Category Archives: Fantasy

My initial expectations of “Supernatural” were pretty low. After all, there’s didn’t seem to be a whole lot of deep meaning underlying the premise: two brothers travel around the U.S. to fight monsters. As the “Transformers” movies proved, mindless destruction gets old real fast. But I’ve always had an affinity for contemporary fantasy, and I’m willing to forgive quite a lot (especially where big scary creatures are concerned).

However, it soon became clear that there was much more to “Supernatural” than I’d initially assumed. Over the course of five seasons, “Supernatural” has evolved from an episodic monster-of-the-week drama into one of the most theologically weighty shows I’ve ever seen. I typically don’t review TV shows, but this one deserves some discussion. (Disclaimer: I know “Supernatural” is technically still airing – but considering that show creator Eric Kripke intended for the series to end after the fifth season, I think it’s fair to analyze the show anyway. Anything after the season five finale would feel forced and superfluous.)

(In order to analyze the implications of this show, the following sections contain full spoilers.)

The story can be summarized quickly: two estranged brothers – Sam and Dean Winchester – are reunited when their father goes missing and a “yellow-eyed demon” murders Sam’s girlfriend. Although Sam and Dean were raised as “hunters” – transient warriors going around the country fighting monsters – Sam previously gave up the family business in favor of law school. When things get personal, however, everything changes. The first and second seasons revolve around Sam and Dean’s quest to find both the yellow-eyed demon – the same creature that, more than twenty years ago, killed their mother – and their father. Along the way, they fight a myriad of creatures pulled from the pages of folklore – from ghosts to wendigos to werewolves. As the Winchester brothers get closer to their goal, more and more is revealed about their respective characters.

Elder brother Dean is the natural leader of the two. On the surface, he seems preoccupied with hedonism – drinking beer, blasting music, hitting on women, polishing his 1963 Chevy Impala, etc. However, his devil-may-care exterior belies deep insecurities. Dean idolizes (and idealizes) his hard-driving father, which leads to conflicts with his more laid-back brother. He feels responsible for Sam’s safety and the ultimate success of their endeavors. Despite his disregard for conventional morality, he adheres to an ironclad set of personal principles (fulfilling the role of an “antihero” of sorts), which plays a key role in later seasons.

Sam, on the other hand, is the rebel. After “abandoning” his family to pursue a normal career, his subsequent relationship with Dean is marked by tension. Dean, fiercely loyal to his father, cannot understand Sam’s discontent with the hunting life. Sam, naturally inquisitive and ambitious, can’t comprehend Dean’s “blind” adherence to their father’s plans. Ironically, Sam typically serves as Dean’s conscience throughout most of the early seasons…roles that are reversed later on. But there’s another side to Sam’s character as well: the night the Winchesters’ mother was killed, Sam was infected with “demon blood” which gives him a latent tendency towards the dark side. His struggle against a seemingly inevitable destiny plays a key role in his relationships with both Dean and the monsters they fight.

This would all make for a very straightforward TV show, if not for the well-planned story arc underlying the entire series. In the second season finale, Sam is killed during a fight. Desperate to get his brother back, Dean makes a deal with a “crossroads demon” – selling his own soul in exchange for Sam’s life, with the debt to be paid after one year. (I’ll discuss the obvious implications of this later on.) Sam is resurrected, and together the two kill the yellow-eyed demon. Unfortunately, the demon also succeeds in releasing many more of his kind, causing a series of disturbances across the U.S. The third season follows Sam’s vain attempts to circumvent Dean’s agreement, and concludes with Dean being dragged into hell. Season four opens abruptly – Dean is pulled out of hell by Castiel, an “angel of the Lord.” Apparently, demons around the world are trying to break the 66 seals that keep Lucifer imprisoned – and if the devil gets out, the apocalypse will begin. Castiel, Sam and Dean attempt to stop the process, but are unsuccessful. Lucifer is unleashed and begins causing chaos around the globe (although the world doesn’t realize who’s behind it).

This is where “Supernatural” starts getting into very heavy theological/philosophical territory.

