Harry Potter is a head.
July 17, 2000 7:36 PM Subscribe
Harry Potter is a head. Who knew? The things some people will find to be paranoid about...
Once again: If you look for anything hard enough, you can find it, whether it's there or not.
posted by harmful at 7:57 PM on July 17, 2000
posted by harmful at 7:57 PM on July 17, 2000
I love how the author seems to think "politically correct" is a term with some sort of valid weight or measure behind it, rather than the derisive and ironic pejorative it is.
Or perhaps the politically correct "community" is following the example of self-proclaimed "queers": reclaim the taunt and make it an affirmation? verrrrry clever, those anonymous anti-drug dads.
posted by Sapphireblue at 8:27 PM on July 17, 2000
Or perhaps the politically correct "community" is following the example of self-proclaimed "queers": reclaim the taunt and make it an affirmation? verrrrry clever, those anonymous anti-drug dads.
posted by Sapphireblue at 8:27 PM on July 17, 2000
i used to date a guy who wasn't allowed to play pac-man as a kid because pac-man took drugs and saw "crazy ghosts"
seriously
posted by sugarfish at 8:39 PM on July 17, 2000
seriously
posted by sugarfish at 8:39 PM on July 17, 2000
What is politically correct, anyway? Isn't political correctness designed to eliminate the unpleasantness in society by use of logic-less euphemisms? If someone doesn't have something to be outraged about, they;ll find it in the oddest places....
posted by elf_baby at 8:54 PM on July 17, 2000
posted by elf_baby at 8:54 PM on July 17, 2000
Well, better Harry Potter to teach today's wayward youth about the road to chemical enlightenment than what we oldsters had to make do with. I mean, really. At least this stuff uses manageable sentence structures, not like, oh, Naked Lunch or Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas. Sheesh. Maybe these kids'll finally figure out what all those acid visions are all about, and we all can waltz (sorry, ride) the road to true enlightenment.
And the children shall lead them.
But seriously. Isn't it comforting that there's a lit(t)erary option for kids that's "more dangerous than Little House On The Prairie"?
posted by chicobangs at 9:27 PM on July 17, 2000
And the children shall lead them.
But seriously. Isn't it comforting that there's a lit(t)erary option for kids that's "more dangerous than Little House On The Prairie"?
posted by chicobangs at 9:27 PM on July 17, 2000
And I suppose this guy recommends that people read the Bible, which is of course completely free of drug references, visions, and so forth. Uh-huh. Revelations, Ezekiel, et al. were tripping their prophetic heads off. Puh-lease.
posted by schampeo at 10:02 PM on July 17, 2000
posted by schampeo at 10:02 PM on July 17, 2000
Lets just erase the entire history of potions, and poisions, and magic - all because its too much like drugs. I hate people. Alice in Wonderland was written under the influence of peyote. Why not rant on that? The purple Teletubby is a homosexual? Wtf? Burroughs was never known for normal style of writing.
posted by Satapher at 10:02 PM on July 17, 2000
posted by Satapher at 10:02 PM on July 17, 2000
Isn't this just a straight (pace Tinky Winky) headline grabber site? Harry's a satanist who will lead children to reading "Stephen King" instead of Thomas Hardy or Homer, and will drive them into the evil sin dens we call Public Libraries, where our precious future ministers and lawmakers will be turned gay by all the evil debauchery coming from the filthy pen of J.K. Rowling.
Fabulous. If that's what people are like, I hate them too.
Is there any way to make sure these wackos (and the thosands of other wacko groups like them) are really fringe groups, and not the quote moral unquote quote majority unquote?
Cos if there's more of them than there are of the rest of us, I'm taking the big leap right now, damnation be damned.
posted by chicobangs at 10:32 PM on July 17, 2000
Fabulous. If that's what people are like, I hate them too.
Is there any way to make sure these wackos (and the thosands of other wacko groups like them) are really fringe groups, and not the quote moral unquote quote majority unquote?
Cos if there's more of them than there are of the rest of us, I'm taking the big leap right now, damnation be damned.
posted by chicobangs at 10:32 PM on July 17, 2000
You know?
