THE CANADIAN author Michael O’Brien is an eloquent critic of the occult influences on children today, especially through fantasy literature. O’Brien is author of A Landscape With Dragons: The Battle for Your Child’s Mind (Ignatius) and Harry Potter and the Paganization of Culture (Fides et Traditio) . In a 2001 interview with Zenit.org, he summarized his objections to J.K. Rowling’s works. His points are relevant to much of popular culture:

Q: Many are critical of the Harry Potter books because they claim it is dangerous to expose children to witchcraft and the occult. What is your reaction to this?

O’Brien: I have read the four volumes of the Harry Potter series three times, and with each reading the serious defects of the novels appear in clearer light.

The most obvious problem, of course, is the author’s use of the symbol-world of the occult as her primary metaphor, and occultic activities as the dramatic engine of the plots. It presents these to the child reader through attractive role models, such as Harry and Hermione, who are students of witchcraft and sorcery. This has the potential of lowering a child’s guard—both subconscious and spiritual—to actual occult activity, which is everywhere and growing.

Rationally, children know that the fantasy element in the books is not “real.” But emotionally and subconsciously the young reader absorbs it as real. This is further complicated by the fact that in the world around us there are many opportunities for young people to enter the occult subcultures, where some of Harry’s powers are indeed offered as real.

Q: Critics of Harry Potter see a big difference between authors such as Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, who, they argue, use magical elements in a Christian way, and the books of J.K. Rowling, where magic is presented in a Gnostic and pagan fashion.

O’Brien: The differences are great, I would say absolute. The resemblance between the works of Christian fantasy writers and Rowling is only superficial. Yes, there is “magic” in both. Yet Tolkien and Lewis repeatedly warn about the danger of magic throughout their novels.

Tolkien is especially clear on this. In his great epic The Lord of the Rings, and in his foundational work, The Silmarillion, he shows that powers that do not rightly belong to man always have a corrupting influence on man. Only higher ranks of creatures in his imaginary world exercise supernatural powers, and then only as a gift from God.

The evil characters in the tale have corrupted these gifts, or else—in the case of humans—they have tried to seize them as personal possessions, only to be deceived and finally destroyed by them. Moreover, the “magic” in Tolkien’s subcreation does not really resemble magic practices in the real world. He makes efforts to explain this in his collected letters, where he expresses some concern that his intention might be misinterpreted by readers.

In his fantasy series for children, The Chronicles of Narnia, and in his cosmic trilogy for adults, C.S. Lewis also repeatedly demonstrates the seductiveness of powers that are not rightly man’s, especially when they are seized as a form of Gnostic quest for power.

Both of these Christian writers firmly underline the fact that defeat of radical evil depends on humility, courage, love, self-sacrifice—in short, our natural human virtues.

Q: How does this differ from Rowling’s approach in the Potter series?

O’Brien: Rowling’s Potter-world is fundamentally Gnostic. Magic is presented as an inherent faculty of human nature that only needs awakening and formation through the pursuit of esoteric knowledge and power.

There is not even a whiff of divine presence, whereas Tolkien’s and Lewis’ worlds are radiant with this unspoken presence. In Potter-world, magic is portrayed as a morally neutral power, which in the hands of “nice” characters serves the good, and in the hands of negative characters serves evil.

When the war between good and evil is portrayed as thrilling and highly rewarding emotionally, a child reader will be imprinted deeply with messages about the way in which the “good” characters defeat the evil.

Tolkien’s central character, Frodo, defeats evil by fidelity to truth, by rejecting unlawful power, and persevering in a state of weakness. Rowling’s central character defeats evil by amassing enough power to overcome his archenemy, yet this power is the same as that of his opponent.

Simply saying that the Potter books show good as better than evil, is not sufficient defense of the series. Rowling has radically blurred the lines between good and evil, redefining some of both. The real question is, what is the nature of good and evil as she has presented it, and as it is presented in the film.

Q: Others see in the stories a classical children’s tale, albeit with magical elements, of good against evil. What positive elements are there in the books for readers?

O’Brien: I can think of few works of culture, regardless of how flawed, that do not contain some positive elements. But this is no argument for giving gravely disordered material to our children.

In the Potter series there is an attempt to portray courage and loyalty in the “good” characters. But courage and loyalty can be found in all peoples, even those involved in the worst forms of paganism.

It is important to note that children read fiction with a different consciousness than adults. This is something that has been overlooked by those Christian leaders who have written pro-Potter commentaries. They forget that children are in a state of formation, that their understanding of reality is being forged at every turn.