I’ve read dozens of apocalypse/good-versus-evil stories. I generally don’t judge such material too harshly: while there may be undercurrents of questionable theology, I can appreciate the need to tell a good (fictional!) yarn. I’ll typically consider such works worth reading if they contain some generally positive attitudes towards God and faith, and support a traditional view of morality. (See review of “The Passage” for a good example.) However, “Supernatural” deserves a more critical look. Not only does it deal head-on with religious topics, it calls the very fabric of Judeo-Christian morality into question. While there are definitely praiseworthy elements – and some important insights – the series amounts to a very, very long apologetic for a particular non-Christian worldview.

There are three topic areas that deserve particular consideration: God, Satan, and the series finale.

GOD:

For its first three seasons, “Supernatural” neatly sidestepped issues of legitimate controversy. While there were a few passing negative references to faith (including an episode in which a “faith healer” turns out to be making deals with questionable spiritual beings), there were also affirmations of an ultimate plan, and a general respect for religion.

Season four introduced angels into the “Supernatural” mythos (in the series, demons are distinct from fallen angels – more on this later). However, most of these angels aren’t friendly – they’re scheming connivers interested only in their own power. Castiel’s “boss” angel, Zachariah, is a manipulative corporate type with an ends-justify-the-means attitude. This renders the angels almost as bad as Lucifer and his cabal. Utterly myopic, they believe that Sam and Dean must play specific roles in the apocalypse, and their fates are inevitable: Sam will become the human vessel of Lucifer, and Dean will become the human vessel of the Archangel Michael. According to Zachariah, they can do nothing to change their ultimate, foreordained destiny. (This amounts to a critique of hyper-Calvinist theology. While the show obviously exaggerates Reformed doctrine, Arminians will find some elements insightful.)

Philosophy buffs will be interested to note that Sam and Dean promote deontological ethics (doing the right thing no matter what) whereas the angels espouse utilitarian ethics (the greatest good for the greatest number). Most Christians would agree that Sam and Dean’s approach is vastly more consistent with Christianity: sin is sin, no matter whether or not it achieves a positive end. (If I kill someone and give the money to starving children…I still killed someone).

Essentially, the angels depicted by “Supernatural” are bizarrely amoral. Of course, this begs the question: where’s God Himself in all of this? According to Zachariah: “God has left the building.”

At the beginning of season five, lapsed angel Castiel decides to search for God (believing He is the only one who can stop Lucifer). Partway through the season, Sam and Dean “die” and go to heaven, where they meet the gardener angel Joshua. According to Joshua, God isn’t in heaven anymore – He is sitting somewhere on earth, watching the apocalyptic drama play out. Not only is He oblivious to human suffering, He isn’t interested in doing anything to help fight the devil. Castiel curses God and storms away in utter despair. Ironically, the trio’s attitudes toward God reflect modern sentiment: let’s call on God whenever He’s needed, but we can’t have Him directing anything else in our lives. They reject the angels’ blind authoritarianism, but complain when forced to live in a deistic universe.

The notion of a personal, theistic God – more specifically, Jesus Christ – is never once raised…and this reflects a trend in modern angels-and-demons fantasy. While God frequently plays a role – usually as a somewhat disconnected, unconcerned creator – Jesus never makes an appearance (examples: the books of Philip Pullman and Jim Butcher, and the film “Constantine”). While it’s popularly acceptable to celebrate Jesus as a “great moral teacher,” the idea that He might be God incarnate isn’t touched by authors.

Perhaps most striking of all, the God of “Supernatural” is neither omnipresent nor eternal. Angels can’t find him, and he never makes a personal appearance in the series. More striking, though is the show’s attack on God’s eternality: in the second-to-last episode of season five, Dean sits down for a conversation with Death (one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse). Death informs Dean that he, not God, is the eldest being in the universe…and someday, he will “reap” God Himself. The Nietzsche-laced implications of such a philosophy are frightening.

So why don’t the Winchesters just commit suicide and end it all, then? If the universe is godless and essentially purposeless, is there any reason for living? The answer to that question defines the show’s worldview.