Here are kids reading books. What? Kids like reading books because someone for the first time took them for more than idiots with an IQ of a paper bag? We can't have that. Kids need to hate books, reading, and everything academic all together! Ohh, and starting next week, we love TeeVee again, so trash your "KILL YOUR TV" stickers.
posted by tiaka at 5:24 AM on July 18, 2000
Here are kids reading books. What? Kids like reading books because someone for the first time took them for more than idiots with an IQ of a paper bag? We can't have that. Kids need to hate books, reading, and everything academic all together! Ohh, and starting next week, we love TeeVee again, so trash your "KILL YOUR TV" stickers.
posted by tiaka at 5:24 AM on July 18, 2000
Wow. That passage could describe my feelings about coffee (esp. monsooned malabar or aged sumatra). Oh, yeah, wait, caffeine is a drug.... they tell me.
posted by mimi at 6:42 AM on July 18, 2000
posted by mimi at 6:42 AM on July 18, 2000
Of course, the author of this piece wasn't so sure of his opinions to actually reveal his identity:
The author is a physician and father who asked to remain anonymous.
posted by daveadams at 7:28 AM on July 18, 2000
The author is a physician and father who asked to remain anonymous.
posted by daveadams at 7:28 AM on July 18, 2000
These folks might even disapprove of kids reading the Bible. According to the original source for this link:
posted by harmful at 8:13 AM on July 18, 2000
Noah Webster, whose views on the need to scrutinize children's education the group quotes with approval, actually produced a bowdlerized version of the Bible.
posted by harmful at 8:13 AM on July 18, 2000
If you read Family Friendly Libraries' (ffl.org) "vision statement," it says it does not support "government censorship or **censorship by unauthorized persons.**" Whoa! That sent a chill up my spine. So, if the censoring person has the FFL's blessing, let 'em chop away at great books like the Harry Potter series (yes, I'm 30 and I've read all four of them --- they're great juvie lit).
The mention of Huck Finn and Little House on the Prairie are references to those books being taken out of school libraries because they contain the word "nigger." *That* is political correctness (someone needs to tell the guy who wrote the Harry Potter review, as mentioned above).
It seems that the FFL wants to remove Harry from libraries on the exceedingly unlikely chance that JK Rowling is subtly encouraging youngsters to start up a meth lab in their treehouse, but condemns the censoring of Huck Finn and Little House.
I happen to agree with them about censoring those two books. However, I do think that those two books have a higher potential for being misunderstood by kids young enough to not grasp the historical context for the use of the word "nigger" than Harry Potter does for encouraging kids to power up a meth lab or starting dropping acid. But, whereas reading "nigger" in a book *might* (and it's a slim chance, I think) end up with some kids using the word because of the book, I doubt it would even occur to a kid reading Harry Potter to run out and try some hallucinogenic, primarily because Harry Potter is fantasy and Huck Finn is presented as "realistic fiction" (yes, somewhat of an oxymoron there).
In either case, a short conversation with your kid would clear up either misconception, and the kid would probably come away with a better understanding of history and human nature to boot. Isn't that what reading is all about, anyhow?
posted by sjarvis at 8:32 AM on July 18, 2000
The mention of Huck Finn and Little House on the Prairie are references to those books being taken out of school libraries because they contain the word "nigger." *That* is political correctness (someone needs to tell the guy who wrote the Harry Potter review, as mentioned above).
It seems that the FFL wants to remove Harry from libraries on the exceedingly unlikely chance that JK Rowling is subtly encouraging youngsters to start up a meth lab in their treehouse, but condemns the censoring of Huck Finn and Little House.
I happen to agree with them about censoring those two books. However, I do think that those two books have a higher potential for being misunderstood by kids young enough to not grasp the historical context for the use of the word "nigger" than Harry Potter does for encouraging kids to power up a meth lab or starting dropping acid. But, whereas reading "nigger" in a book *might* (and it's a slim chance, I think) end up with some kids using the word because of the book, I doubt it would even occur to a kid reading Harry Potter to run out and try some hallucinogenic, primarily because Harry Potter is fantasy and Huck Finn is presented as "realistic fiction" (yes, somewhat of an oxymoron there).
In either case, a short conversation with your kid would clear up either misconception, and the kid would probably come away with a better understanding of history and human nature to boot. Isn't that what reading is all about, anyhow?
posted by sjarvis at 8:32 AM on July 18, 2000
Other than the fact that Huck Finn was probably the most anti-racist book I read back in my elementary and junior high days - and considering the time it was written - I dont think its just to ban arguably one of the best stories ever told. Besides, Huck Finn is a hella long book for kids. Sure, I read it, but I was weird. And I also was capable of understanding the point of the book, and that the "n" word was nothing I needed to repeat. I also read ALL (I mean every single one) of the Little House on the Prairie Books from 3rd-4th grade. Those books are some of my best childhood memories. Everyone else was reading "Goosebumps". I cannot agree to the justification of banning those books. Besides, I know high schoolers who refuse to read them as they are "too long."
posted by Satapher at 10:38 AM on July 18, 2000
posted by Satapher at 10:38 AM on July 18, 2000
To paraphrase Jim Morrison:"For Christ's sake Potter, don't drink absinthe, smoke pot!"
posted by Mr. skullhead at 3:09 PM on July 18, 2000
posted by Mr. skullhead at 3:09 PM on July 18, 2000
Thanks, Brennan; Kevin credited it, but I didn't.
