I've noticed what he's talking about here with a lot of children's movies. In most children's movies today under-emphsize the importance of working hard and acquiring the necessary skills to achieve a goal. They instead seem to send the message that merely intending to be good will get you the results you desire.
Mary Poppins from the book was supposed to teach kids about just that, but Disney decided to make it more "happy happy all the time and nothing bad ever happens"
And of ego, that you would dare think the creator of the universe would act on your behalf. It's also sad to think that you must ask the creator of all things good to prevent terrible things from happening when he should be powerful and benevolent enough to never let them happen. Dear Lord! Please prevent this child from developing bone cancer! Thank you, you are all powerful and good! *God looks on from Heaven* "Hmm..yeah maybe I should prevent that...wait...why did I let that happen anyway?"
Wowo Mah You seem to have a push button view of prayer. God must do what I ask/tell him to do. If that were the case then you would be "god" and god would be your servant.
@@gerardk51 The thing is that it is questionable how a rational person can believe in an all-powerful, omniscient being that also loves every single human being while acknowledging the misery that is inevitably part of this world, especially things like disease in children, as these are not the result of harmful human actions (as far as we know) and the child does not deserve that suffering. Prayer is hoping for someone to fix your problems. Even if you pray in humility, that is what it is. Religion teaches you to see yourself as a child, the child of your holy father, and to do as he says and to ask him for help and maybe he will grant it to you (if you are really lucky?!) and to think that you will be saved by him from death, the scary unknown. Magic, as portrayed in Harry Potter, is a tool you have to learn to master, and the characters do not seek instant gratification, but rather go through great length to become grown-ups that can stand up for themselves and solve their own problems, but death is clearly portrayed as a problem magic cannot solve permanently (ironically the source of the main conflict) and while there are some psychopathic villains, the "good" people have to go through internal conflict and realise that there is evil inside them and that they make mistakes. It is not the best work of fiction out there, but it is not as childish as Scruton makes it seem and in my opinion more grown-up than Christian ideology.
@@kathrinlindern2697 No explanation is given for the source of the power/magic. The "philosophy" of the Potter books is groundless. Is it Nature? Well that would be nature mysticism. I can't remember whether Scruton said it in this vid or somewhere else but he says the rejection of alchemy opened the way for science. People began to seek to understand the workings of the universe rather than "waving a wand". God could still be understood as the creator. As for the struggle between good and evil in the world and in oneself, that is very much a Christian notion and owes nothing to Potter/Rowling.
@@gerardk51 The way magic is portrayed in-universe, however, is as a part of science. It is something one can study, mastered through experiments. The source of the magic is not explained, but it is also irrelevant, as in that world, magic is just an accepted fact, sought to be understood, but there are no definite answers to its sources. We, in the real world, do not know where we come from, or why we have consciousness, but we do and we accept that. But the magic is not the ground for the philosophy, it's just a premise for the story. And I do acknowledge that the book deals with"Christian" themes, though I would say the good vs evil thing is culturally universal, as is a certain struggle with death, and the western world has been very greatly influenced by Christian myth over the last few centuries, so it is natural that these themes pop up. But I personally like the idea to see myth in a fictional, metaphorical way instead of believing in the god they describe.
The myth of Sisyphus, as described by Camus...but we must question this Babylonian story that life has to be Hardship, Wars and Injustice... I like the Mark Twain Mindset much better because it celebrates Nature, Goodness and Justice.
@@abigailslade3824 siddartha gautama said the same but was also selling something, which was buddhism, so maybe we shouldnt look to dread pirates for wisdom.
i say this without hyperbole - i think Roger Scruton may be one of the smartest people alive. start with his years of analytic philosophy, then his writings on music, sex and art. add that to his novels and his symphonic music. then add his work on politics. and then on Sundays he plays the organ in his local church!
He may be a great observer, he is not a great mind - he comes up with observations not solutions. And even his observations are simplistic and in isolation, but the delivery is dressed in pseudo intellectual snobbery.
preposterous. these are quick, little youtube clips - he's being asked about his observations. it's a 10 minute clip. he's been knighted. the Czechs have given him awards for establishing networks behind the iron curtain. taught graduate classes at Oxford. numerous books ABOUT his books on aesthetics.at least 50 books including novels. oh, and a few operas. the first modern treatise on APPLYING Conservative thought to government. you are so immersed in shallow thought that when you see the real thing it actually confuses you.
Well stated, Anthony. I can't think how anyone familiar with Sir Roger's body of work could disagree with you, unless he/she were infected with a political animus against him.
I knew something was wrong with Rowling's writing the second all the Slitherin kids were forced to sit in the dungeon because "they may influenced" or rather "they are tainted with evil". The slitherin kids did not choose to be in Slitherin. They were merely placed in it by a hat that read their thoughts. Literally imprisoned for thought crime
@TheEmeraldBlonde agreed. In half a dozen books Rowling managed to show almost zero character development. Even Snape, the big hopes for some sort of big reveal as a kind of “deep cover” secret agent , fell a bit flat. In Rowling’s world, you are born good or born bad and that’s it. In fact as the books went on the goodies got better and the baddies got worse. By the end it was just boring. Edit: no Lucius betraying V for his son, or Draco defying pressure and turning good, no good characters revealing hidden desires and acting badly on them. No cowardly gryffindors, no good slytherins, no suggestion that children might be capable of acting better, worse or even differently from their parents. Cardboard characters basically. I agree it’s an unpleasant world view. I’m not surprised JKR hasn’t been called out on it by normal people because it’s just kids books, so who really cares? However it does show that she and the loonies she courts on social media are a good fit, with their straitened, unforgiving, judgmental, fixed view of society, where authority is concentrated in the hands of a moral elite, who are the sole arbiters of what is good and true.
this is an interesting point. It’s very likely that they were imprisoned precisely because many of the deaths eaters in Voldemort’s army were their parents or relatives. It was done simply out of necessity. Sure it could’ve been played as a joke about them being ‘evil’ but behind it all was rooted in practicality.
That's not true. In the books, not all Slytherins were imprisoned - some fought for Hogwarts. Only Draco and his friends who had close contacts to Death Eaters (Draco even had the dark mark) were "imprisoned" in the Dungeons, which, you know, happened to be their own quarters in the school. And they were not really imprisoned, as they were only detained for the duration of a battle that lasted less than 48 hours. Which, by the way, also happened to every single student year 5 and under, to protect the young kids that would not be able to stand their ground in a fight, and who were not legally adults. They were also not heavily guarded or anything. It was more of an "okay we are under immediate attack and we can't afford traitors" thing and not imprisonment for thought crime.
Dear Rodger it's a pleasure to listen to somebody who has a command of the English language. Who is intellectually agile and articulate. I'm not big on Harry Potter. When it comes to waving a wand: Leonard Bernstein. Thank you.
What a kind voice he speaks with. Religion encourages humility "I can of mine own self do nothing". But, if you consider, Sir Roger Scruton achieved wisdom, " as I hear I judge and my judgement is just because I seek not my own will, but the will of the father which hast sent me."
Ignoring of course the fact that the books get progressively more adult and more and more responsibility is forced on the younger characters as they age. No mention of that? I wonder why.
Our culture is screwed up because we have been lulled into thinking that the world belongs in the hands of a tiny elite of men who want to sell us JUNK and keep us in debt.
When I saw the Lord of the Rings movies, I appreciated the themes of self sacrifice and resisting seduction, like Gandalf not lifting the ring from the floor in the first movie because he realised it would seduce him. When I saw the first Potter movie, the way Harry felt justified in laughing at the humiliation of the annoying kid rubbed me the wrong way, seeming to send the wrong message to kids. That exemplifies the difference between Rowling and Tolkien for me.
Harry is a very flawed and damn annoying character. That's the point - we watch him grow up. It's a slow and tedious process as he's a fairly ordinary annoying teenager. Gandalf is the equivalent of an old man with enormous experience. Harry has the role of flawed hero who learns a lot and grows to understand himself and the world's complexities and grey areas. He might eventually be a Gandalf, when he has some more grey hairs. Dumbledore plays the Gandalf character - string of mind and ethics, but not without his flaws too. Try reading the 7 books and you'll see some character development.
You’re complaining about a character -a child no less - being flawed. Neither the book Nor the film depict his actions as heroic or morally justified. What is your point exactly?