SATAN:

Although he’s undeniably the prime villain of the series, Lucifer gets a much more nuanced portrayal than one might expect. Rather than adhering to the Biblical account (Satan’s pride, and his desire to be like God, caused him to be cast out from heaven), “Supernatural” employs the pop-culture interpretation of Satan’s origins. I’m not sure where this originally came from (I think it has roots in Milton or Goethe), but the story goes something like this: Lucifer loved God more than any of the other angels. When God created man, He commanded that all the angels bow down before man. Lucifer loved God so much that he refused to bow before any other being. This act of disobedience led to his expulsion from heaven. The implications of this revisionism are obvious: Satan comes off looking like a wronged hero, contributing to the overall moral ambiguity of the heaven-and-hell storyline.

The portrayal of hell in “Supernatural” is of particular interest. Souls brought to hell are tortured cruelly by demons, but offered a choice at the end of each day: if they so choose, they can get up off the rack…as long as they’re willing to torture the next batch of fresh souls. Over time, this constant moral degradation turns them from humans into demons, which can then walk freely in the world (as previously noted, “Supernatural” postulates a distinction between demons and fallen angels). One theological problem predominates: by portraying souls as “falling” in hell itself, it implies that they were somehow innocent in the first place. Christian doctrine holds that God damns no one to hell; rather, they damn themselves through sin. (This may be stepping on the toes of Reformed readers who hold to a doctrine of reprobation…no offense is intended).

SERIES FINALE:

All of these tangled story threads come together in the final episode of season five. Sam and Dean, having collected the four rings worn by the Horsemen of the Apocalypse, plan to reopen the gates to Satan’s prison. Sam will then allow Lucifer to possess him, in the hopes that he will be able to briefly regain control of his body and throw himself into the prison. The plan works as expected: through immense force of will, Sam eventually regains control of his body and jumps into the prison, heedless of the cost to his own soul. Dean chooses to give up the life of a hunter, forging his own destiny in the “real world.” (Of note: characters question whether or not God helped during the final battle – but, as before, it really doesn’t matter whether He did or not.)

In his book, “The Universe Next Door,” James W. Sire discusses two forms of existentialist thought present in modern culture: “atheistic existentialism” and “theistic existentialism.” “Supernatural” offers a third strain: what I would term “agnostic existentialism.” This worldview does not directly deny God’s existence, but it relegates Him to the back burner. Agnostic existentialism hybridizes deism and atheistic existentialism, acknowledging that there might conceivably be a creator, but He doesn’t really matter.

Throughout the course of “Supernatural,” self-assertion is held up as the supreme value, which may manifest in a variety of traditionally ethical actions: sacrifice, loyalty, doing the right thing, etc. However, these actions are NOT done because they are commanded by a Supreme Being – rather, they are trumpeted as “good” because they are confident acts of the will. Sam and Dean operate according to their own ethical code, regardless of whether or not that code conforms to an external morality. Don’t get me wrong – they typically do the “right thing” – but the problem is that they remove transcendent morality from the equation. Sam’s throwing himself into the pit is the ultimate expression of this mindset. Not only is he thwarting Satan’s plan for global dominion, he’s also defying God’s plan (to have Michael defeat Lucifer once and for all) and choosing his own path.

SUMMARY

So, the million-dollar question: is this a show you should watch?

“Supernatural” is jam-packed with traditionally objectionable content. Not only is the underlying worldview highly suspect, but there are plenty of things to concern viewers. Graphic bloody violence is a series staple (and I’m frequently horrified that such grisly material can be shown on network TV). Although the show carries a TV-14 rating, the gore alone would guarantee it a hard-R rating if it showed in theaters. There’s also a fair amount of innuendo (actual sex scenes are infrequent – I think there are four or five throughout the course of the 100+-episode series), plus a relatively steady stream of PG-13 language.

And this is saying nothing of the pervasive occult themes. In literally every episode, Sam and Dean discuss ways to kill, injure, coerce, or persuade all kinds of supernatural creatures. They frequently employ witchcraft-related tactics (using runes to trap angels and demons, engaging in astral projection, etc.) to achieve their ends. To be fair, the show is heavily fictionalized…but elements of “Supernatural” stray much, much closer to real occult practices than, say, the magic in “Harry Potter.”

