You Know What They Say About People Who Assume

People are stupid. Not all people - just a lot of them.

I was reminded of this when my friend Nicole sent me a link to the opinion page of our hometown newspaper. A man by the name of Woody Russell thinks it is his moral duty to save America's children from being exposed to the occult symbolism that apparently runs rampant in the Harry Potter Books and will inevitably seep into their minds. Read for yourself:

Reader's Viewpoint: It's time to pull Harry Potter books from our libraries

To the Editor:

The article "Not So Wild About Harry (Potter)" in Parade magazine Oct. 29 has some good advice, and it'’s time to pull the worldÂ’s most popular wizard, Harry Potter, from the school libraries. Has witchcraft conquered the church too?

British author J.K. Rowling'’s "“Harry Potter"” books for a brief time were selling better than the holy Bible. Those books were very cleverly packaged to introduce tens of millions of children to satanic symbols, rituals and concepts. Did anyone ever notice that lightning bolt on his forehead?

Parents are not hesitating to buy those books for their children, and as a result witchcraft has now virtually conquered the whole of Christian establishments. The lightning bolt has long been a satanic symbol.

Children have been placing a tattooed lightning bolt symbol on their foreheads. Lightning has long been a supreme symbol of Lucifer, whom the Illuminati deem to be their "“enlightener,"” just as Jesus in the Bible, who says, "“I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven." Lucifer is also called the "Prince of the Power of Air."” (Ephesians 2:2)

The modern Illuminati have borrowed from the pagan mystery religions, a supreme god as a fiery, flying serpent, bringing lightning and thunder in his wake.

The Greeks and Romans also worshipped angry deities, Zeus and Jupiter, sitting on a throne at the hub of the heavens throwing lightning bolts and becoming thunder at their enemies.

It is also recognized as a phallic symbol -– in the Illuminist religion that originated from tantric tradition, in which it is taught that lightning is a phallic scepter, jewel, lingam or a magical wand of the gods. It also symbolizes the Hindu fire god, "Agni"” – in the third eye region of the forehead between the eyes. The Nordic people also worshiped him as Odin.

A Hitler Youth bugle band also once flew a banner of the lightning bolt, an occult symbol of the ancient Mystery Religions. The were designed as a rigid "“S"” meaning the secret adoration of Satan.

In Britain, the New Party once marched with a banner with a lightning flash that stood for action in a circle (wreath) that was around it for Unity or Union. Another Illuminist symbol is the five- or six-pointed stars -– symbol of the Devil.

Believe it or don'’t!

Woody Russell,

New Philadelphia

I'm baffled by the fact that this man would leave himself so open to rebuttal. He's obviously intelligent enough to pull a few facts about the lightning bolt as a symbol of Satan off the internet, but he conveniently left out the fact that the lighning bolt was also seen as a symbol of God's might in the Old Testament (I can pull information off the internet, too). Even more disturbing, though, is the fact that he obviously didn't bother to research the Harry Potter books themselves. Instead, he arrived at his earth-shattering conclusions about Rowling's books based simply on the cover art. Aren't his powers of deduction just incredible, that he could form an entire contention regarding the nature of what is arguably the most popular series of children's books in the last decade without even lifting the front cover?

Naturally, I couldn't let this kind of ignorance sway the consciences of the good (but easily influenced) people of Tuscarawas County. Thus, I penned a response that will hopefully appeal to the religiously conservative majority of my place of origin. As someone who actually read the Harry Potter books before making up her mind about them, I think I'm a bit more qualified to form an opinion about them:

To the Editor:

I am writing in response to Woody Russell’s contribution to Reader’s Viewpoint titled “It’s time to pull Harry Potter books from our libraries.” Russell’s letter was both closed-minded and based on speculation, and I think it’s a safe bet to say he’s never read a single page from any of the Harry Potter books.

Russell’s argument was based on the cover art of the books, all of which features an artist’s rendering of Harry Potter himself, who is depicted with a lightning bolt-shaped scar on his forehead. Had Russell bothered to find out how Harry obtained the scar, he would know that it was the by-product of the murder of Harry’s mother, who died protecting her infant son from a powerful wizard turned evil. Harry’s scar is not a mark he chose. Nor does it label him as evil, as Russell assumed. Rather, it is the outward evidence that Harry has been the victim of evil. Lily Potter’s selfless act spared her son Harry from certain death and rendered him immune to the evil that, until then, was unstoppable. Maybe it’s just me, but the story reminds me a little bit of another famous story, one that you’ll find in the New Testament, involving a selfless act made by the son of God.

Anyone who’s bothered to read the books before condemning them knows that Rowling’s story is a classic one of good versus evil. Young Harry devotes himself completely to living up to his parents’ memories by defeating the evil wizard who made him an orphan and has caused so many other good wizards and witches so much pain. It seems that much of the proposed censorship of children’s literature stems from simple ignorance. Take, for example, C.S. Lewis’ “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe,” which appears on more than one list of books that are challenged with some regularity. In the case of Lewis’ book, the charge is often made that the book is satanic, by people who do not understand the meaning of the word “allegory” and who do not take the time to find out that C.S. Lewis was one of the most respected theologians of the twentieth century.

We should not pull Harry Potter books from our libraries, as Russell suggests, but instead make available more copies of them. There are precious few books that children will almost universally devour of their own free will, never mind that their pages number well past 800. If parents want to prevent their own children from reading the Harry Potter books, that’s their business, but they have no right to impose their assumptions on all children. Censorship on the scale Russell proposes has no place in any of our libraries.

An Event 26 Years in the Making

I finally believe everyone who said having a B.A., even a somewhat useless one in English, would someday pay off. This is because, three years after finishing that degree and starting my (still unfinished) M.A., I finally have a real job.

What qualifies as a real job, you may ask? Well, according to my definition, it features (a) a living wage, (b) the option of real health benefits, and (c) work that I find rewarding to some degree. I start that job on Monday. It's basically the same thing I've been doing for the past few months, just full-time and with benefits. And at a different library in the same system that's actually five minutes from where I now live. (I could walk to work if I was feeling ambitious and left early enough.) It only took me a year to find such a job. Finally, someone thinks my crummy English degree and my varied field of experience is worth something, and I have a better answer for everyone who's asked me what I'm going to do with my degree in English (though really making a career for myself in the library will require an MLS, I think).

New Additions

After a period of mourning for Edie, Mark and I decided to get a new creature to live with us, in addition to my six fish. After much discussion, we decided to go with something furrier this time, since (a) fellow mammals are sometimes easier to relate to, (b) it's hard to find a babysitter for something that eats live crickets (though we're lucky to know someone well-versed in herp care who watched Edie while we were in Florida), and (c) all lizards other than anoles are far more expensive than Edie, who was free.

Following this lengthy discussion, we went to PetSmart, where our minds were made up for us by the absolutely adorable dwarf hamsters, which are the next best thing to cats and dogs, which we aren't allowed to have.

Unfortunately, they don't have names yet. I was going to give them both literary names (I thought perhaps Wanda and June, after a Vonnegut novel, or Thelma and Louise...nothing I've thought of so far has been a perfect match). Then Mark decided he wanted some say in the naming. Thus, I'm naming the "cracked out one," as we've been calling the hyperactive hamster I picked out, and Mark is in charge of naming the "cool one," as we've been calling the more easygoing hamster that the girl at PetSmart placed in my hand, which caused us to fall in love with her immediately. So I'm trying to think of a similarly cracked out literary character to name my hamster after while trying not to think of what Mark will come up with for his (such as KeeneHamster 1.0, if he names animals the same way he names everything else).

Suggestions are, of course, welcome.