This has aged exceptionally well. Thank you Sir Roger, I credit you from my awakening from exactly the child like fantasy you describe here. When I was a bleeding heart liberal, I met someone who told me about you and I subsequently found what you believe about culture and, well, belief, was entirely consistent with my Darwinian, evolutionary understanding of the world. I have since re-assumed the faith of my ancestors and try to live by your words every day. You seamlessly connected the practical anglo-conservative mindset with scientific truth, and called us all to aspire to something greater than the mere scientific truth of what we are. If you wish to change the opinion of a scientifically minded liberal ideologue, you could do no better than Sir Roger Scruton's books, interviews and dialogues. The way you embraced JK Rowling while gently criticizing her work at the same time is an absolute master class in rhetoric. This was simply brilliant. I hope to one day be able to combine anthropology, ethics, literary critique and love in the same monologue with the same skill and understanding displayed here. Sir Roger, you are one of the finest men of the 20th century and your impact on the world will be sorely missed. Thank you. May you rest in peace.
one only has to look at the depression to see parallels. when people feel the weakest and the most powerless they find inspiration in Superman, Marvel, Superheros who save the day.....the adult mind sees only obstacles. the child mind finds comfort in the magical. Potter would have been big anytime, but it touches a nerve today because of the level of powerlessness people feel in their lives. Consciously or not. why are there so many Marvel Movies out there that are blockbusters? Why so many Spiderman/Hulk reboots that take off???? there's a hunger that is not being satisfied through living. .. so it must be replaced by entertainment
Constance St Michael Look at it this way: CHRISTIANS then & now were and are WAY too accepting of Foreign Entities. Why do you think it took FOUR HUNDRED YEARS before Christians realized they needed to undertake the first Crusade to drive Muslims out of Europe? Why do most Christians accept GODLESS COMMUNISTS slaughtering their kin & supporting the destruction of THE ONE REGIME that could have rid Europe & The World of Global Communism?
He's so respectful towards jk rowling, praises her strength and intelligently deconstructs the flaws in her work. Extremely smart and balanced analysis. Roger Scruton was a treasure
This is a really good take in that it balances an actual appreciation for Rowling's work with a critique of how her simplified morality has hampered the book recently.
@@Den.Vos.Reynaerde Children just copy their parents, I do not find Tolkien and Rowling that different. Both are otherwordly, creepy authors, only one of them was overeducated. Kirk Douglas has passed recently. He played Ulysses, he played Spartacus. Who does that today? Our history is full of strong stories, yet here we are only quarreling whether a monkey or a fox is better suited to rule the animals.
@@Den.Vos.Reynaerde Well, if this shit is only for the insightgifted, I give in. I like the popular stuff, unfortunately. And will not be here in 50 yrs time, when the presented kind of storytelling will be justly forgotten, just to tell you: Though not very educated or articulate, I was still onto something.
@@truemamrdi4all How can an author be "overeducated" that doesn't even make semse. And what about Tolkien is "creepy"? He was a nice old man with a passion for history and linguistics.
the whole development of the harry potter story is one towards complexity. Harry meets this world which takes him away from all his troubles at his terrible home, but with this wonderful discovery come the bits of imperfection, trouble and danger that it has, and each time he returns to that place it goes deeper and more dangerous. Magic is never enough to solve harry or the magic world problems and spells are never the final answer to this. There is scene in the sixth book, in which the prime minister of britain is informed about the return of no other than lord Voldemort, and after some chat about it and the realization that there is nothing he can do, he asks something along the lines of: "but you are magicians, why don't you use your magic to solve this?". There are some plot elements that go more in the description that mister Scruton explains here, but this do not dismiss the other examples of complexity in Rowling's work.
I also think Scruton has some very good points, but I do see some of the complexity you mention. For instance, when Harry, Hermione, and Ron are on the run, the one of the things they cannot do is produce food by magic. They have to forage. Also, at the end, Harry renounces the elder wand, which would give him power over all of the other wands. I think Scruton also misses the thirst for power in science, which seeks the same goal, that is, dominance over nature. That goal was expressly stated by some of the early scientists like Descartes and Bacon.
I have to say I can't quite agree - I think that there's some serious arguments to be made that Harry Potter engages with Christian ideas. Scruton says it avoids talking about religion and yet the central themes of Harry Potter are the power of sacrificial love, the importance of compassion, and the need to put away childish things and face responsibilities - arguably very Christian ideas. He talks about how magic represents man taking the position of God - yet death, and it's inevitability, are central to Harry's journey. It's clear throughout the series that spells AREN'T the solution to all problems as he suggests. Regardless of what Rowling is like on twitter or whatever (I don't use it) I can't agree with this analysis - a poor attempt to blame these novels for ills in the political culture.
It's not that he blames these novels for ills in the political culture. It's that Rowling attempts to use them as aids, when they are not at all suited to the task and reduce the world to a stupid oversimplification. Take a look at her Twitter, it's central to what he's saying.
@@TohnoEn Rowlings Twitter may be stupid, but the story itself is good. Death of the author! Scruton clearly talks about the themes of a series of novels here, not about Rowlings twitter. And in that novel, magic is not the solution to existential problems. Magic can't overrule death. Magic can't force love. People trying these things are the reason for the evil in Harry's world, because magic - power - corrupts people. And in the end, Harry doesn't win by using better magic, he wins because he is willing to face death. He is saved not by himself, but by the mercy of death or a god or simply luck. But he doesn't win through a calculated spell. And for a series of children's books, Harry Potter is relatively complex. Of course, it does not accurately portray every single detail about the life and the universe - that is impossible - but it does not oversimplify good and evil to the degree Scruton describes. And certainly not more so than the vast majority of children's literature I have read. Like, less good vs evil would probably result in a completely postmodernist world view where absolutely everything is relative and objective morality does not exist, and that would make for a really terrible bedtime story.
@@kathrinlindern2697 I'm in the middle between your and Scruton's points of view. And I agree with TohnoEn that Rowling's books aren't to blame for the failings of our modern culture, but a symptom. On the one hand, easy answers (as in magic) do not solve all of Harry's problems. Usually, the spells just add flavor, such as levitating a feather, or move the plot (find the mcguffin, er, horcrux). Instead, the point of each book is that love, friendship, or hope is what saved the protagonists in the end. The problem is, those ARE handled like magic spells. In these books, as well as every other piece of Liberal content cloned these days. The answer to all our problems are just darn ol' love and friend power; and gee whiz, if we only use the power of friendship to unite, then when all our powers combine EVIL is defeated! If Voldemort was armed with a shotgun instead of a wand, and wasn't so one-dimensional, then Harry and the gang would have lost a hundred times over. (Ugh, I feel dirty just writing that, since I do love the franchise anyway). How did Harry survive getting shot in the face at birth? Love. How did Harry survive getting shot in the face in the graveyard? Love. How did Harry survive getting shot in the face at the battle of Hogwarts? Lo-- well, no he died. ...But then he got resurrected because of: Love! Mommy's love and gee whiz, having friends were the reasoning behind much of his success. Which, in order to make that work, also meant that Voldemort had to be without love and friendship. Which just made him a cartoon. I grew less fond of Harry Potter the more it became evident that the answer to the mystery of Voldemort was just yet another cardboard cutout of the moustache-twirling racist. Yet in real life, everyone has friends, including the "bad guys." And while some of them might not know love, it is often a poor assumption to make by (typically Liberal) content creators that their *political* adversary opposes them simply because they don't know what love or good is. This is the paradigm in the Harry Potter books, and it is the philosophy of Rowling and the rest of the sort who thrive on twitter. The most interesting part in HP is when the gang has to resist the institutional oppression of Umbridge, the Ministry, and the gossip-turned-propaganda lies of Rita Skeeter. Here the villains were more realistic, and had to be outwitted and outlasted. Unlike Voldemort, who was defeated because unkillable Harry shot him with a better shotgun. This is what Scruton touches upon, I think, when he means the socialism of Harry Potter. I would personally have liked to see hard work, skill progression, and cleverness avail Harry more often than relying upon Hermione's encyclopedic knowledge or the ghostly vestiges of his mother. All that being said, I remember the movies better than the books. Also, I still love the franchise even if everyone in my political sphere hates it. I can critique it because I love it so much regardless. ...Fantastic Beasts is trash. OG HP 4eva.
All the imagery of sacrificial love and compassion are staged and written in so superficial and cheap way that I dare to say with Christianity they have nothing in common. And death is a central theme? Really? Oh, isn't it in Lord of the Rings? In Great Gatsby? In Ana Karenina? In Crime and Punishment? In Little Prince? In In Search of Lost Time? Death itself has no meaning. We give it to it. And vulgar imagery can not substitute a lack of it.
I must disagree, I wouldn't say they were cheap just because it's children literature, and yes death is central to works like Lord of the rings and Anna Karenina, both of the authors of those texts were Christian and engaged with those ideas so it makes sense.
Wonderfully insightful. The kind of popular literary criticism that is so lacking. I wonder what Scruton would have made of Rawling's rejection of the magical thinking that is transideology.