That isn’t to say, however, that “Supernatural” is entirely bad. Up until now, this review has been pretty negative – but the show has plenty of positive elements as well.

For starters, the importance of family always takes center stage. Loyalty and love for one’s family are constantly extolled, and themes of forgiveness and redemption underlie the series. In an era that’s witnessing widespread fragmentation of families, such sentiments are extremely refreshing. Sam and Dean aren’t perfect, but they’re willing to die – or worse – for each other. It’s definitely reminded me how important my relationship with my own brother is. Also, I can honestly say that I’ve thought more about my faith since I started watching the show. Most importantly, I feel like I’ve personally gained a deeper appreciation for Christ’s sacrificial death and resurrection (the ultimate expression of God’s involvement in the world). “Supernatural” is a slickly packaged product designed to market a particular worldview – and it’s definitely beneficial to confront an opposing mindset’s strongest arguments.

From a purely technical standpoint, “Supernatural” is outstanding. There’s a reason it currently holds an incredible 9.0/10 rating on IMDB – it’s marvelously acted, well-paced, and emotionally resonant. While the effects are at times schlocky, they’re not the primary focus. This is a series about the journey of Sam and Dean Winchester, and on that level, it works. Although some early episodes – as well as a later handful of painfully pointless, self-parodying episodes – bordered on cheesiness, in the fourth and fifth seasons the series hit its groove. If nothing else, watching all five seasons allowed me to appreciate the immense thought behind the show. That’s not to say that the series is “literary” on the level of “Citizen Kane” or another cinematic classic, but it’s definitely a cut above most TV these days.

In the end, I feel about “Supernatural” much the same way as I feel about Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged”: excellent artistry built around a flawed worldview. Both are unbelievably long (altogether, the five seasons of “Supernatural” clock in at around 67 hours), and both are designed to communicate a particular message. Both are also full of material that puts them off-limits for anyone under 17 or 18. However, both also contain thought-provoking messages that, when viewed from the correct perspective and with eyes wide open, may prove insightful and beneficial.

Whether or not you choose to explore these themes for yourself is up to you.

VERDICT: 8/10
A provocative, spiritually complex exploration of good, evil, and everything in between.

I think it’s fair to say that few books have ever inspired as much controversy as J.K. Rowling’s hugely popular “Harry Potter” fantasy series. With more than 400 million copies sold, the books have impacted popular culture in a massive way. And, of course, they’ve attracted praise and scorn from virtually all sides, including an almost unprecedented amount of criticism from the conservative Christian community.

I’ve previously avoided discussing this issue directly for a variety of reasons. As a Christian, I don’t want to cause anyone to stumble by what I say, nor do I want to simply stir up dissent. However, considering that the franchise has almost run its course, and sentiments have cooled somewhat, I feel it’s time to take an in-depth look at some of the themes and worldview elements in this oft-disputed series.

Five years ago, I began reading the series suspiciously, expecting to encounter a barrage of subversive, anti-Christian propaganda. I’d read plenty of books about the “occultism” of the series, and heard all the anti-“Potter” arguments. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that I’d been mistaken: the books were adventure stories in the style of Roald Dahl, with a layer of fairy-tale magic added on. I devoured the first six volumes, read the seventh book as soon as it came out, and moved on to other things. This past summer, I took the time to revisit the series from a more critical standpoint. The first time I read the books, I did so primarily for entertainment. The second time around, I was specifically looking for themes – and more specifically, I intended to write this commentary. This will necessarily be a fairly long discussion – after a brief summary of the series, this commentary will explore the three predominant motifs in the seven books before responding to a few of the foremost anti-“Potter” objections.

I’ll come right out with the thesis for this discussion: I do not believe the “Harry Potter” series is an apologetic for witchcraft, nor do I believe it should be shunned by Christians. While it isn’t an allegory on the level of the “Narnia” books, it contains some deeply Christian themes. Rather than being blindly condemned and censored, it should be read and analyzed thoughtfully.

