While I haven’t read the newest book yet, I have read all the others. And all the rhetoric about them. And, like any other media, they don’t force anyone to do anything. The readers aren’t even really made to think very much. The books are entertaining. There were a few cute and almost novel ideas in the first book or two, but anyone with a love of children’s literature can trace where each idea originated. Rowling’s ability to assimilate all these odds and ends of children’s fantasy literature into a new story is quite good. That she was able to stretch this into a 7 book series is also good, mostly for her and certainly for her fans and detractors. None of this changes the fact that words written on paper or available in pixels or even spoken in Books on Tape or coded into Braille still cannot compel anyone to do anything.
No book written has ever forced anyone to become Christian or Pagan or a witch or evil or good. The innate character of the person reading the book and that person’s needs, desires, and thoughts are what is converted into action. Books convey information, either factual or fictional. Experience allows us to differentiate between fact and fiction. You don’t even have to be educated to understand the difference.
Those who treat fiction as if it were fact do greater harm than the authors of any work of fiction could ever imagine. They assign too great an importance to the story, and by their conflation of fiction and fact, they blur the lines for those who are learning those differences. The move to treat fiction as if it were fact and to hold the authors of fiction as accountable for their words as authors of factual treatises and how-to manuals is a disturbing one.
I’ve written about the Poole case, where a teen was charged with a felony crime of terroristic threats for a fictional story he wrote. That is, so far, the most extreme case of punishing a fiction author as if his story were truth. It isn’t the first, and I greatly fear it won’t be the last. I first noted the pattern of holding fictional authors to the same standards as authors of factual books – demanding documentation, substantiation, and support for their fictional suppositions – about 25 years ago. I personally know authors who refuse to publish certain stories of theirs because they fear the fiction will be taken as fact, and they’ll be held legally liable for actions readers may then take based on their stories. At some point, parents stopped teaching their children the difference between fact and fiction. The schools neglected to teach the difference between fact and fiction, between literature and science.
And now, today, we have people who can’t distinguish between a work of children’s fiction and real life – adults, no less. I could almost understand this blurring of the lines if the people involved were young children. Almost, because in my experience, even quite young children understand the difference between real and not real. As an example from 11 years ago, my daughter had an English teacher in junior high school who was worried about her mental health because when she was asked to write stories, she chose to write about elves and winged ponies and magic doorways. My response to the teacher was, “You asked her to write stories, not documentaries.” The teacher didn’t understand the difference. To that teacher, a story was always based on what really happened. Anything outside of that meant the child was growing up to be a Satanist. There was no convincing her otherwise.
More and more adults are either unaware of the difference between fiction and fact, or they truly believe all stories, no matter how outrageously improbable, are based on “what really happened”. Either way terrifies me. What kind of world will we have if there is no fiction?
Some of the complaints about the Potter stories is that they will lure children to witchcraft because the children want to live in the world Potter inhabits. This attitude presupposes that Harry Potter is a real boy, attending a real school, and the adventures he has are real ones any living child might experience.
Most of the detractors of the Potter tales claim that Rowling’s stories are responsible for the rise in interest in Wicca and witchcraft, as if those two events are connected and that this is a Bad Thing. First of all, there’s been a rising interest in Wicca and witchcraft and alternative religions in the US since about the late 60’s, and Rowling wasn’t even born then. Saying the Potter books caused a rise in that interest is ignoring reality – not a problem for people who can’t tell the difference between fact and fiction, I suppose. I’d suppose the opposite, that a rising interest in Wicca and witchcraft has opened the way for books like Rowling’s, Diane Wynne Jones’, Susan Cooper’s, and Colfer’s children’s fantasy stories to be published and gain popularity. Llewellyn Press can easily refute that Rowling was responsible for a rise in interest in Wicca and witchcraft, considering they’ve been publishing witchcraft-related books since 1901. That far pre-dates Rowling.
As for the contention that “luring” children to Wicca and witchcraft is a Bad Thing, I suppose it would be, if you looked out and saw empty pews and collection plates in your church. After all, they are losing money – always a Bad Thing, but not as bad as they make it out to be, since many churches own very profitable for-profit businesses like banks and pharmacies and can shelter under all sorts of tax exemptions. That they worry about the souls of others is commendable, but ultimately, isn’t it the choice of the person whose soul is involved to care for their soul as they see best? Christianity isn’t always the best route to grace for a soul. I see the Christian angst over loss of membership as one of control and selfish greed, and I don’t get either of those attitudes – they aren’t part of my religion.
That sales are up for fantasy items like robes and hats and glasses and books is surely a boon to the economy. Does it matter if the material objects are space rockets or brooms? It’s all toys. And whether it’s a broom or a Dick Tracy Decoder Ring, it encourages the imagination. I see this as a Good Thing. Everybody benefits – the manufacturers, the stores, the kids, the parents. OK, maybe the parents don’t benefit as much – after all, their pocketbook is the one hit to pay for these toys. Still, they do derive the benefit of knowing their child is literate; their child can make friends to play at being one of the characters, much like we used to play at being Peter Pan or Wendy; their child is learning to entertain themselves – a blessing to parents who need a little adult time; and their child may be inspired to enter a comparable field of study – like medicine or horticulture or engineering. It may inspire the child to become a writer themselves.
Me, I think the hooha over these books drives up sales, and Rowling smiles all the way to the bank. So keep protesting her books and drive those sales up even higher.