This was a great reflection about Harry Potter. I've seen Jordan Peterson talking about the characters and what they kinda symbolize, but Sir Roger took me on a flight with this particular analysis. Indeed it is quite astonishing how the HP story mirrors crucial aspects of human behavior and social tendencies.
Hardly bang on - he loses me when admiring how prayer, one of the most selfish and egotistical things man does, is somehow admission of weakness. As if casually commanding the universe to listen to your list of requests, and thinking the universe is even listening in the first place is in anyway a perception of disenfranchisement. Tell me more about infantile wish fulfillment. Meanwhile, Potter and his gang, with literally all the magic in their fictional world, face suffering sacrifice and death for 7 books without one asking a God to snap away their problems. They do it themselves and lose much in the process. Potter even accepts to make a self sacrifice Rowling foreshadows the entire series. God has never asked us to pray to snap away problems - rather, God incentivises us to work hard, just as Harry and his friends did in JKR's fiction. I challenge anyone who thinks these books to be infantile or wish fulfilling to read beyond the opening premise.
@@_Wakaz_ thanks for your response. I have always taken the books to be kids versions of shopping novels. Everything literally falls into the hands of the main protagonist. It’s like charlie and the chocolate factory over and over and over. harry gets decreasingly likeable as the series progresses, the books get more and more bloated, the characters don’t grow or learn and the “sacrifice” of harry with his death and resurrection was, well, a story Ive heard before. As a child I found the Narnia books far more compelling and uplifting. I liked what you said about prayer, but i thought you missed my point which was that in the harry potter books the wishes keep getting fulfilled, which isn’t what happens with prayer, however much people would like. all the best.
I love Roger Scruton, but I think he seriously misses the mark of the heart of the Harry Potter series here. Underlying the spells and magic is the emphasis on friendship and heroic courage and self-sacrificing love. Self-sacrificing love is the core theme of the books. People sacrifice themselves throughout the series for their loved ones and Rowling doesn't enable magic as a panacea to bring them back. Also, there definitely are character arcs that blur a simple good/evil dichotomy so I somewhat question whether he even read the series. Maybe Scruton arrived at some of his points based on a personal knowledge of Rowling's politics which align more closely with his review, but regarding the actual series his remarks don't match up. "Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. Love as powerful as your mother's for you leaves it's own mark. To have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone, will give us some protection forever."
I largely sympathize with Scruton on this, and he gives an interesting take on the Harry Potter books. But I disagree with him about the characters being simply good or evil by nature in the book. Harry Potter himself has a part of Voldemort (symbolizing evil) inside of him. It almost comes out at numerous points in the book, including where he's about to use the torture curse on a black witch who killed his uncle, show a character who has internal moral conflicts and has a radical development from a young child unaware of anything "real" to a leader and a man deserving of his fame and wealth. The internal conflicts of characters engaging in good or evil are replete, from Malfoy to Dumbledore to Snape. Is it the best work of children's literature ever? No. There are other books which look at these themes in much more in depth ways. But Scruton himself points out a lot of the merits of the books (the imagination in particular), which I also agree with, and that is just one more I'd like to point out. The way it has gotten into adult life though is something I absolutely sympathize with.
Bob Bobson I think both Lord of the rings and the Potter series are just fabulous! I've read both on english and swedish more times than I can count, both for my kids and for my own pleasure, and I still get something out of it. We can't all share taste, but we don't have to trash other peoples taste because it differs from ours.
I don’t agree with every detail here, but overall, he sums up the issue with J.K. Rowling quite well. Pop culture has become very strange in recent years. I am completely astonished by the amount of adult Harry Potter fans that exist. It’s embarrassing to see.
Allison Anne There are adult HP fans, adults who fight over Star Wars and Star Treck and even adults who buy comic books and get obsessed with it. It’s insane when you think about it. Modern westerners are becoming increasingly childish and dumb. They are unworthy of their ancestors and their achievements.
AdamArsenal888 I agree wholeheartedly. I knew a woman years ago who had a Harry Potter themed wedding. I’m not kidding. This whole thing is a disgrace. Literature, music, and film obviously doesn’t always have to be high brow art. There’s nothing wrong with fun and superficial entertainment. But the childishness and stupidity we’re seeing in pop culture should not be as prevalent as it currently is. It’s just embarrassing.
I’d disagree that the character’s morality and inclination for good or evil are fixed and unchanging. There are quite a few instances where characters who have been “evil” have changed and used their powers for “good”. Snape being the prime example. There are also a number of ambiguous characters that walk the line between good and evil.
Its interesting if you think through the logic of the Potter universe. Rowlings central message is a rather shallow comment on the evils of racism. With Voldermort (i.e. Hitler) and the Death Eaters (Nazis) supporting "pure bloods" and wanting to make sure that magic people have kids together. While she points out that non-magic "squibs" are occasionally born to magic families and magic kids are occasionally born to non-magic "muggles" it is quite clear that there is an association between being magic and having magic kids. The exceptions actually prove the rule. In other words even though her message is against eugenics & concepts of racial purity it is quite clear that, in fact, Voldermort is probably on to something when he encourages magics to reproduce with each other in order to maintain and expand "the race".
I could never get through the second book of the Harry Potter series. People tell me still, after all these years, that I've really missed out. But there was something about them that seemed to push away rather than pull me in. Anyone else feel this way?
At about 5.50 he starts spouting absolute gibberish and I realized almost immediately after that, that I'm no part of his, "our," nor would I ever wish to be. Scruton still remains even now, a strange and often compelling admixture of extraordinary talent, insight and crack-pottery. He's far from being wrong about everything he criticizes however.
I’m amazed at his seemingly overt omission of JRR Tolkien in his literary references. Tolkien famously said “the spark of the divine is contained in all mythology.” He helped to convince CS Lewis to indulge in the fantasy genre to great effect (another omission). Where as I find most of Sir Roger Scruton’s commentary interesting, it is still somewhat shallow in its interpretation of the subject. He lyrically skates on the surface of a subject that deserves more piercing insight into its depths.
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is the most enchanting children's story ever written. It is also underscored by a writer, C.S.Lewis, whose wisdom and Christian decency totally overshadows a writer like Rowling. A woman who is not only devoid of such qualities, but is their antithesis. Isaiah 3:12 (ESV) "My people, children are your oppressors and women rule over them. O my people, your guides mislead you, and they have swallowed up the course of thy paths".
Well, the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe is a good story, but it is also Christian propaganda, and I personally feel like Christianity in its core is very childish. Because it teaches you to follow rules, to obey a fatherly authority figure without question, to be nice - but the idea of praying is basically just asking your parents to fix a mess you feel overwhelmed by...
@@kathrinlindern2697 Have you approached Christianity with humility and sincerity? There is a wealth of mature, intelligent, and well-reasoned defense and explanation of Christianity, if you really want to understand it.
@@d.ryanwebb1166 I was raised in a Christian household, and I don't hate the idea of Christianity - but I don't believe it is true. The world is an unfair place to live, where you are born and what your genetic disposition is, determines the chances you will have in life. The idea that you need to believe in God to be saved is cynical, especially when people never specify what exactly that means and how it relates to babies or children that die or people who never came into contact with Christianity. It's a religion full of contradictions, as people continue to come up with their own interpretations. What are your reasons for being a Christian?
@@kathrinlindern2697 I have many reasons for accepting Christianity as the truth, and they none of them came without years of agonizing doubting and questioning! But I'm grateful now for the struggle, because as you say, so many external factors influence our beliefs; I don't like the idea of subscribing to any doctrine just because I was raised in it. Unfortunately, I'm unable to give you the response you deserve in a forum like this - it would take ages to peck out on my phone! But I might answer you more later on after I've considered your points and my counterpoints. Is that all right? :)
Has the Bollinger Bolshevik JK Rowling welcomed any refugees into her multi-million pound mansion yet or are we still waiting for her to practise what she preaches?
@@flugsven Your comment is a fallacy of logic, commonly called a "strawman argument." The key to understanding Keith's opinion is in the last clause of his sentence. It will answer your question to him.
William David Hilton He can't have read her books. According to what he says, anyways, because he contradict the nr one rule in them. The magic don't solve anything per se, in fact it may cause new difficulties to overcome. But my comment was about every alt right demanding Rowling to shut up about welcoming refugees as long as she don't keep them in her home.
