Harry Potter and the Glamour of Power

Harry Potter is a children's tale.(1) In order to analyze it critically, I read the first twenty of the classic of children's tales, Grimms' Fairy Tales.(2) These were compared to Potter with the aim of laying bare the novel's essential message and its impact on young readers. I also considered both Tolkien and Lewis.

In any story, first lines are critically important. If they are good, they immediately seize the soul and set the agenda for the remainder of the book. Harry Potter begins with these words,

Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much. They were the last people you'd expect to be involved in anything strange or mysterious, because they just didn't hold with such nonsense.(p. 1)

Potter begins with this world, the daily round of life. We meet Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, are given their street address, and learn at once that they are "perfectly normal, thank you very much." Secondly, there is another world, something "strange or mysterious," which looms on the horizon of the "perfectly normal." The reader knows at once that whatever this is, it will surely affect the Dursleys even if they "don't hold with such nonsense."

Among Grimms' fairy tales, some are fanciful, most are magical. I will give the opening lines of the first three magical ones.

Once upon a time there was a king who had twelve daughters, each more beautiful than the other.(p. 1)

A long time ago there was a king who had a lovely pleasure garden around his palace and in it stood a tree which bore golden apples.(p. 7)

There was once an old castle in the middle of a vast thick wood. In it there lived an old woman quite alone, and she was a witch. By day she made herself into a cat or a screech owl, ... (p. 32)

Unlike Potter, Grimms' fairy tales do not begin with daily life. The words, "once" and "a long time ago," reveal that the story happened only once, so remote that it doesn't belong to our time. Further, the magic of this world is not presented as something "strange or mysterious," but ordinary. It is ordinary because it belongs to the fairy tale and not the world of the reader. As we shall see, the fairy tale will have implications for the reader's world, but not at the level of magic. For if so, the magic would have appeared as something "strange or mysterious" in this world.

This contrast between Potter and Grimms can also be seen by examining their last lines. Potter ends with the words, "'I'm going to have a lot of fun with Dudley this summer ... '"(p. 309) These words are spoken by Harry Potter, the novel's central character. As a child, Harry lived with his aunt and uncle, the Dursleys. They and their very nasty son Dudley abused and humiliated Harry mercilessly. But then, on Harry's eleventh birthday, the "strange or mysterious" appears. A envoy from the world of magic rescues Harry and takes him off to the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. There he learns occult magic, and after the first year, returns to the Dursleys for summer vacation. But now, he, not the Dursleys and their son Dudley, has the power, and they know it. And what does he intend to do? "'I'm going to have a lot of fun with Dudley this summer ... '"

Here are the final lines of fairy tales previously quoted.

So the wedding was celebrated that very day, and the kingdom was promised to him on the King's death. But for every night which the princes had spent in dancing with the princesses, a day was added to their time of enchantment.

There was nothing now wanting to their happiness for the rest of their lives.

After that he changed all the other birds back into maidens again and went home with Jorinda, and they lived long and happily together.

All three of these magical tales concern a young man who, by his humility and perseverance, wins and marries a beautiful maiden. All three endings signal the end of the story, and with its ending, the end of the magic. Just as none of the stories began with the reader's world, none return there. In this way, the fairy tale becomes a self contained unit distinct from daily life.

The fundamental difference between Grimms and Potter can be summarized as follows: In Potter, there are two worlds, the world of the everyday and the world of magic. In Grimms, there is one world, the world of the fairy tale. In regard to the reader, Potter begins with the reader's normal world, takes the reader into the world of witches and wizards, and returns the young reader to his or her life with new possibilities for power. In Grimms, the story as a whole affects the reader, but only as a unit distinct from this world. I will now further develop these differences.

