s plays are filled with criticisms and
doubts about the Christian faith yet I doubt anybody would argue that
they shouldn’t be taught in the high school. Prose’s concern over the
lack of classical works being taught is a little more serious. I,
however, do not agree with her belief that modern literature is
unconcerned with the function of language and therefore cannot and is
not read closely. As with everything though I believe that it is
important to strike a balance between. Students should be exposed to a
wide range of literature from different times, cultures, and beliefs.
Bibliography:
Ballard,
S.B. "Thoughts on Harry Potter: Wizardry, Good and Evil." Anglican
Theological Review. Winter 2000: 173-175.
"Does Harry
Potter Know How to Pray." Christian Science Monitor. 5 October 1999: 19.
In
Time of Emergency: a Citizen’s Handbook on Nuclear Attack and Natural
Disasters. Department of Defense: Office of Civil Defense, 1968.
Keim,
David. "Parents Push for Wizard-Free Reading." Christianity Today. 10
January 2000: 23.
Le Guin, Ursula K. A Wizard fo
Earthsea. New York: Bantam Books, 1968.
Moukheiber,
Zina and Pappas Ben. "The Geeks have Inherited the Earth." Forbes. 14
(1997): 348-355.
Neill, Derrick. "When Censorship Gets
Personal." NEA Today. April 1999: 41.
Oder, Norman.
"Harry Potter Most Challenged." Library Journal. 1 March 2000: 19.
Patrouch,
Joe. "Some Thoughts on American SF." Extrapolation. Spring 1997: 5-14.
Prose,
Francine. "I Know Why the Caged Bird Cannot Read." Harper’s. September
1999: 76-84.
Rogers, Norman and Oder, Norman. "FFL,
Others Target ‘Harry Potter.’" Library Journal. 15 November 1999: 14-15.
Sanders,
William. "The Undiscovered." The Year’s Best Science Fiction: Fifteenth
Annual Collection. Ed. Gardner Dozois. New York: St. Martin’s Press,
1998. 224-244.
Schoefer, Christine. "Harry Potter and
the Magical World of Patriarchy." New Moon Network. March-April 2000:
10-11.
Silverberg, Robert. "There Was an Old Woman."
Not of Woman Born. Ed. Constance Ash. New York: Penquin Putnam, 1999.
140-154.
No comments:
Post a Comment