I haven't got such a feeling even for the Hobbit, as for the rest, Tolkien went to some considerable pains to explain the so called 'unnatural' things in his HoME series afterwards, really. Try customs of the Eldar, for instance. Wonder why lembas is so sustaining - look into it. etc.

*smash head against wall for misplacing HoME and BoLT after such a long time.*

Ah, well... I needed that information on why Lembas are so filling still...

BoLT is the part of HoME as far as my knowledge reaches. Whilst not being right (to avoid possible comments, you have the right to do so in a sense as Theron puts it, but not right to do so as Saucepan Man feels it ;)) in smashing your head against wall (it hurts, presumably), try looking on the other end (vv 10 and 12)

First of all, thanks guys for such an interesting and well argued thread. It took a good one to drag me out of my seclusion and get me to post here.:rolleyes:

As for my contribution to this debate, I think that Lush is on to something here:

I think part of the screaming frenzy among certain conservative Christian groups about Harry Potter, and the lack of such a reaction to LOTR has a lot to do with currency (as in the state of being current) and publicity. Harry Potter is a new, intriguing, fascinating phenomenon, and like so many people have pointed out, people are frightened by what they do not understand, in this case, that something is the nature of the magic(k) used in Harry Potter. Since the issue is not whether these Christian groups are right in taking an anti-witchcraft position, but whether such a position applies to the content of Tolkien's works and Rowling's respectively, I'm not going to offer an apology for the Christian position here. But it's easy for someone to understand why, when Harry Potter has a lightningbolt burst of popularity, one could be pressured into taking an extreme position.

Why then, is this not happening with Tolkien? With Return of the King taking so many Oscars this year, it's hard (ok, impossible;)) to say it's less popular than Harry Potter. However, it's a lot less recent. Lord of the Rings has been flying just under the radar of public notice for decades now. The "concerned parent" who was quietly exposed to Tolkien twenty years ago need not be nervous about it.

Give Christian (and any other anti-HP) groups a few years. I suspect eventually the liberal and moderate ones will accept Rowling (if they already haven't). The hyper-conservative probably don't like Tolkien either, they've just stopped talking about it.

Sophia

Nice post Sophia - i agree with you. I get reminded that here some times that I am old lol ... Remember the 70's? lol There were many Christian groups that lumped JRRT right in there with Dungeons and Dragons and Black Sabbath lol
Escapist devil stuff...

To me the difference between LOTR and HP is the difference between a fiction novel (a contrived work of fiction), and a fairy tale (something timeless about it's nature and its themes, and every culture has them). Kids get that. Most adults dont.

Actually, you can draw the distinction wherever you like.

There seems to be no hard and fast rule as to what literature could be 'acceptable' to Christians. It depends on what kind of 'Christian' you are talking about. For example, I've just been looking at a website called keepersofthefaith which recommended that C.S Lewis, Little Women, Anne of Green Gables and Laura Ingalls Wilder should be kept away from good Christian children because of their corruptive anti-Biblical influences. :rolleyes:

And if I were going to be cynical, I'd say that a lot of these book-burners and book-banners focus on popular, high-profile works in order to attract attention to themselves and their sects.

Omigod omigod omigod, Lalaith, that site is hours worth of free entertainment. Thank you so much. Omigod, they use the phrase "communistic governments." I'm in heaven!

Exactly. Christians aren't homogenous. We are all unique and beautiful snowflakes.

I haven't thought of that before.

Personally, I sometimes like the opportunity to be challenged in my literary tastes. I like having conversations with people about why they don't like Tolken. What I don't like is when people can't back up their arguments with anything remotely worthy of my attention.

But when they act like idiots they are at least entertaining.

We had an interesting discussion in faith class today, talking about world view, and someone brought up HP versus LotR. The gist of what my teacher said was that Harry Potter, while on the outside is a good story, has some underlying themes that are "occultic," whereas the themes underlying LotR are more Christian. An example he gave is that there came a point where Frodo and Sam both realized that in order to destroy the Ring they would have to die. I suppose that the sacrifice of Frodo and Sam is seen as a Christian theme.

These are not completely my thoughts, but I thought it was a good example of a Christian point of view on things.

*grins* yes it is rather good, isn't it.

But more seriously, and more relevantly to this topic, I found the review/attack on CS Lewis on that site interesting reading, as insight into just what it is about fantasy that upsets this kind of very conservative mindset.

I think its a bit lame to justify reading of Tolkien by seeking evidence in his work of scriptural parallel - making him some sort of exception to the 'guilty til proved innocent' attitude to literature.
I lament this general desire to assume wickedness and devilry in works of human imagination, it seems rather mediaeval to me.

Look what happened while I was gone
 

Indeed. It is also fantastically refreshing that yahoos like myself can both own and tote weapons of individual destruction (firearms) in this great country. But alas, that is for a different forum.

HerenIstarion, not a problem in the world. Enjoy talking to myself after all. ;)

Saucepan Man, ...clearly there is no...formal "belief system" ...which advocates the banning of books such as LotR as one of its precepts....

Perhaps there is, I was just wanting to see it defined. I understand and agree with your point that some people believe (at least in their gut) that their religion prohibits things like LotR and can arrive at some justification for a ban.

On the other hand, individuals such as Yusko the Ranter...

Also affectionately known as Yusko the Rant. :D Feel free to use these terms interchangeably.

...considers any involvement with them merits eternal damnation.

That would be the non-Roman Catholic "eternal damnation without chance for Purgatory-like parole!" Yusko the Rant willingly skates on the thin ice of his own eternal destiny by even becoming polluted with talking about such vile sin to us ignorant souls.

I think that you are interpreting people's use of the word "right" rather too narrowly.

Probably my destiny, my personal cross to bear, if you will. You are correct, of course. As long as people read my own rants, think about them (as in, "think about what you are saying"), then go on their merry ways, I am happy.

And finally, this "restriction on freedom of speech" is, in my opinion, very much within the realm of your proposed "...very limited circumstances (such as where necessary...to protect children..." . And so this is parental, and therefore, derivatively, school authority that can debate and decide this for (on behalf of) the children. Which you are welcome to debate and/or debunk at will.

(more of a chat than a reply)
 

I am unique, and you are beautiful. But I am not a snowflake. More of a snowball. Or an icicle. With a sharp point.

That is what I have been saying, only Lush said it better. You are a gentlewoman and a...a...according to your location blurb, you are in love. Congrats!

:smokin:

BTW (referring more to the page 1 of the thread:

It is often suggested that the Hebrew word used here should be translated 'poisoner', Though I'm unable to produce any 'pro' or 'contra' argument, still it gives some thoughts to ponder...

No time (or really inclination) to research this, but I think I recall that at least in the NT, the word for witchcraft was occasionally claimed by preachers to be related to drugs. This was used to invoke Biblical authority for prohibiting drug use. Except the claim never seemed to extend to the prohibition of doctor-prescribed drugs...

I'm bringing this up for several reasons:

1. For Science and Faith in Middle Earth thread (Fordim)
2. For Yet Another Call by Me thread (Imladris)
3. For it's own sake
4. Cause