Harry Potter is the devil (not really)

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by PulsusMeusGallo

 

Did he post credentials? With the level of trolling, cointelpro, and people straight making stuff up, it's hard to know who to trust anymore.

I knew him as neighbor, friend, drinking partner, and was introduced to him initially by Porter Goss on Sanibel Island.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz

you need to buy yourself a lackey to argue with.

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by PulsusMeusGallo

 

Did he post credentials? With the level of trolling, cointelpro, and people straight making stuff up, it's hard to know who to trust anymore.

I knew him as neighbor, friend, drinking partner, and was introduced to him initially by Porter Goss on Sanibel Island.

Dix was a voice on the other end of a telephone. He passed the Turing Test.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by PulsusMeusGallo

 

Did he post credentials? With the level of trolling, cointelpro, and people straight making stuff up, it's hard to know who to trust anymore.

Victor didn't need to. He was well known in the newspaper and publishing industry, a self-made millionaire many times over. He was a prolific literary critic and those tight inside the Potterverse knew him, many, frankly, were afraid of him. he challenged and dissolved ego-boundaries.

His intelligence work was mentioned in many books including Frank Camper's (Useppa Island Club) Bob Baer's and dozens more. His involvement with the Potter series was on his own tab, of his own volition, by request and completely voluntary. He was the glue that held Rowling's head, Warner's ego and Radcliffe-Watson-Grint childhoods together.

The speculation was that Warner would supply pre-manuscripts, Dix would review, work them with Rowling, return the worked pre-manuscripts etc until finished. Dix would never confirm but most of us who knew of him or iknew him didn't need the confirmation.

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz

Originally posted by PulsusMeusGallo
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

 

Rowling thinly disguised, if disguised at all, use of the Gringotts Goblins as greedy, self-centered and obnoxiously ugly caricatures for Jews certainly did not help her Christian agenda, imo.

actually i think that connection originated in your head, or was planted there by something you read online. i didn't even think of that.

goblins in harry potter aren't human and don't remind me of jews in any way. maybe if you cling to the stereotype that a majority of jews are greedy bankers you would come up with that allegory, but i sure didn't, and no one i know who i've discussed the books with has either.

for your information, i'm part jewish. not sure how much as my grandma didn't pay attention to her mother's teachings, and my grandma passed away more than 10 years ago. not much chance of finding out more without a genetic test.

In HP the Jews are represented by all Muggles--the inferior bloodline that Voldemort wanted to get rid of. Like Hitler was part Jewish, Voldemort himself was a half-blood.

Rowling is not writing a Christian book, not even close. She is exploring death--that's what the whole series is about. Death, and how we deal with it. She started it right after she lost her mother to multiple sclerosis and was extremely depressed. That's where the dementors came from--they are symbolic of depression and how it sucks all the happiness out of your life.

What she did is write a classic hero journey--it has all the elements, from an unusual orphan child, to the wise old mentor, to the adversary, to the belly of the whale.

Harry is not Christ. Not even close. He might be a Christ-figure or Christ-like, as is Snape, but he is NOT Christ. Nor is Voldemort the Devil. (Voldemort isn't Hitler, either. That part is filled by Grindelwald.)

Rowling is taking the agnostic view--she doesn't know if there's a heaven or a hell. This is blatantly obvious by the King's Cross scene in Deathly Hallows. Harry sees the train and Dumbledore gives him the choice to go on or not, but we never see what lies beyond. Rowling is saying she doesn't know.

Harry didn't die. That's been a huge debate since the last book came out, but it seems obvious to me that he didn't. He was just unconscious. People have made a lot of the events that follow that scene: that Harry's "sacrifice" enabled them to dodge killing curses and otherwise survive, but the fact is, Harry didn't die. He went willingly, but if he hadn't seen Snape's memories in the Pensieve, Voldemort would have had to drag him kicking and screaming. It's exactly the same as Luke going willingly with Vader to face the Emperor in Return of the Jedi. The difference here is that Vader was redeemed, Voldemort wasn't, but then, Star Wars was Anakin's story, not Luke's.