(Note: In order to evaluate the complex themes of this series, the following commentary contains spoilers)

SUMMARY:

The “Harry Potter” series is the story of the eponymous hero, orphaned at birth and left in the care of the cruel Dursley family of “Muggles” (non-magical people). On his eleventh birthday, Harry receives a letter from Hogwarts, a school for young wizards and witches, and promptly enters a world of wonder and mystery. At Hogwarts, he meets his two closest friends – Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger – and begins studying magic. It soon becomes clear that the death of Harry’s parents was no accident: the evil Dark Lord Voldemort murdered them. Voldemort also attempted to kill Harry, but his attack rebounded on himself, severely crippling Voldemort’s power. The first few books of the series develop the characters and set the stage for Book 4, in which Voldemort returns to power and regains a corporeal body. Aided by his fellow evil wizards (“Death Eaters”), Voldemort begins a campaign to kill Harry Potter, the only one who may stand a chance of defeating him. The last three volumes deal with Harry’s increasingly desperate battle against Voldemort, and his fight to remain steadfast even as the world spins into chaos around him.

It’s a fairly simple story arc, but the intricate web of plots and subplots grips the reader’s attention. There’s a reason people lined up for hours to snag copies of each subsequent book – the stories are well-written and increasingly dramatic.

THEMES:

Throughout the course of the series, there are three fundamental concepts that drive the story: the power of love, man’s struggle against death, and the relationship between Harry and his mentor Dumbledore. Each of these deserves thorough evaluation.

1. The Power of Love

One of the most recurring themes in the “Harry Potter” series is the sacrificial love of Harry’s mother Lily, who died to protect her infant son. Voldemort’s deadliest weapon, the “Killing Curse,” rebounded when he used it against Harry, shattering the Dark Lord’s power. In the final pages of Book 1, Voldemort cannot physically touch Harry due to the power of his mother’s love in him. Later in the series (after the Dark Lord’s return to power), Voldemort attempts to “possess” Harry (yes, in the biblical sense) but cannot due to the contrast between Harry’s soul and his own. Harry’s life is founded on his love for others, while Voldemort’s life is centered around hatred. Headmaster Dumbledore observes at one point: “That which Voldemort does not value, he takes no trouble to understand. Of house-elves and children’s tales, of love, loyalty, and innocence, Voldemort knows and understands nothing. Nothing. That they all have a power beyond his own, a power beyond the reach of any magic, is a truth he has never grasped.”

On a less complex level, love also repeatedly motivates acts of self-sacrifice on the parts of the main characters. Primary characters are willing to (and do) suffer unbelievable loss for one another, even giving up their lives in order to do the right thing. The love between family members is celebrated as beautiful and noble, never something to be mocked and sneered at.

However, the true significance of this theme does not emerge until Book 7.

Throughout the book, Harry, Ron and Hermione have successfully located and destroyed the six Horcruxes, magical objects bearing fragments of Voldemort’s essence. (While the Horcruxes exist, Voldemort cannot be truly killed.) However, it soon becomes clear that, in fact, a seventh Horcrux exists: Harry Potter himself. The curse that originally failed to kill Harry struck Voldemort instead, blasting away a piece of Voldemort’s tainted essence…which in turn bonded to Harry. While Harry lives, Voldemort cannot truly die.

The situation may be summarized thusly: Harry, a bearer of evil that is not his own, must suffer death at Voldemort’s hands.

The symbolism is almost explicit. While Harry is certainly not Christ himself, he is the books’ “Christ figure”, willingly enduring a sacrificial death in order to save others from evil. He chooses to lay down his own life to end the evil caused by another. Harry even observes: “I don’t want anyone else to try to help. It’s got to be like this. It’s got to be me.” While this motif is certainly common even in non-Christian literature, it gains special significance when viewed in light of another prevailing theme (to be discussed later).

This theme of sacrificial love applies on another level as well, through the character of Severus Snape. The often-irritable Potions teacher at Hogwarts, Snape frequently appears to be antagonistic towards Harry throughout the series (although, interestingly, he often intervenes to protect Harry during the darkest moments). In the closing pages of Book 6, Snape appears to be allied with Voldemort, lending credence to Harry’s longtime suspicions.

