First, the last book is by far the best and almost renders the others unnecessary. The first was okey, especially if you were a child between the ages of say 8 and 11 ... exceptible, within limmit, that is. But, let's face it : she could have used an Advanced D&D Monster Manual as a reference source. In fact, why didn't she just role die all through the book, to see how it should go? Her ideas are all modern, semi-popular ( but dated re: House Elves ) not baced on true legend or mythology, for the most part. I mean, hippogryphs, please! They are nothing but a literary invention. Many of her ideas about how people really viewed witches during the middle ages ( and later ) is not realistic. More on that, later. as for her world views, there is a reason Tolkien deplored the Anglican Church : they were watered down ages ago. She does seem to show some of the cultural reflections of Anglican enfluence, so I can't that she is down right anti christian, but...she seems to believe that the good ( who don't exit - just the not to evil ) automaticly go to ????????? a better place - sick.& even the sacrificial love of Jesus couldn't save my physical life.Also, her message to the world ( not a new one ) is : no, your not a freak or a geek, but, good gravey - ADD, Autism, Asperger's syndrom, By Polar, Schizophrenic ? By Gosh by Golly, Goodness, No, it can't be ! let's not have real conditions. In the oldendays, you might have been a changeling, later it was aliens and mustants ...and she has joined the "you are actually endowed with magical powers ...sick. So, now some poor kid is there pining to get into her "real" world, intead of dealing with the real world. Too many people just go crazy in denile of disablities, if they aren't obvious and physical.
& NOW : MUGGLES. In 1959 it was the name of a character; but worse, there were the Muggletonians : a very cleaver group to borrow a name from, but give credit where credit is due.
And man became a living soul - yet to her, loss of the soul is immiterial to life ; not to mention rending the soul - try it some time, if you can find yours ...
besides, she's a very popular author, and that is much more important than how she writes.
First, she barrowed hippogriphs from a piece of literature - invented by the author, not common mythology. This is but one example; and what she does to Elves - Tolkien rightly went back to the original - and he is far from being alone.
She ablsolutely made light of those who lost their lives for political reasons under the guise of witch-craft trials, as I noted ...and she has two direct quotes from the Bible - then shows her characters of being totally ignorant of them - one more than the other, though both were raised in regular, everyday Brittish families. Also, her comments on the soul are down right blasphemous.
You both are seriously over-reading the whole thing.
First trip-wire: "true" mythology? We'll ignore the oxymoron inherent in that statement and move on to the fact that mythology and folklore are an ongoing construct--- they didn't stop changing with the scholastic proclamation of the Age of Reason.
Second tripwire: the "You're not a freak, you're special" trope.... this one was old when Zeus was on the bottle. And frankly overall it's a good message--- and one rather reflective of the real world and real childhood, where children who are "too" intelligent, gifted, or simply different are treated rather abominably by both their peers and their authority figures...... especially in a society that wants to punish what used to be known as normal, and perfectly manageable, healthy child behavior by stigmatizing it, ostracizing it, and chemically bombarding it into oblivion. (Asperger's? ADD? We used to call those "awkward"--- or "focused"--- and "energetic." If the pill-popping fools running our psych med industries today had been in charge 50 years ago, an entire generation of scientists and artists would have ended up behind the rail at a McDonald's on a Special Ed job program, drooling on their spatulas in a Ritalin and Prozac haze.) It does get cloying; it pretty well borders on "Little Princess" or "poor little orphan annie,"especially in the first book, but considering the cultural environment today it's small wonder that so many children (and quite a few adults with childhood scars) glommed onto it so quickly.
Third: She was writing a children's fantasy series, not a gospel tract. That she would default to the rather vague Western Civ Judeo-Christian outlook on the afterlife--- "good people go here, bad people go there--" is hardly surprising. I am sad that she is not a Christian herself, but do you think we could wait until she converts before we start demanding loyalty oaths from her?
Fourth: Take note that her representation of the rather nasty things that the various Catholic and Protestant sects did to suspected witches is equally softballed. It was not NEARLY as horrible as the various neopagans try to claim, but it was deuced bad enough. That she barely even mentions it in passing--- and downplays even that with the excerpt about "Wendolyn the Weird"... constitutes charity on her part.
In conclusion, she was writing a children's fantasy story, with storytelling tropes common to the genre. She garners far more socio-religious criticism for that than she even remotely deserves.
part.in - This website is for sale! - part Resources and Information.
This website is for sale! part.in is your first and best source for all of the information you’re looking for. From general topics to more of what yo…
Witches, witches, witches ! Oh, joy ! Make fun of the men and women persecuted for political reasons, under the guise of religion! sorry, lady, but : The Salem Witches institute ? or what ever she called it - one of my relatives was tried as a witch then, and I've come across a decendant of another such victim.
Comments
besides, she's a very popular author, and that is much more important than how she writes.
Good grief, she's a somewhat middling fantasy writer, not the she-bride of the Antichrist. A grip, people: get one!
She ablsolutely made light of those who lost their lives for political reasons under the guise of witch-craft trials, as I noted ...and she has two direct quotes from the Bible - then shows her characters of being totally ignorant of them - one more than the other, though both were raised in regular, everyday Brittish families. Also, her comments on the soul are down right blasphemous.
First trip-wire: "true" mythology? We'll ignore the oxymoron inherent in that statement and move on to the fact that mythology and folklore are an ongoing construct--- they didn't stop changing with the scholastic proclamation of the Age of Reason.
Second tripwire: the "You're not a freak, you're special" trope.... this one was old when Zeus was on the bottle. And frankly overall it's a good message--- and one rather reflective of the real world and real childhood, where children who are "too" intelligent, gifted, or simply different are treated rather abominably by both their peers and their authority figures...... especially in a society that wants to punish what used to be known as normal, and perfectly manageable, healthy child behavior by stigmatizing it, ostracizing it, and chemically bombarding it into oblivion. (Asperger's? ADD? We used to call those "awkward"--- or "focused"--- and "energetic." If the pill-popping fools running our psych med industries today had been in charge 50 years ago, an entire generation of scientists and artists would have ended up behind the rail at a McDonald's on a Special Ed job program, drooling on their spatulas in a Ritalin and Prozac haze.) It does get cloying; it pretty well borders on "Little Princess" or "poor little orphan annie,"especially in the first book, but considering the cultural environment today it's small wonder that so many children (and quite a few adults with childhood scars) glommed onto it so quickly.
Third: She was writing a children's fantasy series, not a gospel tract. That she would default to the rather vague Western Civ Judeo-Christian outlook on the afterlife--- "good people go here, bad people go there--" is hardly surprising. I am sad that she is not a Christian herself, but do you think we could wait until she converts before we start demanding loyalty oaths from her?
Fourth: Take note that her representation of the rather nasty things that the various Catholic and Protestant sects did to suspected witches is equally softballed. It was not NEARLY as horrible as the various neopagans try to claim, but it was deuced bad enough. That she barely even mentions it in passing--- and downplays even that with the excerpt about "Wendolyn the Weird"... constitutes charity on her part.
In conclusion, she was writing a children's fantasy story, with storytelling tropes common to the genre. She garners far more socio-religious criticism for that than she even remotely deserves.