The aim of the fairy tale is to form character. All the magic is subservient to that goal. There is no hint that magic is needed for life, no path from the everyday into the occult. With very few exceptions, which have little bearing on the matter at hand,(3) the following holds for Grimms' first twenty fairy tales: First, the story line itself reveals that its goal is moral. Secondly, when magic appears, it is subservient to the story line. Thirdly, those in the fairy tale who reveal good character are often presented as ideal types without moral flaws. Fourth, the exemplary characters never learn magic, they only receive it in the context of specific occasions which always reveal right character. Those who have learned magic, such as witches, are always seen as evil. Fifth, the occult is never seen as an end in itself. It is never glorified or presented as fascinating. Sixth, these stories are quite secular. There is no cosmic dimension, no struggle between a supernatural good and evil. Finally, as a result of the foregoing, the imagination of the young reader is captured by the principal characters who reveal the virtues that bring happiness.

In regard to Potter, the following holds: First, the drama of the story is about power, occult power. Secondly, when the moral appears, it is subservient to the drama of power. Thirdly, none of the primary characters are ideal types, but mixtures of good and evil and winsomely so. Fourth, the principal characters learn magic, not for specific occasions of moral import, but because it is their destiny. By becoming wizards and witches, they become fully themselves. Fifth, magic is seen as an end in itself, as something exciting, powerful, and fascinating. Sixth, Potter is religious. Behind the scenes there is a cosmic struggle between the powers of good and evil. Seventh, as a result of the foregoing, the imagination of the young reader is captured by the reality of power, its acquisition and use as an extension of themselves. Finally, only one form of power is presented with dramatic force, occult power, wielded by "good" and evil alike. Though these claims can easily be verified, I will here address two critical issues: Potter's presentation of the occult as fascinating and desirable, and secondly, the dominance of power over morality. I began with an example.

While at Hogwarts, Harry receives a Christmas present. It is a cloak that makes him invisible. Here is how it happens.

Something fluid and silvery gray went slithering to the floor where it lay in gleaming folds. Ron gasped.
"I've heard of those," he said in a hushed voice, dropping the box of Every Flavor Beans he'd gotten from Hermione. "If that's what I think it is they're really rare, and really valuable."
"What is it?"
Harry picked the shining, silvery cloth off the floor. It was strange to the touch, like water woven into material.
"It's an invisibility cloak," said Ron, a look of awe on his face. "I'm sure it is try it on."(p. 201)

Later that night, when all are in bed and Harry is alone, he tries it on.

Suddenly, Harry felt wide awake. The whole of Hogwarts was open to him in this cloak. Excitement flooded through him as he stood there in the dark and silence. He could go anywhere in this, anywhere, and Filch would never know.(p. 205)

In the fairy tale, "The Twelve Dancing Princesses," a poor young soldier wants to learn the secret of the princesses and thereby secure a bride and a kingdom. An old woman gives him a cloak with these words,

"That is not so difficult," said the old woman. "You must not drink the wine which will be brought to you in the evening, but must pretend to be fast asleep." Whereupon she gave him a short cloak, saying, "When you wear this you will be invisible, and then you can slip out after the twelve princesses."(pp. 2-3)

Here is the soldier's first use of the cloak,

The soldier, who had noticed everything, did not hesitate long, but threw on the cloak and went down behind the youngest [princess]. Halfway down he trod on her dress.(p. 3)

Young readers do not think abstractly. They absorb whatever is vividly rendered by action and feeling. In Potter, the cloak, and the occult in general, are dramatically presented as a means to power, where power is the capacity to act effectively in a wide range of circumstances. Once Harry put on the cloak, the "whole of Hogwarts was open to him," and he could break the rules with impunity. Children will remember the cloak, the awe, wonder, and excitement of its appearing. Consistently, at every opportunity, Potter presents the occult as fascinating and fun. The message to the child: "Do it, it's awesome."

By contrast, the magic of the fairy tale lies in the background. The above text shows no interest in anyone's feelings about the cloak, nor how it looked or felt. When the time comes, the soldier simply puts it on and follows the princesses.

In regard to the moral element in Potter, several comments are in order. First, Harry and his school companions tell lies, break rules, act spitefully, and enjoy revenge. They use occult magic to do this. These moral lapses are presented without any real censure. Only once are they reprimanded, and their punishment was mitigated by their lying to hide the full extent of their misconduct. On other occasions, they are rewarded for breaking the rules. They also show courage, loyalty, and intelligence, but as I shall show, these are subservient to the struggle for power. That is because the dramatic focus of Potter is power, and the moral is subordinate to it. To show this, I will first give two examples from the fairy tales.