Dumbledore, the word,was taken from Tolkien's poems, the whole story is a reinvention and development of Ursula K. Le Guin's series started with "A Wizard of Earthsea" without the racial theme (the protagonist in Le Guin's work is a "coloured" boy, a student who lives with his aunt, finds out about his powers, goes to wizardry school, has a good relationship with the headmaster and his best friend, releases a shadow which leaves him with a scar on his face and runs from, chases and faces the shadow to find out that the shadow and he are deeply connected and in fact are one. Dragon fights etc. are all present in the plot as well), it would be interesting to compare the two series: Earthsea and Harry Potter
@monsieur burger king she said in the past she is a fan of Tolkien and Ursula K. Le Guin, so I think she took inspiration and borrowed from them, yes you are right, dumbledore indicates a bumblebee or something buzzing like a bumblebee, as it can be read in Tolkien's poems. That said, I do like the Harry Potter books, they are no Tolkien, but I was learning English at the time they came out and I mainly learned the language by reading the Harry Potter books, because they presented a lot of day-to-day vocabulary I was missing. So I'll always be grateful to Rowling for her work, I would not have had the career I had without learning to read, write and speak in English as an additional language. That said, I just think it's "unfair" that Ursula K. Leguin doesn't get as much credit for her work, the lady was a genius.
I could not say whether JK Rowling and Harry Potter are the cause or the outcome of the prevailing "soft socialist" mainstream approach to life. Masterful speech.
There is no "soft socialist" approach to life, quite the opposite. We live under a rampant individualism, pervasive across all of culture. You're deluding yourself into reactionary infantility if you think we live in a socialist world. I wish we did, believe me.
Harry Potter was famous (simply for existing, not for having done great deeds) and children everywhere praised him. There you go, described it in a sentence.
I never read the books because I couldn't stand the movie that I just went into for 5 minutes but I perceived it was very dark thank you for uploading this it was quite interesting to hear somebody's opinion on it I believe Mr sir scruton is a Christian
Rowling’s gift was to tap into the world of “soft socialism” so effectively. The black and white world of good/bad, rich/poor, oppressor/oppressed. It’s such an easy, convenient and tempting way of thinking but it’s false and dangerous. In the end it’s the surrender of individual will and an externalisation of responsibility. Scruton is always brilliant. Whenever I listen to him it’s like lights flick on and doors open within my mind.
There's an even more black and white approach to the world, however, and it's the very approach you and many other conservatives take. That approach is the black OR white approach to the world, and it involves denying everything that exists through the black AND white vacuum; someone like Rowling may see Rich VS Poor, Oppressor VS Oppressed, which is at least a more congruent view of history as one of a persistent conflict between constructivist socialities of people, but you all want to deny there even is such a confiict, and rather see everything - let's use the example of poverty, as this physicalist, perhaps inevitable and necessary wrongdoing, rather than seeking to fundamentally change or evolve from it.
I challenge you to list them. What was left unexplained at the end of the series? It looked to me like every sentence had a purpose, nothing was superfluous.
Ester Hudson He evinces the nonsensical magical mindset however religion is the same. Religion is magic as well. God is not real and no matter how much you pray, you wont make god any more real. It's just as deterministic as magic. You have to be the "chosen" one. Its rubbish. You have the power of volition and free will. God isn't real and you have control over your own life.
Interesting insights. The plots are very clever, the characterisation is a simplistic, pc good versus evil and the language (as I recall from Robert McCrum (?) in the Observer some years ago) lacks the richness of the great authors. I understand many adults read them, which concerns me even if it does not surprise. Scruton's reference to fantasy is perceptive: the world of today cannot be understood without realising this.
This is doubtful: scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10747/what-was-the-original-intended-audience-for-the-harry-potter-books Anyway, I don't consider the books suitable for adults although the simple language might make them attractive to those learning English. Did Scruton say that Huckleberry Finn was a children's book? I was a little surprised as I had never thought of it as such. In any case it is a world apart from Harry Potter.
Every analysis of Rowlings work, character, plots etc, are direct rip offs of other great writers - she's barely one degree away from plagiarism on every page.
+The West is the Best ... Eliot (stealing from Dryden): 'Immature poets imitate, mature poets steal'. From which we conclude Rowling is an immature writer (writing for immature people). I agree that Tolkien is much more rewarding. But even he has his faults.
+Armagideon you'd have to explain how the stories are so similar that you can blatantly call it a rip off. Many stories are about gifted children at a boarding school. No one person owns that genre. If you don't like the stories you can just say it. Rowling was far more successful than Pratchet. That's just how it turned out. In the free market, what is more popular is more successful.
The Harry Potter series reveals clues as to how to overcome severe childhood traumas through focused hard work on oneself and become an individual. Clearly Harry Potters adoptive parents have all the symptoms of narcissistically abusive parents who spoil one child and scapegoat another. Alice Miller practically wrote those scenes. But her stories go past that simplistic psychoanalytic paradigm. And towards the way we actually resolves those traumas and become adult and the challenges that we face as we do so. Which can only be described in magical terminology. Here observations are the observations of the Jungians (who BTW deplored political ideology including Marxism). The problem with this writer is he does not understand metaphor, nor the messages of myth, religion and fairytales and the function of the imagination.
This is a question from the USA with a basic understanding of UK culture: does the sensibility of growing up Scottish have any role in how she has shaped the world of Harry Potter and its magical approach?
He has some good observations about the people's current naive view of the world, but it's not a direct consequence of Harry Potter. Also, it doesn't sound like he has really read HP. It's not as nearly uncomplicated and dichotomous as he says.
"... the soft socialism that people like her can afford." Brilliant!
Exactly what i thought!
@@pinkle257 LOL????
@@pinkle257 Her franchise is but she isn't.
@@pinkle257 ????
@@pinkle257 Just because she went from rags to riches does not mean she supports capitalism in her ideology.
“Even if Corbyn has not quit yet hit Dumbledore status.”
Brilliant.
Rowling dislikes Corbyn, though.
I've noticed what he's talking about here with a lot of children's movies. In most children's movies today under-emphsize the importance of working hard and acquiring the necessary skills to achieve a goal. They instead seem to send the message that merely intending to be good will get you the results you desire.
I agree. I believe I had to deprogram myself from this influence growing up.
SkyDancer just read Shonen manga then.
@@mekudu-man3804 I think the point is it is the first place to start. The desire to do, it is it not!
Ladies and gentlemen - I present to you Rey from the new Star Wars movies. The literal best at everything. Even at things she has no concept of.
Mary Poppins from the book was supposed to teach kids about just that, but Disney decided to make it more "happy happy all the time and nothing bad ever happens"
He speaks so well it inspires me to become more elequent.
Prayer is a recognition of our weakness. Always thought this myself. A beautiful thing.
And of ego, that you would dare think the creator of the universe would act on your behalf. It's also sad to think that you must ask the creator of all things good to prevent terrible things from happening when he should be powerful and benevolent enough to never let them happen. Dear Lord! Please prevent this child from developing bone cancer! Thank you, you are all powerful and good! *God looks on from Heaven* "Hmm..yeah maybe I should prevent that...wait...why did I let that happen anyway?"
Wowo Mah You seem to have a push button view of prayer. God must do what I ask/tell him to do. If that were the case then you would be "god" and god would be your servant.
@@gerardk51 The thing is that it is questionable how a rational person can believe in an all-powerful, omniscient being that also loves every single human being while acknowledging the misery that is inevitably part of this world, especially things like disease in children, as these are not the result of harmful human actions (as far as we know) and the child does not deserve that suffering. Prayer is hoping for someone to fix your problems. Even if you pray in humility, that is what it is. Religion teaches you to see yourself as a child, the child of your holy father, and to do as he says and to ask him for help and maybe he will grant it to you (if you are really lucky?!) and to think that you will be saved by him from death, the scary unknown. Magic, as portrayed in Harry Potter, is a tool you have to learn to master, and the characters do not seek instant gratification, but rather go through great length to become grown-ups that can stand up for themselves and solve their own problems, but death is clearly portrayed as a problem magic cannot solve permanently (ironically the source of the main conflict) and while there are some psychopathic villains, the "good" people have to go through internal conflict and realise that there is evil inside them and that they make mistakes. It is not the best work of fiction out there, but it is not as childish as Scruton makes it seem and in my opinion more grown-up than Christian ideology.
@@kathrinlindern2697 No explanation is given for the source of the power/magic. The "philosophy" of the Potter books is groundless. Is it Nature? Well that would be nature mysticism. I can't remember whether Scruton said it in this vid or somewhere else but he says the rejection of alchemy opened the way for science. People began to seek to understand the workings of the universe rather than "waving a wand". God could still be understood as the creator.
As for the struggle between good and evil in the world and in oneself, that is very much a Christian notion and owes nothing to Potter/Rowling.
@@gerardk51 The way magic is portrayed in-universe, however, is as a part of science. It is something one can study, mastered through experiments. The source of the magic is not explained, but it is also irrelevant, as in that world, magic is just an accepted fact, sought to be understood, but there are no definite answers to its sources. We, in the real world, do not know where we come from, or why we have consciousness, but we do and we accept that. But the magic is not the ground for the philosophy, it's just a premise for the story. And I do acknowledge that the book deals with"Christian" themes, though I would say the good vs evil thing is culturally universal, as is a certain struggle with death, and the western world has been very greatly influenced by Christian myth over the last few centuries, so it is natural that these themes pop up. But I personally like the idea to see myth in a fictional, metaphorical way instead of believing in the god they describe.