He had to believe he would honestly die or he'd never have been able to pull it off.

Originally posted by HappyBunny

Rowling is not writing a Christian book, not even close. ....

Rowling On Christianity and Harry Potter

reply to post by HappyBunny


He did die.... The stone gave him the choice to come back, or move on.

Originally posted by Night Star

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by PulsusMeusGallo

 

A nerd is the bully? That's a new one on me.

Hermione was a lot of things but a bully wasn't one of them!

Nope, just a bushy-haired know it all.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by HappyBunny

 

He did die.... The stone gave him the choice to come back, or move on.

He couldn't die--the Horcrux was protecting him and the AK would not have killed him. The most that can be said is that he had a near-death experience, but he was still alive.

Harry dropped the stone in the forest before he ever got that far.

Harry knew from the Tales of Beedle the Bard that there is no coming back from death. Dead is dead, and that idea was expounded on continuously through the books via Dumbledore. That's why Voldemort was so obsessed with cheating death.

I got the fwd U2U asking about other menaings in harry Potter so I have to respnd here, my U2U doesn't work.

My fav is in my name. Literary alchemy, the symbolism, is the most overlooked Potter meaning imexpereince.

Originally posted by PulsusMeusGallo

Originally posted by HappyBunny

Rowling is not writing a Christian book, not even close. ....

Rowling On Christianity and Harry Potter

And yet, she includes a pagan quotation as she admits in the article. I don't see how you can then make the claim it is exclusively Christian.

I never said HP didn't have religious themes--just not exclusively Christian ones.

reply to post by HappyBunny


Then why was the corrupted soul there? Because it was also dead, the hocrux had to be killed in order for voldy to be able to die and never come back again. That was what the deformed baby represented, the hocrux fragment that used to be bonded to his own soul.

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars
I got the fwd U2U asking about other menaings in harry Potter so I have to respnd here, my U2U doesn't work.

My fav is in my name. Literary alchemy, the symbolism, is the most overlooked Potter meaning imexpereince.

I really hope by using literary alchemy you didn't come to the misguided conclusion that Harry would end up with Hermione, did you? I can't tell you how many arguments I had with people over that. They showed zero understanding of alchemy by doing that--they just wanted Harry and Hermione to end up together--kind of like people wanted Luke and Leia to end up together. Because using alchemy it was obvious from Book 2 that he was going to end up with Ginny and Hermione with Ron. Not to mention the big anvil-sized hints in the text gave it away.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by HappyBunny

 

Then why was the corrupted soul there? Because it was also dead, the hocrux had to be killed in order for voldy to be able to die and never come back again. That was what the deformed baby represented, the hocrux fragment that used to be bonded to his own soul.

The soul wasn't dead--not yet. Remember, it was crying like a baby and Harry wanted to help it, but Dumbledore said it was best to just let it be.

The train station was a limbo of sorts.

ETA: The horcrux was not the soul itself. The horcrux was just the object in which the soul was kept. It had to be destroyed before the soul could escape or whatever. In this case, it was so mangled that it couldn't survive.

The idea of the external soul is hardly new, either. It's existed in folklore and legends from all over the world for thousands of years, and is very popular in fantasy literature. Sauron did exactly the same thing in Lord of the Rings.

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars
I got the fwd U2U asking about other menaings in harry Potter so I have to respnd here, my U2U doesn't work.

My fav is in my name. Literary alchemy, the symbolism, is the most overlooked Potter meaning imexpereince.

L.A. is something that can be discussed about without being out of class, so to speak, as the majority of this work has been posted by Hans Andrea's Harry Potter for Seekers on his website.

Harry Potter For Seekers

This is pure Victor Dix although Dix later claimed to be the disciple of not the teacher of Hans.