In "Sweetheart Roland," an evil witch pursues Roland and his love. The young lovers use a wand to become a swan and a lake. The witch tries to lure swan Roland to the water's edge by scattering bread crumbs upon the water. For the young reader, the real suspense is whether or not Roland will be true to his love or be ensnared by the witch. This is visually rendered by the text. The issue is not power, but moral choice. Therefore, the power of the wand is scarcely noticed. In "The Golden Bird," three brothers are given advice by a fox. They then choose between two inns, one sumptuous the other miserable, and between two bird cages, one of gold the other of wood. In their imaginations young readers see the fox, the inns, and the cages. They see the older brothers choosing the most attractive, while the younger brother chooses the more humble. In the end, they see the younger marry a beautiful bride. In this way the virtue of humility takes visual dramatic form.

Exactly the opposite holds true for Potter. The most significant example is the climax of the novel. Harry and his friends must capture the Sorcerer's Stone and fight Voldemort's alter ego, Quirrell. To do this they must do the following: subdue a friend with a magic spell, enchant a cat, fly on their broomsticks to catch a floating key, display intelligence and presence of mind to solve problems made difficult by spells, and finally, Harry must fight Voldemort's alter ego and defeat him by something which happens in a mirror (to be discussed shortly), by lying, and by a physical struggle. Breaking the rules, deceit, intelligence, and courage all appear, but they serve the real focus, the use of power to break spells and defeat the enemy. That is the dramatic conflict, rendered concrete by vivid action images that capture the imagination. As a result, the drama of power, magic power, force against force, is what enters the child's soul and awakens desire.

Three events in Potter appear to have significant moral import, the Sorting Hat, the Mirror of Erised, and Hagrid's revelation to Harry of his mother's love. In none of these events is the moral dramatically rendered. For example, a voice in the Sorting Hat offers Harry greatness and Harry rejects this temptation. But this "greatness" is never concretely expressed. There are no visible alternatives as in "The Golden Bird." and "Sweetheart Roland". When Harry dons the hat, a voice fleetingly suggests an abstraction, something called "greatness." The same holds for the rescue of the Sorcerer's Stone. We don't know why the stone suddenly appears in Harry's pocket. All we see is the action Harry and friends overcoming one obstacle after another, Harry before the mirror, a physical struggle with Quirrell. Only later does Dumbledore reveal that Harry captured the stone because he didn't covet it. Similarly, only after the action is over does Hagrid tell Harry that he had magic power against Quirrell because his mother loved him. That love is never depicted. No scenes show Harry being loved by his mother. The imaginations of young readers will not be captured by Harry's refusal of greatness, nor by his not coveting, nor by his mother's love. Their imaginations, feelings, and wills, will be captured by the drama of power in action.

There is, however, a certain type of "morality" that Potter does render. Throughout the novel the young reader would identify with Harry, his mistreatment by the Dursleys, his feuds with Draco Malfoy, and above all, his battle with Voldemort. As Harry strikes back, a moral emerges: "If your enemies are evil, you can use power against them." This moral assumes that the self is good and the enemy is evil. And Harry is good. When tempted in the ritual of the Sorting Hat, and above all, when he peers into the mirror that reveals desire, he emerges "pure in heart." That doesn't stop Harry from committing "minor" infractions, breaking the rules and hiding the truth, but these are irrelevant. Good and evil are not given in a moral code that forms character. Good and evil are only relevant in relation to power used against the enemy. As a result, young readers will assume that their daily peccadilloes are perfectly all right as long as they, like Harry, are the good guys battling the bad. This is not a conscious decision on their part, but one created by the narrative.

When Potter is seen in light of the fairy tale, it is not a book about virtue. It is a book about power. It raises one very, very critical question, Can occult power be used in the cause of good? That question does not arise in the fairy tale because its magic does not belong to the child's world. But it does arise in Potter, because the book shows how occult power might be acquired. It shows Harry going to Hogwarts to learn spells, potions, and defense against dark forces. It lists by title the texts he needs to begin his studies. It shows Harry and his friends putting their occult knowledge into action. Some children, especially lonely and mistreated ones like Harry before he "got religion," will follow Harry's example. All they need to do is visit their local bookstore, library, or the web, and there they will find all they need to know on how to become a witch or a wizard. Once they get the knowledge, they will practice the craft. Of that, there is no doubt.

