I am a fifteen-year-old girl whose friends adore Harry Potter. I read this book in an attempt to see whether this book would live up to all the hype surrounding it. I thought that I would perhaps enjoy this book, as I am normally a big fan of "different world" stories. Boy, was I disappointed.I do not think that this book will induce others to practice witchcraft, etc. The reason why I don't like Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone is because IT ISN'T A GOOD BOOK. This story moves like a television series, each storyline acting as an episode. But there is one difference: television shows do a much better job at depicting characters and storylines. J.K. Rowling's use of description is bland and amateurish. I realize that this book was written for children, but couldn't Rowling have at least attempted to use a higher sense of vocabulary? Roald Dahl uses very simplistic vocabulary in his stories, too, but he comes off as charming - Rowling just seems to be somebody who CAN'T use a nice vocab word every now and then.
Let's move on to the actual story. This is where the "unoriginal" trait comes in. Can we say "Cinderella"? The story of Harry Potter is too contrived. We've all seen the main storyline before: kind orphan boy/girl who just so happens to be whisked away to someplace "magical" for them; is great at everything and wins the admiration of practically everybody, with the exception of a few jealous enemies here and there. This storyline has been DONE TO DEATH, and Harry Potter doesn't make it any better.
This book is definitely not a classic. The Chronicles of Narnia - that's a classic. A Wrinkle in Time - that's a classic. Harry Potter doesn't come even close to those or many others. My literature teacher once put books into two different categories: thinking books and non-thinking books. Harry Potter belongs in the latter. This is a book that will go in one ear and out the other, not something that will stay with you for years on end. If this book ever becomes as "classic" as Cinderella or Snow White, the world will have had lost its mind.
This book definitely does not live up to the hype.
(...)I would like to offer my opinion on the Harry Potter books, based on my status as both a Christian and a parent. There’s so much hype and hyperbole surrounding these books that it may be difficult for parents and Christians to sort through it all. Are they filled with the occult, as some claim? Are they leading our children into witchcraft/occultism? Do they teach disrespect, irreverence, disobedience? What follows is merely my opinion, which I have constructed after much contemplation, prayer, and consultation. What are the books about? Most people know the basics--orphaned boy whose parents were killed by a dark wizard (Lord Voldemort, He-who-must-not-be-named) is raised by his horrible aunt and uncle, discovers at age 11 that he is a wizard and has been accepted to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. There, he begins his magical training and makes many friends. The first book deals mostly with Harry becoming acclimated to his surroundings and his classes. There’s also the mystery surrounding a package that Hogwarts Headmaster Albus Dumbledore has had moved to the school--none other than the Sorcerer’s Stone (based on the legend of the Philosopher’s Stone, also the title of the book in Britain). And who keeps trying to cause bodily harm to Harry--nasty Potions teacher Severus Snape, who seems to hate Harry? Or someone else? Could this have anything to do with Lord Voldemort, barely alive since his attack on the infant Harry rebounded on him, leaving the dark wizard near death? Part of the fun of the story is the myriad twists and turns with which Rowling imbues the plot, leaving readers guessing. The book has some plot inconsistencies and the characters aren’t well-defined, but as the series progresses, (and Rowling becomes more comfortable), things get better.
Rowling’s fantasy world swarms with clever, quirky ideas: “living“ chess sets, Every Flavor Beans (yes, EVERY flavor), Quidditch (a combination of soccer and basketball played on brooms), pictures that literally move, and much more. Humor abounds; even adults will finding themselves snickering. Devotees of classical literature and mythology will enjoy some of the references and character names.
There are even a few Christian elements in the story (Harry’s mother was named Lily--a symbol of Easter ; Harry’s wand is made of holly and a feather from a phoenix, both sometimes used as Christian symbols; Harry is in Gryffindor House, whose symbol is the Lion, sometimes used to represent Christ (“The Lion of Judah;” see Aslan in “The Chronicles of Narnia.”);Lord Voldemort is associated with serpents, the symbol of the Devil).
There are many lists online.
So what is all the fuss about? Should parents and Christians be concerned? Well, yes and no.
The positive: Harry is a good protagonist--courageous, clever, fiercely loyal, and self-sacrificing. He often risks life and limb without hesitation. Despite years of abuse growing up, he’s generally good natured and sympathetic. Kids can easily relate to his underdog status--he’s short and skinny for his age, has to wear glasses, and comes to school feeling lost because he grew up outside the wizarding world. Trust me folks; there are far worse role models for your kids.
The negative: He doesn’t always tell the truth, and does have a tendency to break the rules (we see less of that as he matures). Usually, Harry is forced to pay the consequences (such as losing a large number of points for his House in the school’s yearly competition) but not always. This is a good place for parents to discuss right and wrong and obedience with their kids.
So, what about the magical elements in the book? Do they make Harry and his world evil? That’s open for debate; though I offer a few insights that might help:
Harry’s magic is inborn, performed with a few words (usually clever variations on Latin words); there are no pentagrams or chants, no sacrifices, no dealings with spirits. There IS a ditzy Divination teacher at Hogwarts, who appears in the 3rd book, but she--and her class--are played for laughs. The magic involved is utilitarian, not supernatural; but to some, magic is still magic, and forbidden. Again, this may be a good point for discussion with your kids. There’s also been some flap about one of the Sorcerer’s Stone’s creators, Nicholas Flamel (fictional here, but he DID exist, and tried to create a Philosopher‘s Stone). Nicholas is 665 years old, and will die in the next year...making him 666. Hmmm....a Satanic reference? More like coincidence. Rowling based the books in the early 1990s, and the real Nicholas Flamel would have been about 665 years old then.
Also, Harry DOES NOT summon the dead. Through a magical object--The Mirror of Erised--Harry sees his heart’s desire--the parents and family he barely knew. He does not interact with them.
There is a scene in the Sorcerer’s Stone that may disturb younger kids: While in the Forbidden Forest, Harry spies a slain unicorn...and someone drinking its blood in order to stay alive. But as a centaur points out to Harry, this is considered a monstrous crime...only the most evil individuals would resort to such measures. Still, parents might want to be wary of this scene.
If you have concerns about these books, read them with your kids and discuss what you agree and disagree with. Will these books bring kids into the occult or teach kids disobedience? Only if parents allow it! Make it clear to kids that this is pure FANTASY. Kids are going to want to read these books; what they take from them is up to their parents and guardians. This could be an opportunity to bond with your children. For further reading, there are articles in Christian and parent-oriented magazines and online. There’s also Connie Neal’s book "What’s A Christian to do with Harry Potter?"
I hope this review helps. I am sorry it’s so long.
