issues

I don't know where I was when Harry Potter mania first struck. Must've been on a deserted island somewhere, with nothing to read. Because I didn't catch up with the frenzy until the fourth book. And how did I discover the trend? Why, by reading this book!

It was easy enough to glom onto what my pastors and mentors were saying about the Harry Potter series. Evil? Witchy? Occultic? Sure! I admit thinking that way to my everlasting shame, though. I'm a children's lit specialist, and I've worked in bookstores for most of my working life.

I was working in a Christian bookstore when this one was published. So I decided to read it on my lunch hours. It took all of fifteen minutes to understand that Abanes's arguments are superficial, flawed, and come from an uneducated understanding of literature. I had never read Rowling's books up to that point. The nonsense spewing forth from the pages of Harry Potter and the Bible is what made me turn to Book One, Page One of the Harry Potter series. I had to see for myself if such shallow arguments (such as, Harry lies and therefore teaches readers that lying is okay) had any basis at ALL.

Well, okay. Harry does lie. And yeah, he sure does use magic! But he's not a sorcerer, for pity's sake. He's not invoking spirits or calling up devils. He's doing what I'd call "play" magic - flinging feathers, unlocking doors (no, wait, that was Hermione!), etc. Even when he performs more serious magic (Patronus, etc.) it's for the good.

True, the Bible is clear on its warnings against sorcery. Abanes isn't a total idiot. He's got that bit right. But his understanding of literature is impossibly skewed. Writing is a craft. Every craft has its own tools. One that writers use is called PLOT DEVICE. That's what magic is in the Harry Potter novels. It moves the story along, gives it character. It does not teach impressionable young'uns occult practices.

I could go on and on about how ridiculous this book is. Let me just say, as a Christian, a reader, an educated individual, it was Abanes's book that got me to read Harry Potter in the first place. For that, I have to thank him. Because I LOVE J.K. Rowling's creation! The books are fantastic, brilliant, amazingly crafted, and they echo (as all Good Literature does) the Greater Story.

I read this book, and many of it's reviews, and am apalled by it. Abanes says Harry and friends lie, cheat and steal. True, but that's not all. He continues to say that, as always, there are no consequences. That is wrong. That is totally and completely wrong. Then there's the big thing on "Harry Potter uses magic". True, the books would probably be just as popular without magic(k), but it's not as big a thing. Now I will quote a reviewer:
"The people who try to bash Richard Abanes and the people who try to bash others who have problems with the Harry Potter book series are an interesting sort. They say that they are the ones who are "open-minded" and "tolerant" which is seen as a virtue in today's world, but in effect, they are the ones who are close-minded and intolerant."
Really? Then I've been thinking all wrong. No one's bashing Abanes, as far as I know, and I read only the reviews giving this book 5 stars. I call that open-minded. And look at all the people who read the book and are still saying that Harry is good! They all read the book, and that's also open-minded. And we're tolerant enough to put up with people like Abanes or Arms (Pokemon and Harry Potter: a fatal attraction). Another reviewer says:
"Abanes also does an excellent job of comparing Lewis and Tolkein's works to the modern "masterpieces" of Rowling, and helps the reader to understand that other than superficial similarities, Lewis and Tolkein's books are VASTLY different from that of Rowling"
Their books are VASTLY different? Gandalf/Dumbledore/the wizard I forgot his name, Harry/Frodo/Lucy, Dobby/Gollum, The Sword Of Gryffindor/Frodo's Sword (forgot the name)/Peter's sword. And then Alan and the Gryffindor lion, which is something. Magic(k) takes place in all three books. Consider the time when Lucy has to use magic. The ring in Lord Of The Rings is magic. I don't see much difference, other than names and a difference in characters here and there.
I'd also like to add that Harry uses magic mostly to defend himself. In the OotP (I know this book was written before) Harry defends himself from a Demetor with the Patronus charm, even though he's not allowed to. He also breaks rules to learn to defend himself and others. In both cases it's survival on their minds, and they can't be attacked for that. In CoS Hermione steals something from Snape for truth. Yes, Harry cheats in the Triwizard tournament, but that's what you're supposed to do. He didn't keep the prize fpr himself, anyway. He gave it to charity (sorta). I think Abanes read the whole book thoughrouly, but I wouldn't put it past him that he didn't!
(...)

Richard Abanes has managed to do what very few authors have done. He annoyed me to the level of giving his book only 1 star. Only a couple of others(Kobo Abe, Kathy Acker, and Lydia Adamson) have managed that dubious feat UNTIL NOW.

Abanes basically wrote a 200 something page screed against Harry Potter, and J.K Rowling. He contradicts himself through, giving mixed messages about Rowling's character. He takes parts of the books completely out of context, so it would make Harry look the worst. He goes off the deep end with mentioning real-life occultists that the average pre-pubbescant wouldn't have the resources or the mindset to look up. He completely doesn't understand the average 11-year old, and makes Harry look like a poor role model(which is debatable) because he acts like a typical 11-year old.

Some chapters digress totally away from Harry Potter, and get into Satanism and dark occultic practices that have NOTHING to do with Rowling or Harry Potter, but have everything to do with fanatics and the most wholy evil of us. Bad writing and poor apologetics. Abanes should stick to anti-Mormon books, and leave critiques of children's literature to one who can only think for himself.