The whole of the Christian tradition, the teaching of Scripture, the writings of the fathers, are unanimous occult power can never be used in the cause of good. That is the great lie of Potter. It makes the occult attractive, and then shows it in action for the sake of goodness. Further, experimenting with the occult opens a person to the demonic. Many of those who practice the occult know it isn't a game; they know they have encountered spiritual beings.(4)

How should parents respond? I do not think young children should be reading the book. Certainly not on their own. Perhaps a parent could read it to them and interpret it correctly. Even that is dubious. Not all parents discern properly and there are many other children's stories.

Not all would agree with me. In their view, Potter is mythic, a drama revealing the struggle between good and evil as in Tolkien or the fairy tale.(5) To focus on the occult would be to miss the point. Others would claim that it is a fantasy and little more. Still others see spiritual or mythic themes that point to the Christian story. Here is a typical statement taken from Episcopal Life. ":And indeed Harry plays out to very sympathetic Christian themes: the battle between good and evil, the sense of purpose and destiny, the value of sacrifice."(6) Such claims fail on many levels. To begin with, Potter is more than fantasy. Occult spiritual power exists. It is real and it is evil. Secondly, and critically, truth for a child is revealed dramatically in action and potent images. Adults may discern some abstract moral, some deeper mythic or Christian meaning, but the child will be carried along by the drama of the action. The vital images of conflict and occult wonder will be remembered, not some abstraction, theme, or supposed moral. Every commentary I have seen on Potter has failed to to recognize Potter's fundamental message. This, in my view, is because force has become so commonplace in American culture that its dramatic presence is scarcely noticed.

Furthermore, the fact that something is mythic does not mean that it is good. There are good and bad myths. Nor can myths be abstracted from their symbols. Without the occult, Potter is not Potter. Finally, the fairy tales I read were not mythic. Like myths, they used concrete images, but they did not present a cosmic dimension that makes sense of life. That is part of Potter's fascination. It is a cosmic drama.

Tolkien is mythic, but similar to the fairy tale, Tolkien's Hobbit and the Ring Trilogy do not take place in this world. Nor do these books glorify occult power. Nor do they assume that spiritual power is neutral, that it can be used for both good and evil. Rather, there is both evil and good power in Tolkien, and both are external to human existence. The most important example is the ring that Frodo possesses. The ring is evil. Every time Frodo puts it on, evil makes another advance. Frodo's entire effort is to avoid using the ring, and in the end, to destroy it. The reader comes away from the Ring Trilogy with the understanding that certain forms of power are dangerous, that this power can tempt and destroy us, that it is a cosmic power, that it can never be used for good, and that it can only be defeated by giving up all use of it forever. That is the fundamental difference between Potter and the Ring Trilogy. The Ring Trilogy knows there is an evil cosmic power. In that sense, it is Christian. Potter claims that occult power is neutral, that its effects are determined by the morality of the person using it. That is not Christian.

A comparison between Harry Potter and C.S. Lewis' The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe leads to similar results. Both stories start in the world, take the reader to a magical world, and then return to the ordinary world of daily life. The two stories diverge radically, however, on what is learned in the magical world. Unlike Harry and his companions, none of the children in Lewis' tale learn magic. None of them practice it. Further, as in the fairy tale, the real drama is not a conflict of opposing powers, but a moral struggle. Edmund learns that loyalty and love matter more than Turkish Delights. Aslan, the lion whose magic is deepest of all, gives up his life to save Edmund from death. The climax of the story is not a battle of opposing forces, but Aslan's willing sacrifice of himself at the hands of the wicked Queen. His death for Edmund's sake is dramatically rendered. Obviously, the novel is a thinly disguised allegory of the gospels with Aslan playing the part of Christ. Love not power is its central theme. A child will not come away from Lewis thrilled by power in action, but touched by a love from before the dawn of time. Both stories are mythic. The one is a pagan myth of power, the other a Christian love story. One is of the night, the other of the day.

