His wife Narcissa is too, but at the same time she is strongly devoted to her son Draco, a devotion that leads her to lie to Voldemort and save Harry Potter. Lucius Malfoy, a nasty bigoted man, in the end is a weak person. Harry also has to come to grips with the fact that his father had mistreated Snape, and, as a young wizard, even Dumbledore had lusted for power.Īlso, some of the bad characters are not purely evil. In addition to Ron’s adolescent addiction to snogging (which is Rowling’s fault not his), he is subject to juvenile jealousy, and Harry can feel real hatred.
There is internal conflict and failure by the good. Her characters are not mere cartoon figures of pure good and evil. Rowling does avoid the trap of simplistic characterization, a failing of many children’s and cosmic conflict stories. At times Rowling’s writing contains some painful lapses. As an epic author his prose has a gravitas that is lacking in Rowling, and his landscape descriptions carry the reader into a world of sweeping grandeur. She also includes a wonderful collection of queer beasts and odd ball characters. Howlers, disgusting jelly bean flavors, and quidditch are great fun. Her marvelous gift for invention is used to entertain children and teens. I think this is why Rowling has so much more humor than does Tolkien. As Harry, Ron, and Hermione grow up, the story becomes more appropriate for adolescents and young adults. The Lord of the Rings is an epic tale and so more in tune with the tragic dimension of life.Īs a coming of age story, Harry Potter is necessarily geared to a younger audience than Tolkien, and, at least in the earlier volumes, is at the level of intelligent older children. Harry Potter is also a coming of age story and shows a marked preoccupation with death.
They are both fantasy literature, have a deep concern with the dangers of power, and share a typically British appreciation for normal life. The similarities between Tolkien’s and Rowling’s works are obvious. We desperately need to hear Tolkien in order to avoid the errors of moralism and a simplistic faith that cannot withstand the tidal waves of disappointment in the face of the hiddenness of God. That shortcoming, however, is one that much Christian thinking about God and evil shares. Nevertheless, Rowling falls short at a crucial point. Taking into account the facts that Tolkien’s masterpiece is the standard for fantasy literature and that Rowling is writing a slightly different genre and for a different audience, Harry Potter holds up fairly well. Harry Potter Part II: The Good and the Not So GoodĪ good way to evaluate Harry Potter is to compare it to Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings trilogy.
0 kommentar(er)