Two points. J. K. Rowling certainly had the scholastic background to understand the use of and the interpretations from the literary alchemical works prior to her writing Potter. She would have certainly known of the Rosicrucians and the Chymical Wedding. I am however quite certain, to any measure of doubt, that it was Dix that molded her from Books 3 on in the L.A symbologies.

The reason I say this is that by the time of Prisoners of Azkaban, Rowling and the rest of the Rowling Group had come to understand that the opportunity to turn wildly successful children's books and engage the adult readership and literary societies was by deepening the meanings, lengthening the narratives and developing a much more complex and rich Potter experience.

Enter literary alchemical symbolism.

Originally posted by HappyBunny

Originally posted by PulsusMeusGallo

Originally posted by HappyBunny

Rowling is not writing a Christian book, not even close. ....

Rowling On Christianity and Harry Potter

And yet, she includes a pagan quotation as she admits in the article. I don't see how you can then make the claim it is exclusively Christian.

I never said HP didn't have religious themes--just not exclusively Christian ones.

edit on 3/20/2012 by HappyBunny because: (no reason given)

Rowling says what she says, whatever you want to believe from her is your choice. I believe only that which I can corroborate. In short, she's a very competent liar.

Potter is too complex to be only about any one thing though.

Originally posted by HappyBunny

I really hope by using literary alchemy you didn't come to the misguided conclusion that Harry would end up with Hermione, did you? I can't tell you how many arguments I had with people over that. They showed zero understanding of alchemy by doing that--they just wanted Harry and Hermione to end up together--kind of like people wanted Luke and Leia to end up together. Because using alchemy it was obvious from Book 2 that he was going to end up with Ginny and Hermione with Ron. Not to mention the big anvil-sized hints in the text gave it away.

shipping has nothing to do with lit alchemy which you are confusing with the alchemy of the Philosopher's Stone.

Originally posted by HappyBunny

I really hope by using literary alchemy you didn't come to the misguided conclusion that Harry would end up with Hermione, did you? I can't tell you how many arguments I had with people over that. They showed zero understanding of alchemy by doing that--they just wanted Harry and Hermione to end up together--kind of like people wanted Luke and Leia to end up together. Because using alchemy it was obvious from Book 2 that he was going to end up with Ginny and Hermione with Ron. Not to mention the big anvil-sized hints in the text gave it away.

Anvil sized hints or not (Longbottom-Lovegood? ), Rowling never fully committed to R-H until Deathly Hallows.

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars

Originally posted by HappyBunny

I really hope by using literary alchemy you didn't come to the misguided conclusion that Harry would end up with Hermione, did you? I can't tell you how many arguments I had with people over that. They showed zero understanding of alchemy by doing that--they just wanted Harry and Hermione to end up together--kind of like people wanted Luke and Leia to end up together. Because using alchemy it was obvious from Book 2 that he was going to end up with Ginny and Hermione with Ron. Not to mention the big anvil-sized hints in the text gave it away.

shipping has nothing to do with lit alchemy which you are confusing with the alchemy of the Philosopher's Stone.

No, I'm not confusing it at all--but a lot of people did, and they tried to use literary alchemy to prove it. And they were wrong, wrong, wrong anyway.

Originally posted by PulsusMeusGallo

Originally posted by HappyBunny

I really hope by using literary alchemy you didn't come to the misguided conclusion that Harry would end up with Hermione, did you? I can't tell you how many arguments I had with people over that. They showed zero understanding of alchemy by doing that--they just wanted Harry and Hermione to end up together--kind of like people wanted Luke and Leia to end up together. Because using alchemy it was obvious from Book 2 that he was going to end up with Ginny and Hermione with Ron. Not to mention the big anvil-sized hints in the text gave it away.

Anvil sized hints or not (Longbottom-Lovegood?

), Rowling never fully committed to R-H until Deathly Hallows.

Come on now, it was obvious in Chamber of Secrets what was going to happen.