"Life is pain highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something". (The princess bride)
The myth of Sisyphus, as described by Camus...but we must question this Babylonian story that life has to be Hardship, Wars and Injustice... I like the Mark Twain Mindset much better because it celebrates Nature, Goodness and Justice.
Selling something like salvation and healing from pain highness. Princess fucking Bride? What are you doing HERE?
@@@cecilyt006 I think there is an important philosophical/theological distinction to draw between being in pain and suffering.
Doesn’t he say anyone who says different is trying to sell you something
@@abigailslade3824 siddartha gautama said the same but was also selling something, which was buddhism, so maybe we shouldnt look to dread pirates for wisdom.
i say this without hyperbole - i think Roger Scruton may be one of the smartest people alive. start with his years of analytic philosophy, then his writings on music, sex and art. add that to his novels and his symphonic music. then add his work on politics. and then on Sundays he plays the organ in his local church!
I've just discovered a shred of this man's brilliance and I'm astonished. Cannot wait to discover more.
Look for Olavo de Carvalho, both are the last of a kind
He may be a great observer, he is not a great mind - he comes up with observations not solutions. And even his observations are simplistic and in isolation, but the delivery is dressed in pseudo intellectual snobbery.
preposterous. these are quick, little youtube clips - he's being asked about his observations. it's a 10 minute clip. he's been knighted. the Czechs have given him awards for establishing networks behind the iron curtain. taught graduate classes at Oxford. numerous books ABOUT his books on aesthetics.at least 50 books including novels. oh, and a few operas. the first modern treatise on APPLYING Conservative thought to government. you are so immersed in shallow thought that when you see the real thing it actually confuses you.
Well stated, Anthony. I can't think how anyone familiar with Sir Roger's body of work could disagree with you, unless he/she were infected with a political animus against him.
I knew something was wrong with Rowling's writing the second all the Slitherin kids were forced to sit in the dungeon because "they may influenced" or rather "they are tainted with evil". The slitherin kids did not choose to be in Slitherin. They were merely placed in it by a hat that read their thoughts.
Literally imprisoned for thought crime
@TheEmeraldBlonde agreed. In half a dozen books Rowling managed to show almost zero character development. Even Snape, the big hopes for some sort of big reveal as a kind of “deep cover” secret agent , fell a bit flat. In Rowling’s world, you are born good or born bad and that’s it. In fact as the books went on the goodies got better and the baddies got worse. By the end it was just boring.
Edit: no Lucius betraying V for his son, or Draco defying pressure and turning good, no good characters revealing hidden desires and acting badly on them. No cowardly gryffindors, no good slytherins, no suggestion that children might be capable of acting better, worse or even differently from their parents. Cardboard characters basically.
I agree it’s an unpleasant world view. I’m not surprised JKR hasn’t been called out on it by normal people because it’s just kids books, so who really cares? However it does show that she and the loonies she courts on social media are a good fit, with their straitened, unforgiving, judgmental, fixed view of society, where authority is concentrated in the hands of a moral elite, who are the sole arbiters of what is good and true.
It’s not a crime because their placement is not punishment.
@Thomas Gurule their placement is a punishment because it precludes change. When it comes to children that’s about as harsh as it gets
this is an interesting point. It’s very likely that they were imprisoned precisely because many of the deaths eaters in Voldemort’s army were their parents or relatives. It was done simply out of necessity. Sure it could’ve been played as a joke about them being ‘evil’ but behind it all was rooted in practicality.
That's not true. In the books, not all Slytherins were imprisoned - some fought for Hogwarts. Only Draco and his friends who had close contacts to Death Eaters (Draco even had the dark mark) were "imprisoned" in the Dungeons, which, you know, happened to be their own quarters in the school. And they were not really imprisoned, as they were only detained for the duration of a battle that lasted less than 48 hours. Which, by the way, also happened to every single student year 5 and under, to protect the young kids that would not be able to stand their ground in a fight, and who were not legally adults. They were also not heavily guarded or anything. It was more of an "okay we are under immediate attack and we can't afford traitors" thing and not imprisonment for thought crime.
A great man once walked and lived! Will miss him!
I will always cherish the Harry Potter books and films, but like always Scruton is absolutely right.
Dear Rodger it's a pleasure to listen to somebody who has a command of the English language.
Who is intellectually agile and articulate. I'm not big on Harry Potter. When it comes to waving a wand: Leonard Bernstein.
Thank you.
This was genuinely fascinating to listen to. I was never very good at this kind of artistic analysis, but I love listening to those who are
I always thought Harry Potter was like fast food--it tastes good, and it's easy to digest, but there's nothing there, no nutrition, no substance.
What a kind voice he speaks with. Religion encourages humility "I can of mine own self do nothing". But, if you consider, Sir Roger Scruton achieved wisdom, " as I hear I judge and my judgement is just because I seek not my own will, but the will of the father which hast sent me."
Perceptive and subtle analysis of a story which says a great deal about the current childishness of our Western culture.
Hear! Hear!
People have always been childish. There really is no difference betwix adult and child.
Ignoring of course the fact that the books get progressively more adult and more and more responsibility is forced on the younger characters as they age. No mention of that? I wonder why.
@@ginge641 Very interesting point.
Our culture is screwed up because we have been lulled into thinking that the world belongs in the hands of a tiny elite of men who want to sell us JUNK and keep us in debt.
Wonderful as always. An exquisite class on childrens literature.
Judging by the Harry Potter generation's conduct so far, she should have put her pen away.
When I saw the Lord of the Rings movies, I appreciated the themes of self sacrifice and resisting seduction, like Gandalf not lifting the ring from the floor in the first movie because he realised it would seduce him. When I saw the first Potter movie, the way Harry felt justified in laughing at the humiliation of the annoying kid rubbed me the wrong way, seeming to send the wrong message to kids. That exemplifies the difference between Rowling and Tolkien for me.
Harry is a very flawed and damn annoying character. That's the point - we watch him grow up. It's a slow and tedious process as he's a fairly ordinary annoying teenager. Gandalf is the equivalent of an old man with enormous experience. Harry has the role of flawed hero who learns a lot and grows to understand himself and the world's complexities and grey areas. He might eventually be a Gandalf, when he has some more grey hairs. Dumbledore plays the Gandalf character - string of mind and ethics, but not without his flaws too. Try reading the 7 books and you'll see some character development.
Harry Potter likers are spiteful too.
Besides, they were both written in very different historic times
You should read Tolkien’s books..
You’re complaining about a character -a child no less - being flawed. Neither the book Nor the film depict his actions as heroic or morally justified. What is your point exactly?
This has aged exceptionally well. Thank you Sir Roger, I credit you from my awakening from exactly the child like fantasy you describe here. When I was a bleeding heart liberal, I met someone who told me about you and I subsequently found what you believe about culture and, well, belief, was entirely consistent with my Darwinian, evolutionary understanding of the world. I have since re-assumed the faith of my ancestors and try to live by your words every day. You seamlessly connected the practical anglo-conservative mindset with scientific truth, and called us all to aspire to something greater than the mere scientific truth of what we are. If you wish to change the opinion of a scientifically minded liberal ideologue, you could do no better than Sir Roger Scruton's books, interviews and dialogues. The way you embraced JK Rowling while gently criticizing her work at the same time is an absolute master class in rhetoric. This was simply brilliant. I hope to one day be able to combine anthropology, ethics, literary critique and love in the same monologue with the same skill and understanding displayed here.
Sir Roger, you are one of the finest men of the 20th century and your impact on the world will be sorely missed. Thank you. May you rest in peace.
one only has to look at the depression to see parallels. when people feel the weakest and the most powerless they find inspiration in Superman, Marvel, Superheros who save the day.....the adult mind sees only obstacles. the child mind finds comfort in the magical. Potter would have been big anytime, but it touches a nerve today because of the level of powerlessness people feel in their lives. Consciously or not. why are there so many Marvel Movies out there that are blockbusters? Why so many Spiderman/Hulk reboots that take off???? there's a hunger that is not being satisfied through living. .. so it must be replaced by entertainment
Constance St Michael no that's bunk. It's not because of Christian eradication.
onajourneytosomewhere k I agree with you
Constance St Michael Look at it this way: CHRISTIANS then & now were and are WAY too accepting of Foreign Entities. Why do you think it took FOUR HUNDRED YEARS before Christians realized they needed to undertake the first Crusade to drive Muslims out of Europe? Why do most Christians accept GODLESS COMMUNISTS slaughtering their kin & supporting the destruction of THE ONE REGIME that could have rid Europe & The World of Global Communism?