Wholesome fantasy, regardless of how wildly imaginative it may be, reinforces the moral order of the universe in a child’s mind. Corrupt fantasy undermines it. The Potter world is corrupt fantasy with a little cosmetics. The cosmetics are the “values” woven into the tale by the author.

In modern culture we have all become accustomed to eating a certain amount of poison in our diet; indeed most of us no longer even recognize the poison. I believe that’s why many educators and parents simply don’t recognize the scope of the problem with the Potter books.

Q: Would you say that the witchcraft and sorcery element is the only defect in the Potter series?

O’Brien: There are other serious problems in these books, notably the question of authority and obedience.

Harry’s faults are rarely punished, and usually by the negative authority figures in the tale. The positive authority figures actually reward Harry for his disobedience when it brings about some perceived good. His lies, his acts of vengeance, and his misuse of his powers are frequently ignored. The message of “the end justifies the means” is dominant throughout.

Lip service is paid to a code of ethics—never really spelled out—but in fact the undermining of those ethics is reinforced at every turn. Another problem is the consistent use of repulsive details, lowering the child’s instinctive aversion to the horrible and grotesque.

For example, in one class the students are taught to cut up mandrake roots, which are living human babies, for use in a potion. At the least, this can cause a subconscious desensitization to abortion.

Q: In recent years there has been a surge of interest in themes related to the occult. Why is this happening?

O’Brien: The phenomenal resurgence of interest in occult “spiritualities” is a symptom of the bankruptcy of secularism. There is an innate hunger in human nature for the sacred transcendent, for the holy, wherein man finds his true identity and worth. When it is denied, a void opens up within him.

If our particular churches are not offering the fullness of the Catholic faith to the coming generation, if we are not giving the young an authentic and vital spiritual life, they will go searching elsewhere—and the realm of the pseudo-mystical, which is so often connected to the diabolical, will be waiting for them.

The Potter books open a doorway into that world. Articles have been appearing for more than a year now, in secular and religious periodicals, providing evidence that this series of books bridges the gap between normal children and the world of darkness.

With the appearance of the film version of the first volume—and this film promises to be one of the biggest box office hits of all time—an added dimension of psychological influence is at work.

Any serious student of modern media recognizes the power of film to reshape consciousness. By using both overt and subliminal techniques, it can override the mind’s natural critical faculty. It is also interesting to note that, even in the books, Rowling’s use of imagery and pace is actually derived from the techniques of visual media.

[cont.]

— Comments —

Nick writes:

I would like to add a bit more to your very informative article on how books geared toward children often intentionally manipulate their young, impressionable minds. The author of whom you referenced speaks about the Occult, but another way these popular modern books for young adults condition their thinking is by creating mistrust for and even anger towards adults and authoritative institutions run by those adults.

In books like The Hunger Games, the Divergent series, Harry Potter and others, there is a common feature amongst all of these: adults are abusive and often oppressive figures that initiate systems of control that inhibit individuality and freedom. Even good adults, like Dumbledore in the Potter series, often fail and do not live up to certain expectations. Sometimes, inadvertently or not, adult characters make choices that hurt the whole world. Adult characters are often weak, vicious, bumbling, and morally nihilistic. Their decisions are usually ruinous. Children of course must save humanity by stopping the bad adults, with the service of good-but-weak adults, and completely dismantle any cultural or political order from which these wicked adults exercise their power. Only through a new, better order instantiated by these child-heroes will bring about a more peaceful world.

It should be no surprise that we see such an insurgency in child protesters becoming increasingly radicalized and more vitriolic towards traditional things, adults and their parents expectations of them. They are not taught to honor “father and mother” but to distrust – and even to actively seek to change – anything that comes from their forefathers.

Laura writes:

Thank you. Great points.

O’Brien talks about this in his book, Harry Potter and the Paganization of Culture.

Matt writes:

I read through O’Brien’s interview, and the “problems” that he identified seem to be centered specifically around Christian beliefs. Particularly, whether Christians believe the Occult to be real or imaginary varies, but they do generally believe that if it’s real, then it must be of the devil, or that it’s inherently evil because God said so, or at the very least that humans are for some reason unworthy of magical power and to seek it is hubris. From a Christian perspective, his points make some sense.

But outside of Christianity, there are many other religions, each with wildly different conceptions of the world, and their own views on whether magical powers are real and whether they are good or bad. Some may actually consider it to be the whole point of spirituality.