However, Book 7 finally provides the full story. Snape, a longtime admirer of Lily (Harry’s mother), was forced to watch as she married a man Snape deemed reckless and immature. To make matters worse, Lily asked Snape to watch over their newborn son in the event of her death. Since that point, Snape’s relationship with Harry has been a constant source of pain…yet Snape chooses to sacrifice his own feelings and defend a child he believes should have been his. This subplot is one of the most moving elements of the entire series.

2. Man’s Struggle Against Death

The “Harry Potter” series is, in many ways, a parable about the danger of desiring immortality. Voldemort is obsessed with the concept of living forever, no matter what the cost. This dark desire leads him down the path of villainy, transforming him from a disturbed orphan boy into the living incarnation of evil. He attains a sort of pseudo-immortality by constructing the aforementioned Horcruxes – but in order to do so, he must take a human life for every Horcrux he creates. Dumbledore sharply critiques this empty attitude towards life: “As much money and life as you could want! The two things most human beings would choose above all – the trouble is, humans do have a knack of choosing precisely those things that are worst for them.”

In contrast, Harry and his friends are unafraid of their own mortality. When Harry confronts Voldemort and suffers death at the Dark Lord’s hands, he awakens to find himself in a limbo-like state between life and death. There, he sees the mutilated soul of Lord Voldemort – an affirmation that souls are ultimately held accountable for their actions, and that the material world is but the precursor to something more. Death is seen not as an end, but rather as a beginning. As Dumbledore puts it: “It is the unknown we fear when we look upon death and darkness, nothing more.”

But for Harry, death isn’t the end. To complete the Christ metaphor, Harry is resurrected from the dead, defeats Voldemort once and for all, and saves the magical world. His death leads to the salvation of countless others.

3. Harry’s Relationship with Dumbledore

(Note: I am not going to explore the hot-button issue of whether Dumbledore is or is not homosexual. The issue was never raised or alluded to in the novels themselves; thus, for the purposes of this commentary, this will not be under consideration.)

I must confess that I missed the significance of this theme the first time I read the series. However, this is perhaps the most interesting and uniquely symbolic element of the entire seven-book saga. To offer some background, Professor Albus Dumbledore is the headmaster of Hogwarts School, and fulfills the role of a father to Harry. He helps Harry wage his battle against Voldemort, providing counseling and insight throughout the series. Their relationship can be analyzed on two distinct levels: as a metaphor for the relationship between God the Father and God the Son, and as a metaphor for the relationship between God and His people.

Throughout the course of Book 7, Harry struggles with the quest that Dumbledore has left him: finding and destroying Voldemort’s Horcruxes. In the same way that Jesus pleaded with God the Father in the Garden of Gethsemane to “take this cup from [Him]”, Harry struggles to understand the “cup” that Dumbledore has left him to bear. During his journey to face Voldemort and die at the Dark Lord’s hands (a sequence clearly inspired by the Garden of Gethsemane), Harry never questions Dumbledore’s authority or his command, but sincerely wrestles with issues of grief and loss. It isn’t a perfect analogy – for instance, it’s not as strong as the Aslan/Emperor-over-the-Sea allegory found in the “Narnia” books. However, the way in which Harry fulfills the task left him by Dumbledore is, to an extent, analogous to the way in which Jesus obeyed His Father’s will.

On another level, Book 7 also serves as a metaphor for the relationship between God and His people. After Dumbledore’s untimely “death” in Book 6, a series of rumors begin to fly regarding Dumbledore, questioning his authority and his wisdom. These rumors are strikingly similar to arguments leveled by those antagonistic toward Christianity. Harry must decide whom he trusts: Dumbledore, who is no longer directly there with him, or those who criticize him.

In total, these are the three themes that struck me most upon a rereading of the series. Careful readers may note that I’ve frequently referred to the seventh volume of the series in exploring these issues; however, these ideas are developed throughout the series as a whole. Book 7 successfully unites all these elements into a dramatic, triumphant finale. This isn’t to say that there aren’t other themes in the books. There are countless other elements worthy of analysis – race and class discrimination, civil disobedience, and the corrupting effect of power, just to name a few – but these three are perhaps the standouts from a Christian worldview standpoint.