Just came here to see what this is about. Nice to know that conservatives and nazis are intertwined. Thank you.
He's so respectful towards jk rowling, praises her strength and intelligently deconstructs the flaws in her work. Extremely smart and balanced analysis. Roger Scruton was a treasure
Brilliant! Some of my old admiration for you crazy Brits got back by your words, and I thank you for it.
This is a really good take in that it balances an actual appreciation for Rowling's work with a critique of how her simplified morality has hampered the book recently.
My children prefer Tolkien to JK Rowling
Then you must have done something right...
@@Den.Vos.Reynaerde Children just copy their parents, I do not find Tolkien and Rowling that different. Both are otherwordly, creepy authors, only one of them was overeducated. Kirk Douglas has passed recently. He played Ulysses, he played Spartacus. Who does that today? Our history is full of strong stories, yet here we are only quarreling whether a monkey or a fox is better suited to rule the animals.
@@truemamrdi4all Your insight in storytelling is as barren and fruitless as the last part of your moniker would suggest.
@@Den.Vos.Reynaerde Well, if this shit is only for the insightgifted, I give in. I like the popular stuff, unfortunately. And will not be here in 50 yrs time, when the presented kind of storytelling will be justly forgotten, just to tell you: Though not very educated or articulate, I was still onto something.
@@truemamrdi4all How can an author be "overeducated" that doesn't even make semse.
And what about Tolkien is "creepy"?
He was a nice old man with a passion for history and linguistics.
the whole development of the harry potter story is one towards complexity. Harry meets this world which takes him away from all his troubles at his terrible home, but with this wonderful discovery come the bits of imperfection, trouble and danger that it has, and each time he returns to that place it goes deeper and more dangerous. Magic is never enough to solve harry or the magic world problems and spells are never the final answer to this. There is scene in the sixth book, in which the prime minister of britain is informed about the return of no other than lord Voldemort, and after some chat about it and the realization that there is nothing he can do, he asks something along the lines of: "but you are magicians, why don't you use your magic to solve this?". There are some plot elements that go more in the description that mister Scruton explains here, but this do not dismiss the other examples of complexity in Rowling's work.
I also think Scruton has some very good points, but I do see some of the complexity you mention. For instance, when Harry, Hermione, and Ron are on the run, the one of the things they cannot do is produce food by magic. They have to forage. Also, at the end, Harry renounces the elder wand, which would give him power over all of the other wands. I think Scruton also misses the thirst for power in science, which seeks the same goal, that is, dominance over nature. That goal was expressly stated by some of the early scientists like Descartes and Bacon.
Brilliant as ever. Wonderful how he is able to squeeze so much insight and wisdom into ten minutes.
My six year old girl preferred C.S.lewis’s Narnia than Potter
Rowling's Harry Potter series of books are low-brow recycled junk. I wouldn't encourage a child of any age to read them.
demigodzilla why do you feel the need to be so unpleasant to people?
demigodzilla I’m not defending anyone. I asked why you were being so unpleasant to strangers on the internet. Civility costs nothing.
Tom Sullivan How come so many empty accounts feel the urge to attack an author of childrens books?? 🤷🏻♀️
@demigodzilla no need for the nastiness
When once in a lifetime people like Roger Scruton come along, we really should take it in. Not to, would be to miss out.
A government that has the power to give you everything you want has the power to take away everything you have.
as always excellent ..... thank you sir.....
I have to say I can't quite agree - I think that there's some serious arguments to be made that Harry Potter engages with Christian ideas. Scruton says it avoids talking about religion and yet the central themes of Harry Potter are the power of sacrificial love, the importance of compassion, and the need to put away childish things and face responsibilities - arguably very Christian ideas. He talks about how magic represents man taking the position of God - yet death, and it's inevitability, are central to Harry's journey. It's clear throughout the series that spells AREN'T the solution to all problems as he suggests. Regardless of what Rowling is like on twitter or whatever (I don't use it) I can't agree with this analysis - a poor attempt to blame these novels for ills in the political culture.
It's not that he blames these novels for ills in the political culture.
It's that Rowling attempts to use them as aids, when they are not at all suited to the task and reduce the world to a stupid oversimplification. Take a look at her Twitter, it's central to what he's saying.
@@TohnoEn Rowlings Twitter may be stupid, but the story itself is good. Death of the author! Scruton clearly talks about the themes of a series of novels here, not about Rowlings twitter. And in that novel, magic is not the solution to existential problems. Magic can't overrule death. Magic can't force love. People trying these things are the reason for the evil in Harry's world, because magic - power - corrupts people. And in the end, Harry doesn't win by using better magic, he wins because he is willing to face death. He is saved not by himself, but by the mercy of death or a god or simply luck. But he doesn't win through a calculated spell.
And for a series of children's books, Harry Potter is relatively complex. Of course, it does not accurately portray every single detail about the life and the universe - that is impossible - but it does not oversimplify good and evil to the degree Scruton describes. And certainly not more so than the vast majority of children's literature I have read. Like, less good vs evil would probably result in a completely postmodernist world view where absolutely everything is relative and objective morality does not exist, and that would make for a really terrible bedtime story.
@@kathrinlindern2697 I'm in the middle between your and Scruton's points of view. And I agree with TohnoEn that Rowling's books aren't to blame for the failings of our modern culture, but a symptom.
On the one hand, easy answers (as in magic) do not solve all of Harry's problems. Usually, the spells just add flavor, such as levitating a feather, or move the plot (find the mcguffin, er, horcrux). Instead, the point of each book is that love, friendship, or hope is what saved the protagonists in the end.
The problem is, those ARE handled like magic spells. In these books, as well as every other piece of Liberal content cloned these days. The answer to all our problems are just darn ol' love and friend power; and gee whiz, if we only use the power of friendship to unite, then when all our powers combine EVIL is defeated! If Voldemort was armed with a shotgun instead of a wand, and wasn't so one-dimensional, then Harry and the gang would have lost a hundred times over. (Ugh, I feel dirty just writing that, since I do love the franchise anyway).
How did Harry survive getting shot in the face at birth? Love. How did Harry survive getting shot in the face in the graveyard? Love. How did Harry survive getting shot in the face at the battle of Hogwarts? Lo-- well, no he died. ...But then he got resurrected because of: Love!
Mommy's love and gee whiz, having friends were the reasoning behind much of his success. Which, in order to make that work, also meant that Voldemort had to be without love and friendship. Which just made him a cartoon. I grew less fond of Harry Potter the more it became evident that the answer to the mystery of Voldemort was just yet another cardboard cutout of the moustache-twirling racist. Yet in real life, everyone has friends, including the "bad guys." And while some of them might not know love, it is often a poor assumption to make by (typically Liberal) content creators that their *political* adversary opposes them simply because they don't know what love or good is. This is the paradigm in the Harry Potter books, and it is the philosophy of Rowling and the rest of the sort who thrive on twitter.
The most interesting part in HP is when the gang has to resist the institutional oppression of Umbridge, the Ministry, and the gossip-turned-propaganda lies of Rita Skeeter. Here the villains were more realistic, and had to be outwitted and outlasted. Unlike Voldemort, who was defeated because unkillable Harry shot him with a better shotgun.
This is what Scruton touches upon, I think, when he means the socialism of Harry Potter.
I would personally have liked to see hard work, skill progression, and cleverness avail Harry more often than relying upon Hermione's encyclopedic knowledge or the ghostly vestiges of his mother.
All that being said, I remember the movies better than the books. Also, I still love the franchise even if everyone in my political sphere hates it. I can critique it because I love it so much regardless.
...Fantastic Beasts is trash. OG HP 4eva.
All the imagery of sacrificial love and compassion are staged and written in so superficial and cheap way that I dare to say with Christianity they have nothing in common. And death is a central theme? Really? Oh, isn't it in Lord of the Rings? In Great Gatsby? In Ana Karenina? In Crime and Punishment? In Little Prince? In In Search of Lost Time?
Death itself has no meaning. We give it to it. And vulgar imagery can not substitute a lack of it.
I must disagree, I wouldn't say they were cheap just because it's children literature, and yes death is central to works like Lord of the rings and Anna Karenina, both of the authors of those texts were Christian and engaged with those ideas so it makes sense.
Roger Scruton is a true class act.
This is some of the wisest words I've heard in the past few months
Love this
Wonderfully insightful. The kind of popular literary criticism that is so lacking.
I wonder what Scruton would have made of Rawling's rejection of the magical thinking that is transideology.
Sir Roger Scruton excellent discussion, more please.
RIP Roger 😥
Only just discovered him . Very impressed.
*Easily impressed.