Once a child is older, knows the Christian story, can think abstractly, discriminate, and compare, Harry Potter can be read and evaluated. It is a window on our world, revealing a profound cultural shift towards paganism. Reading Potter, however, needs to happen in the context of the family or church where Christ is loved and served. Then the matter can be discussed in a way that enables the young to make their way in life. I would not, however, recommend that Potter be promoted as a good read for parents and children in general.

Just how dangerous is Harry Potter? From a biblical point of view, there is a devil and the devil has power. That power must be fought in the name of Christ by exorcism and other means. Once the occult in Potter is recognized and avoided, however, the book is not that dangerous. The real danger is ourselves. The devil may tempt, but we are the ones who sin. The most dangerous sins are the hidden one. In that regard, Potter sheds so little light. It only emphasizes the immediate, the individual. It has no concept of social and economic sin. In that regard, the novel is rather small.

Two world views lie behind the debate over Potter. There are those who believe that the spells and magic of Potter are forms of imagination that can deepen one's appreciation of all forms of story including the Christian story. Theologically, this perspective tends to downplay the supernatural, thinking that faith points to a "dimension of depth," to use a phrase of Anglican theologian John Macquarrie's. This perspective often doubts the supernatural, whether a real devil or an external God who intervenes in the world. Such a perspective is widely held among Protestant theologians of the liberal variety. By contrast, there are those who believe in an external supernatural reality. They believe certain names and rituals can invoke the devil's deadly presence, just as the biblical narrative and Christian liturgy brings life in the name of Jesus Christ. I have called these two perspectives the objective and ecstatic ways of understanding the Christian faith. These two ways mark a profound cultural and theological divide.

If one reads a pre Christian narrative such as the Irish Tain,(7) one cannot help but be horrified at the magic these people practiced and the terror of their supernatural world. They were subject to violent attacks by their gods, in constant fear of hexes and spells, always subject to becoming a lake, tree, or bird. Christianity conquered this dreadful world with the gospel, a message that included deliverance from evil spirits. With the passing of paganism and the victory of Christianity, the supernatural gradually vanished from Western civilization. Today, many Christians within the so called "First World," including many Anglicans, deny or avoid the supernatural, whether pagan or Christian. The occult enters the vacuum, the result of a denied spiritual hunger. At the moment, it often masquerades as tolerant and life affirming. Sooner or later, however, it will bare its fangs as in the Nazi experiment.(8) Only the Lord Jesus can stop it, working through an obedient church that knows the power of Christ over the devil and his angels. Without that authority, the church fails at a critical point to counter a culture "slouching toward Bethlehem" and a pagan rebirth.

Endnotes

1. J. K. Rowling. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. New York: Scholastic Press, 1997.
2. Grimm, The Brothers. Grimms' Fairy Tales. Translated by Lucas, Crane, and Edwardes. New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1945.
3. "Thumbling the Dwarf and Thumbling the Giant" is a rambling tale, difficult to follow, without any apparent moral. "Briar Rose" has a moral, that beauty, goodness, and cleverness win out in the end, but it is not as clear as some of the others. "The Cat and Mouse in Partnership" is more of a statement about the nature of life than a moral, although the moral is quite near the surface.
4. See, among many examples, Margot Adler's, Drawing Down the Moon. Boston: Beacon Press, 1986.
5. See The Living Church, Nov. 12, 2,000, pp. 17 8.
6. Episcopal Life, January, 2002, p. 20.
7. The Tain. Translated from the Irish Epic, Tain Bo Cuailnge, by Thomas Kinsella. London: Oxford university Press, 1970.
8. National Socialism was a pagan religion, a revival of Nordic paganism, complete with rituals, occult magic, and a pagan ethic. For an outstanding analysis of this phenomena and its appearance in a softer, gentler form throughout the West, see Robert A Pois, National Socialism and the Religion of Nature. Croom Helm, London and Sydney, 1986.

The Rev. Robert J. Sanders, Ph.D.
February, 2002.