Of course, there have been plenty of criticisms of the “Harry Potter” series as well. Some of the particularly prevalent arguments deserve honest and respectful consideration.

CRITICISMS:

Perhaps the most well-known argument runs something along the lines of “Harry Potter promotes real-world occult practices.” Unfortunately, this issue has turned into a media circus, thanks to unfortunate publications like this one: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Nervous_Witch_20.png. While certainly well-intended, claims like this are factually inaccurate and completely misrepresent the books. For starters, the only “real-world” occult practice employed by “good characters” is divination (reading tea leaves and crystal balls in an attempt to predict the future). However, Rowling neatly sidesteps genuine controversy by satirizing the concept of divination altogether, portraying the teacher as a dreamy hippie whose predictions are notoriously inaccurate.

The magic employed in “Harry Potter” is purely instrumental. There’s no conjuring up of spirits, no altars to pagan gods, no communion with demons – Potter-magic functions along the lines of “point wand, say word.” The spells aren’t cribbed from pagan rituals – for the most part, they’re pseudo-Latinized phrases (“Expelliarmus” blasts an opponent’s wand out of his/her hand, “Incendio” summons fire, “Reparo” fixes broken objects).

I can appreciate the concerns of individuals who point to the Bible’s condemnation of witchcraft as sin. However, “Harry Potter” is set in a fantastical world where magic is not linked to demonic forces. “Harry Potter” magic is similar to a genetic mutation – some possess it, others do not. It operates according to certain rules, just like gravity, and there are both good and bad ways to employ it. (Interestingly, magic operates in a way that could theoretically be tested according to the scientific method!) There is honestly no moral difference between the magic in “Harry Potter” and the powers possessed by Superman or Spider-Man.

Valid concerns have also been raised regarding the darkness and violence of the series, especially the later books. These are certainly legitimate: the books get progressively scarier and as the series goes on, although the ending is ultimately redemptive. In all honesty, advertisers erred in marketing this series to a preteen demographic: although the early volumes are filled with childish innocence, the story matures along with its protagonist. There are certainly moments in the “Harry Potter” series disturbing enough to put the books off-limits for sensitive readers.

Unfortunately, legitimate disagreements with the content of “Harry Potter” have often been obscured by a deluge of inaccurate information. Well-intentioned individuals like Laura Mallory (who has engaged in an anti-“Harry Potter” crusade for years, despite not actually having read the books) do not further the cause of Christianity by their protests. What’s more, disputes over the “Harry Potter” series have led to other, more subversive material being overlooked. Notably, Philip Pullman’s atheistic fantasy series, “His Dark Materials (which directly attacks Christianity) was published alongside “Harry Potter”, and went largely unnoticed by Christian critics.

Clearly, the question of “Harry Potter” is a complicated one. I will make an open request to all individuals who are still concerned about “Harry Potter” after reading this review: please do not argue that “Harry Potter” is evil/Wiccan/Satanic, unless you have actually read the books for yourself. There is nothing in the series that will corrupt a mature Christian, and it borders on slander to make harsh accusations without knowing the facts. Criticizing something one knows little or nothing about is unwise.

CONCLUSION:

The book of Acts tells the story of Paul using the Athenians’ altar to an “Unknown God” as a means of proclaiming the truth of the Gospel. As a Christian, I choose to recognize that the “Harry Potter” series may be a modern “altar to an unknown God” – a means by which we can share our faith with the world. As the film series nears its completion, there will likely be many questions about the themes in the final installment. By recognizing the Christian themes woven into the plot, the “Harry Potter” series can become a tool for cultural evangelism.

I am not going to make a blanket statement that “everyone should read these books.” However, I will recommend that mature Christian fantasy readers (generally over the age of ten or eleven) will find the series powerful, exciting, moving, and spiritually resonant. I envision reading the books aloud to my children someday – once they’re old enough to understand them, and mature enough to handle them.

Highly recommended.

OVERALL VERDICT: 9.5/10
A young-adult series for the ages. Will likely be remembered alongside “Narnia” and “Lord of the Rings.”