Sorry, Rebekah.
And, Chico? Remember my first rule of the internet: there are only two types of people: perverts...
and hypocrites. :-) We perverts have known this for *years*...
posted by baylink at 3:28 PM on July 18, 2000
Sorry, Rebekah.
And, Chico? Remember my first rule of the internet: there are only two types of people: perverts...
and hypocrites. :-) We perverts have known this for *years*...
posted by baylink at 3:28 PM on July 18, 2000
Personally, now I want to read these books. So, in a way, our anonymous dad is making a sale for the Potter books.
I love irony. And LSD.
However, chicobangs, some of us got into Steven King via Homer. And for my money, Homer's still got more chops. The Odyssey just kicks ass.
posted by Ezrael at 8:53 PM on July 18, 2000
I love irony. And LSD.
However, chicobangs, some of us got into Steven King via Homer. And for my money, Homer's still got more chops. The Odyssey just kicks ass.
posted by Ezrael at 8:53 PM on July 18, 2000
It's really funny how all the thousands of years that witch's and wizard's have peacefully practiced their religion they have been persecuted and tortured. Only christians have managed to kill, toture and start wars that have killed up to millions in the name of their god. Yes, you have evey reason to run from Harry Potter, a fictional charactor who was written by a woman who never practiced wicca a day in her life.
If you know any thing about Wicca you would know that Harry Potter has no Wiccan fondation to it at all. christians on the other hand are all still gathering wood to burn people to the stake, and banning books, just a couple hundred years ago you where banning Galilio from looking through his telescope.
This is becouse most christians dont understand much of the out side world. It is easier too sit behind a wall and point fingers. There have been others who were members of the church who chose to ban books and had great burnings, his name Adolf Hitler. Something christians also choose to ignore, how about how the luthern and catholic church both knew of the holocaust and supported it, getting rid of the Jew's was a great ideal to them. so continue to ignore me, or read your history. In europe this is common knowledge its not suger coated like it is here.
Lets talk about bad things for kids to read. How about the Bible. There is sex, violence, incest, murder, rape, torture, polygamy, disease, famine, adultry, human sacrifice, slaghter, animal sacrifice(I thought only witches did this?), demon possesion(I thought that was our stuff, give it back!, and MAGIC!!!!, I mean miracles.
So pick on your book, look at it's origins. Like all other religions it owes it's beginnings to the ones before it. Here if you want to know the truth study Phynician, Babalonian, Egyptian, among others. You will see very familiar stories surfacing one after another. However you are in America so you are all ready brain washed and are affraid to say the word Babylonian, so I cant help you get out of your dream.
The point to all of this is to stop limiting others and limit your mouth, than you will start to hear, and ultimatly learn.
who knows what will happen, you might even think practice other religions are people too.
posted by Jesus Christ at 1:39 PM on August 29, 2001
If you know any thing about Wicca you would know that Harry Potter has no Wiccan fondation to it at all. christians on the other hand are all still gathering wood to burn people to the stake, and banning books, just a couple hundred years ago you where banning Galilio from looking through his telescope.
This is becouse most christians dont understand much of the out side world. It is easier too sit behind a wall and point fingers. There have been others who were members of the church who chose to ban books and had great burnings, his name Adolf Hitler. Something christians also choose to ignore, how about how the luthern and catholic church both knew of the holocaust and supported it, getting rid of the Jew's was a great ideal to them. so continue to ignore me, or read your history. In europe this is common knowledge its not suger coated like it is here.
Lets talk about bad things for kids to read. How about the Bible. There is sex, violence, incest, murder, rape, torture, polygamy, disease, famine, adultry, human sacrifice, slaghter, animal sacrifice(I thought only witches did this?), demon possesion(I thought that was our stuff, give it back!, and MAGIC!!!!, I mean miracles.
So pick on your book, look at it's origins. Like all other religions it owes it's beginnings to the ones before it. Here if you want to know the truth study Phynician, Babalonian, Egyptian, among others. You will see very familiar stories surfacing one after another. However you are in America so you are all ready brain washed and are affraid to say the word Babylonian, so I cant help you get out of your dream.
The point to all of this is to stop limiting others and limit your mouth, than you will start to hear, and ultimatly learn.
who knows what will happen, you might even think practice other religions are people too.
posted by Jesus Christ at 1:39 PM on August 29, 2001
« Older We're all a bunch of ignorami. | Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
And, even if this flake's assertions were *true*... what better time to answer the question "so, Dad, what do *you* think about that?"...
[ I'm a firm proponent of the Golden Moment theory of parenting. ]
posted by baylink at 7:38 PM on July 17, 2000