@@SuperTonyony jaundiced and empty slur. who else is even comparable to Scruton, nevermind easily available? so easy that you could name alternatives?
Roger is right on the mark regarding the infantile adults
This was a great reflection about Harry Potter. I've seen Jordan Peterson talking about the characters and what they kinda symbolize, but Sir Roger took me on a flight with this particular analysis. Indeed it is quite astonishing how the HP story mirrors crucial aspects of human behavior and social tendencies.
Really brilliant analysis of Rowling's oeuvre.
Awesome!!
This gem of an excerpt from the late and great Sir Roger Scruton is absolutely bang on. JKR’s fiction is wish fulfilment for the infantile.
It's just a fantasy series people enjoy escaping into. Why do you pretentiously overcomplicate the reasons for why people enjoy JKR's fiction?
Hardly bang on - he loses me when admiring how prayer, one of the most selfish and egotistical things man does, is somehow admission of weakness. As if casually commanding the universe to listen to your list of requests, and thinking the universe is even listening in the first place is in anyway a perception of disenfranchisement. Tell me more about infantile wish fulfillment.
Meanwhile, Potter and his gang, with literally all the magic in their fictional world, face suffering sacrifice and death for 7 books without one asking a God to snap away their problems. They do it themselves and lose much in the process. Potter even accepts to make a self sacrifice Rowling foreshadows the entire series.
God has never asked us to pray to snap away problems - rather, God incentivises us to work hard, just as Harry and his friends did in JKR's fiction.
I challenge anyone who thinks these books to be infantile or wish fulfilling to read beyond the opening premise.
@@_Wakaz_ thanks for your response. I have always taken the books to be kids versions of shopping novels. Everything literally falls into the hands of the main protagonist. It’s like charlie and the chocolate factory over and over and over. harry gets decreasingly likeable as the series progresses, the books get more and more bloated, the characters don’t grow or learn and the “sacrifice” of harry with his death and resurrection was, well, a story Ive heard before.
As a child I found the Narnia books far more compelling and uplifting. I liked what you said about prayer, but i thought you missed my point which was that in the harry potter books the wishes keep getting fulfilled, which isn’t what happens with prayer, however much people would like. all the best.
Wonderful
Love this video.
I love Roger Scruton, but I think he seriously misses the mark of the heart of the Harry Potter series here. Underlying the spells and magic is the emphasis on friendship and heroic courage and self-sacrificing love.
Self-sacrificing love is the core theme of the books. People sacrifice themselves throughout the series for their loved ones and Rowling doesn't enable magic as a panacea to bring them back. Also, there definitely are character arcs that blur a simple good/evil dichotomy so I somewhat question whether he even read the series.
Maybe Scruton arrived at some of his points based on a personal knowledge of Rowling's politics which align more closely with his review, but regarding the actual series his remarks don't match up.
"Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. Love as powerful as your mother's for you leaves it's own mark. To have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone, will give us some protection forever."
To be fair to JK Rowling, her recent tweet on gender identity demonstrates there is a limit to her Potterist magic thinking.
Thank you, Sir Roger.
I largely sympathize with Scruton on this, and he gives an interesting take on the Harry Potter books. But I disagree with him about the characters being simply good or evil by nature in the book. Harry Potter himself has a part of Voldemort (symbolizing evil) inside of him. It almost comes out at numerous points in the book, including where he's about to use the torture curse on a black witch who killed his uncle, show a character who has internal moral conflicts and has a radical development from a young child unaware of anything "real" to a leader and a man deserving of his fame and wealth. The internal conflicts of characters engaging in good or evil are replete, from Malfoy to Dumbledore to Snape.
Is it the best work of children's literature ever? No. There are other books which look at these themes in much more in depth ways. But Scruton himself points out a lot of the merits of the books (the imagination in particular), which I also agree with, and that is just one more I'd like to point out.
The way it has gotten into adult life though is something I absolutely sympathize with.
He's just someone else being a snob because the first few books were for children.
My thoughts exactly, thank you. Not to challenge you but out of curiosity, which children's books would you say are among the "best"?
God, imagine admitting to actually having read any of this trash...
@@celteuskara I think I've found one.
Bob Bobson I think both Lord of the rings and the Potter series are just fabulous! I've read both on english and swedish more times than I can count, both for my kids and for my own pleasure, and I still get something out of it. We can't all share taste, but we don't have to trash other peoples taste because it differs from ours.
It’s easy to see why Douglas Murray had such respect for Sir Roger
I don’t agree with every detail here, but overall, he sums up the issue with J.K. Rowling quite well. Pop culture has become very strange in recent years. I am completely astonished by the amount of adult Harry Potter fans that exist. It’s embarrassing to see.
Allison Anne There are adult HP fans, adults who fight over Star Wars and Star Treck and even adults who buy comic books and get obsessed with it. It’s insane when you think about it. Modern westerners are becoming increasingly childish and dumb. They are unworthy of their ancestors and their achievements.
AdamArsenal888 I agree wholeheartedly. I knew a woman years ago who had a Harry Potter themed wedding. I’m not kidding. This whole thing is a disgrace. Literature, music, and film obviously doesn’t always have to be high brow art. There’s nothing wrong with fun and superficial entertainment. But the childishness and stupidity we’re seeing in pop culture should not be as prevalent as it currently is. It’s just embarrassing.
Damn good video! Thank you!
I love this lecture.
This video reminded me of the Never Ending Story, and how if the main character just kept wishing all his problems away he loose his sense of self.
I’d disagree that the character’s morality and inclination for good or evil are fixed and unchanging. There are quite a few instances where characters who have been “evil” have changed and used their powers for “good”. Snape being the prime example. There are also a number of ambiguous characters that walk the line between good and evil.
A very good analysis. I've always wondered whether I should read the books.
Its interesting if you think through the logic of the Potter universe. Rowlings central message is a rather shallow comment on the evils of racism. With Voldermort (i.e. Hitler) and the Death Eaters (Nazis) supporting "pure bloods" and wanting to make sure that magic people have kids together. While she points out that non-magic "squibs" are occasionally born to magic families and magic kids are occasionally born to non-magic "muggles" it is quite clear that there is an association between being magic and having magic kids. The exceptions actually prove the rule. In other words even though her message is against eugenics & concepts of racial purity it is quite clear that, in fact, Voldermort is probably on to something when he encourages magics to reproduce with each other in order to maintain and expand "the race".
where does this text and audio come from? I mean, what book/audiobook?
I could never get through the second book of the Harry Potter series. People tell me still, after all these years, that I've really missed out. But there was something about them that seemed to push away rather than pull me in. Anyone else feel this way?
At about 5.50 he starts spouting absolute gibberish and I realized almost immediately after that, that I'm no part of his, "our," nor would I ever wish to be.
Scruton still remains even now, a strange and often compelling admixture of extraordinary talent, insight and crack-pottery.
He's far from being wrong about everything he criticizes however.
Clever man
I’m amazed at his seemingly overt omission of JRR Tolkien in his literary references. Tolkien famously said “the spark of the divine is contained in all mythology.” He helped to convince CS Lewis to indulge in the fantasy genre to great effect (another omission). Where as I find most of Sir Roger Scruton’s commentary interesting, it is still somewhat shallow in its interpretation of the subject. He lyrically skates on the surface of a subject that deserves more piercing insight into its depths.
I believe he thought Tolkien was second rate.
A sentiment I certainly do not share
Remarkable analysis and words.
Brilliant analysis
What elegance of expression
Mr Scruton, another powerful and totally correct analysis.
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is the most enchanting children's story ever written. It is also underscored by a writer, C.S.Lewis, whose wisdom and Christian decency totally overshadows a writer like Rowling. A woman who is not only devoid of such qualities, but is their antithesis.
Isaiah 3:12 (ESV) "My people, children are your oppressors and women rule over them. O my people, your guides mislead you, and they have swallowed up the course of thy paths".
Well, the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe is a good story, but it is also Christian propaganda, and I personally feel like Christianity in its core is very childish. Because it teaches you to follow rules, to obey a fatherly authority figure without question, to be nice - but the idea of praying is basically just asking your parents to fix a mess you feel overwhelmed by...
@@kathrinlindern2697 Have you approached Christianity with humility and sincerity? There is a wealth of mature, intelligent, and well-reasoned defense and explanation of Christianity, if you really want to understand it.
@@d.ryanwebb1166 I was raised in a Christian household, and I don't hate the idea of Christianity - but I don't believe it is true. The world is an unfair place to live, where you are born and what your genetic disposition is, determines the chances you will have in life. The idea that you need to believe in God to be saved is cynical, especially when people never specify what exactly that means and how it relates to babies or children that die or people who never came into contact with Christianity. It's a religion full of contradictions, as people continue to come up with their own interpretations. What are your reasons for being a Christian?
@@kathrinlindern2697 I have many reasons for accepting Christianity as the truth, and they none of them came without years of agonizing doubting and questioning! But I'm grateful now for the struggle, because as you say, so many external factors influence our beliefs; I don't like the idea of subscribing to any doctrine just because I was raised in it. Unfortunately, I'm unable to give you the response you deserve in a forum like this - it would take ages to peck out on my phone! But I might answer you more later on after I've considered your points and my counterpoints. Is that all right? :)
@@d.ryanwebb1166 I am looking forward to it
This makes me glad that I outgrew Potter when I was 13.
What a brilliant mind!
Pure genius.
Very eloquent and insightful. Is this an excerpt from a book?
Brilliant
Has the Bollinger Bolshevik JK Rowling welcomed any refugees into her multi-million pound mansion yet or are we still waiting for her to practise what she preaches?
That's a fair point, but in my experience, people who say things like that don't give a damn about any kind of people in need under any circumstances.
Everybody loves a good story. Not everybody gives two shits about good writing.
Keith Kent Will you stop seeing the dentist then, until you have a dental clinic for the whole neighbourhood in your living room? 🙄
@@flugsven Your comment is a fallacy of logic, commonly called a "strawman argument." The key to understanding Keith's opinion is in the last clause of his sentence. It will answer your question to him.
William David Hilton He can't have read her books. According to what he says, anyways, because he contradict the nr one rule in them. The magic don't solve anything per se, in fact it may cause new difficulties to overcome. But my comment was about every alt right demanding Rowling to shut up about welcoming refugees as long as she don't keep them in her home.
Dumbledore, the word,was taken from Tolkien's poems, the whole story is a reinvention and development of Ursula K. Le Guin's series started with "A Wizard of Earthsea" without the racial theme (the protagonist in Le Guin's work is a "coloured" boy, a student who lives with his aunt, finds out about his powers, goes to wizardry school, has a good relationship with the headmaster and his best friend, releases a shadow which leaves him with a scar on his face and runs from, chases and faces the shadow to find out that the shadow and he are deeply connected and in fact are one. Dragon fights etc. are all present in the plot as well), it would be interesting to compare the two series: Earthsea and Harry Potter
@monsieur burger king she said in the past she is a fan of Tolkien and Ursula K. Le Guin, so I think she took inspiration and borrowed from them, yes you are right, dumbledore indicates a bumblebee or something buzzing like a bumblebee, as it can be read in Tolkien's poems. That said, I do like the Harry Potter books, they are no Tolkien, but I was learning English at the time they came out and I mainly learned the language by reading the Harry Potter books, because they presented a lot of day-to-day vocabulary I was missing. So I'll always be grateful to Rowling for her work, I would not have had the career I had without learning to read, write and speak in English as an additional language. That said, I just think it's "unfair" that Ursula K. Leguin doesn't get as much credit for her work, the lady was a genius.
I agree with all the posts. HP is just another generic boy wizard, spells and spooks kids book.
I could not say whether JK Rowling and Harry Potter are the cause or the outcome of the prevailing "soft socialist" mainstream approach to life.
Masterful speech.
There is no "soft socialist" approach to life, quite the opposite. We live under a rampant individualism, pervasive across all of culture. You're deluding yourself into reactionary infantility if you think we live in a socialist world. I wish we did, believe me.
IT'S ALL ABOUT POWER
Harry Potter was famous (simply for existing, not for having done great deeds) and children everywhere praised him. There you go, described it in a sentence.
You seemed to have only read the first few pages of the first book.
@@_Wakaz_ Then why am I describing events from the middle of the book, old chap?
I never read the books because I couldn't stand the movie that I just went into for 5 minutes but I perceived it was very dark thank you for uploading this it was quite interesting to hear somebody's opinion on it I believe Mr sir scruton is a Christian
I had heard JKR is a Christian
Rowling’s gift was to tap into the world of “soft socialism” so effectively. The black and white world of good/bad, rich/poor, oppressor/oppressed. It’s such an easy, convenient and tempting way of thinking but it’s false and dangerous. In the end it’s the surrender of individual will and an externalisation of responsibility. Scruton is always brilliant. Whenever I listen to him it’s like lights flick on and doors open within my mind.
There's an even more black and white approach to the world, however, and it's the very approach you and many other conservatives take. That approach is the black OR white approach to the world, and it involves denying everything that exists through the black AND white vacuum; someone like Rowling may see Rich VS Poor, Oppressor VS Oppressed, which is at least a more congruent view of history as one of a persistent conflict between constructivist socialities of people, but you all want to deny there even is such a confiict, and rather see everything - let's use the example of poverty, as this physicalist, perhaps inevitable and necessary wrongdoing, rather than seeking to fundamentally change or evolve from it.
I can't help but disagree with the "few, if any, loose ends" statement.
There are so many plot holes in the Potter verse that sieves are jealous.
I challenge you to list them. What was left unexplained at the end of the series? It looked to me like every sentence had a purpose, nothing was superfluous.
Can anyone link what full talk or book this is from?
The word ‘occult’ says all you need to know...
I don't know if church condemned alchemy (to promote science) , but it did burn a lot of scientists on a stake.
There is something wrong there, I am the true Harry Potter
Hi, what is this from? Is this an audiobook he narrated and if so, which one?
Wow. Brilliant takedown.
Sheesh....what astonishing insight.
indeed, suh, indeed. quite stonishin indeed
Ester Hudson He evinces the nonsensical magical mindset however religion is the same. Religion is magic as well. God is not real and no matter how much you pray, you wont make god any more real. It's just as deterministic as magic. You have to be the "chosen" one. Its rubbish. You have the power of volition and free will. God isn't real and you have control over your own life.
Interesting insights. The plots are very clever, the characterisation is a simplistic, pc good versus evil and the language (as I recall from Robert McCrum (?) in the Observer some years ago) lacks the richness of the great authors. I understand many adults read them, which concerns me even if it does not surprise. Scruton's reference to fantasy is perceptive: the world of today cannot be understood without realising this.
It's meant for young adults.
This is doubtful:
scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10747/what-was-the-original-intended-audience-for-the-harry-potter-books
Anyway, I don't consider the books suitable for adults although the simple language might make them attractive to those learning English.
Did Scruton say that Huckleberry Finn was a children's book? I was a little surprised as I had never thought of it as such. In any case it is a world apart from Harry Potter.
A clear ripoff of the epic of Gilgamesh.
her books 3 syllable words are 2 more than sports fans.
That was 10 minutes of listening well spent!
Alas , success does not equal craft
Every analysis of Rowlings work, character, plots etc, are direct rip offs of other great writers - she's barely one degree away from plagiarism on every page.
Which books?
Yes. I've read one book by her and thought it rather derivative. I liked the way she handled time though.
+The West is the Best ... Eliot (stealing from Dryden): 'Immature poets imitate, mature poets steal'. From which we conclude Rowling is an immature writer (writing for immature people). I agree that Tolkien is much more rewarding. But even he has his faults.
+Armagideon you'd have to explain how the stories are so similar that you can blatantly call it a rip off. Many stories are about gifted children at a boarding school. No one person owns that genre. If you don't like the stories you can just say it. Rowling was far more successful than Pratchet. That's just how it turned out. In the free market, what is more popular is more successful.
+John Martin so everyone who writes for young adults is immature?
Wow
The Harry Potter series reveals clues as to how to overcome severe childhood traumas through focused hard work on oneself and become an individual.
Clearly Harry Potters adoptive parents have all the symptoms of narcissistically abusive parents who spoil one child and scapegoat another. Alice Miller practically wrote those scenes.
But her stories go past that simplistic psychoanalytic paradigm. And towards the way we actually resolves those traumas and become adult and the challenges that we face as we do so. Which can only be described in magical terminology.
Here observations are the observations of the Jungians (who BTW deplored political ideology including Marxism).
The problem with this writer is he does not understand metaphor, nor the messages of myth, religion and fairytales and the function of the imagination.
What do you mean by "Alice Miller practically wrote those scenes"? Can you elaborate.
“If you suffer from a Potter overdose...”! Great!
What is this taken from?
Where is this taken from?
This is a question from the USA with a basic understanding of UK culture: does the sensibility of growing up Scottish have any role in how she has shaped the world of Harry Potter and its magical approach?
As an English reader I did not detect any Scottish influence. But I'm no expert.
He has some good observations about the people's current naive view of the world, but it's not a direct consequence of Harry Potter. Also, it doesn't sound like he has really read HP. It's not as nearly uncomplicated and dichotomous as he says.
That was excellent.
by 3:10, I started substituting 'children literature' with 'religious literature' in scruton's words... try it
Let us not forget that placebos sometimes work. We are not powerless and God has a wonderful way of helping those who help themselves.