And outside of religion in general, in the context of the scientific and atheistic communities, most people consider the notion of the Occult to be laughable nonsense. But if they had reason to believe it were real, they would find it intriguing, a potential new domain for scientific study, a potential new source of power. Generally speaking, power is not, itself, good or evil. It’s morally neutral. A gun/sword can take the lives of the innocent, or it can save them.

So basically, outside of the Christian worldview, his points don’t really make sense.

Laura writes:

It’s true, many people in the modern world — probably most — don’t believe in the supernatural.

But if you don’t believe in the law of gravity, it still exists. Whether someone believes in the supernatural realm or not, it still exists.

Christians by definition are supernaturalists.

Laura adds:

Just want to clarify:

Even though a reader of Harry Potter may live in a home where the supernatural is not recognized, he can still be profoundly affected by the demonic aspects of the book.

Stephen Ippolito writes:

The enormous appeal of such dead-end notions as the occult and magic to our growing numbers of fatherless and inexperienced youth is the enormously enticing lie that by allowing them to call forth their latent “inner witch or warlock” such practices bestow self-sufficiency and empowerment on those who embrace them. The tragedy, of course, is that they do no such thing because when empty people look inwards only and in search of temporal power over others they are led in precisely the opposite direction to the model extolled by this unique God that Christians remembered just this last week – a divinity that is a real father and is at once all-powerful and yet calls us to embrace the gentle qualities he modelled and which Mr O’Brien correctly identifies as being: “humility, courage, love, self-sacrifice”.

So many fathers now are not even present in the home for their children and of those who are, so many are now effeminate child-men:  stupid, petty, selfish and incompetent; or else are all macho strut and no strength. Either way, increasingly few children today are able to understand, as we do, all that Donna meant when she observed simply that “Daddy’s home”.

Where are the fathers now modelling traditional manliness by doings brave or tough things and in so doing inspiring their children or making them proud and most importantly of all – making them feel protected and safe enough for them to explore and engage with the qualities that make us most fully human – humility, courage love self sacrifice? For our young to take these qualities up surely they must feel safe enough to do so. Where they don’t feel safe, they will surely turn inward upon themselves and take up any belief system that allows them to feel that they are strong and poweful enough to protect themselves. Softness and altruism are luxuries the weak and dispossessed cannot afford. Perhaps this is why Rowling’s works find such receptive soil in the minds of young modern readers while the infinitely more nourishing and layered Christian themes of superior writers such as Lewis and Tolkien are missed.

For years I volunteered at a centre that assisted young people at risk and lacking life skills. I was constantly struck by the huge percentage of such youngsters who identified primarily as witches or wikkans or satanists or such foolishness. The constant was that they came from fatherless homes and lacked not only the positive modelling and protection of a traditional father figure but also the education and the social skills that might have allowed them  some measure of protection from the harshness of the world. It was no wonder that such youngsters came to reject humility, courage, love and self-sacrifice as sops for the weak and rushed to embrace anything that might let them think they had the power within themselves to overcome their enemies.

Similarly with many of the released criminals that I represented in my professional life. Many of these men converted to Islam in jail. They would always lecture me on how satisfying and “real” their new faith was for them. Almost to a man they would praise Islam’s “empowering” effect and (correctly) cite statistics that prison conversions to Islam far outnumber prison conversions to Christianity. I always replied that it was no wonder that in such a place as jail a faith that extolls physical setrength, the use of violence for its ends, lack of empathy for and brutalisation of the weak and disbelieving should flourish. It is easy to take up a cause that calls you to power and feeds the ego. Much harder, I would think, to look beyond one’s self to embrace the gentleness and humility of Christ.

Laura writes:

Thank you.

You write:

The enormous appeal of such dead-end notions as the occult and magic to our growing numbers of fatherless and inexperienced youth is the enormously enticing lie that by allowing them to call forth their latent “inner witch or warlock” such practices bestow self-sufficiency and empowerment on those who embrace them.

That’s a very important point. Just like tattoos, piercings and bizarre hair dyes often represent a pose of strength, occult practices give that false sense of empowerment.

Fatherlessness is definitely a factor. I would say especially for the huge number of teenage girls drawn to the occult. O’Brien also points to the loneliness of children who have essentially lost siblings through abortion and contraception. They are wounded in some ineffable ways by the elimination of their siblings and the absence of potential siblings. Loneliness makes them identify with a character like Harry Potter, who also has suffered and is lonely. His occult practices, which are often used for revenge, seem empowering.

But aside from these social factors, the absence of positive recognition of the supernatural creates a hunger for it.

Where the sacramental is missing, the demonic will triumph.

Please follow and like us: