Speaking of Vampires . . .

Today is the last day to catch Denton Community Theatre's production of Dracula. When I called the box office yesterday, there were still tickets available for today's 2 p.m. matinee. For more information, call 940-382-1915 or go to the Campus Theater's website.

Director Julie Brinker is very proud of the "dream cast" she's assembled, and she's very excited about this stage adaptation because it's true to the Christian themes and the complex characters of the original novel. Hope to see you there!

Romancing the Vampire

Last Saturday (Oct. 27, 2007), I gave a talk called "Romancing the Vampire" on Stephenie Meyer's Twilight series. I repeat it here for those of you who weren't able to attend.


WHAT MAKES TWILIGHT DIFFERENT?

Twilight is the story of Bella Swan—self-proclaimed “plain Jane,” klutz, and danger magnet—and Edward Cullen, a breathtakingly beautiful teenage vampire. The series, begun in 2005, has received numerous awards and popular acclaim. The third book, Eclipse (released August 2007), was highlighted on Barnes & Noble’s e-newsletter to members and featured on the power aisle at the front of the store. The only other YA fantasy series that has received that kind of promotion is Harry Potter.

What has made this series such a phenomenon, crossing the boundary between YA and adult romance with ease? Meyer’s imaginative reworking of the vampire legend, the breathless emotion of first love, and grounding in some of the most popular love stories in literature:

• Romeo and Juliet (Shakespeare’s star-crossed lovers)


• Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice (their initial dislike masks a powerful attraction)


• Jane Eyre and Mr. Rochester in Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre


• Heathcliff and Cathy in Emily Bronte’s Wuthering Heights

TEMPTATION

Meyer’s website reveals that she’s never been comfortable with the title of the first book, Twilight, because she’s not sure it fits her message, but the image on the cover was inspired. The red apple, with its connotation of the story of Adam and Eve, conjures up important themes for the book: temptation, secrets, guilt, dangerous knowledge of good and evil.

The vampire combines all of these elements. By his very nature, the vampire is guilty and his existence must be kept a secret. All vampire stories include a confrontation between good and evil, and the vampire always seems to represent a romantic or seductive temptation:

• The three female vampires who encounter Jonathan Harker in Dracula.


• Also in Dracula: Jonathan’s frustrated desire for his wife, Mina, who has been “infected” with the vampire’s bite.


• The impossible love between Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel, the vampire with a soul


• The seemingly impossible love between Bella and Edward—both battling their desire for other


• Bella wants to become vampire, but Edward’s afraid she might sacrifice her soul, which becomes another source of guilt

THE BYRONIC HERO

The image of the vampire is strongly associated with Romantic poet George Gordon, Lord Byron, who was as notorious for his many love affairs as for his poetry. One of his conquests, Lady Caroline Lamb, famously said that Byron was “mad, bad, and dangerous to know.” In the same ghost-writing contest that produced Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Byron came up with an idea that his friend and physician, John Polidori, wrote and published as The Vampyre. The story was popularly attributed to Byron, and the vampire connection was established.

However, Byron’s most important contribution to the vampire legend is the Byronic hero, a particular kind of hero based not only on Byron’s works (Childe Harold, Don Juan, and Manfred), but also on the legends of the poet’s own life. The Byronic hero has the following characteristics:

• Handsome and/or irresistible to women


• Impressive to other men


• Well-traveled and knowledgeable about the world


• Mysterious


• Isolated from society by some secret in his past that’s never revealed


• Tortured by a guilty conscience

Edward Cullen is clearly modeled on two Byronic heroes of literature: Mr. Rochester and Heathcliff.

Mr. Rochester from Jane Eyre (one of Meyer’s favorite books of all time, according to her website) is more mature than heroine in both age and experience; he is intellectual, charismatic, well-traveled, and cultured. However, he is also strange, moody, and isolated. Only the heroine, his soul mate, can truly understand or please him, but he has a terrible secret that will keep them apart. (Sound familiar?)

Wuthering Heights is clearly another important source for Meyers: Bella reads the book in Twilight and argues with Edward about its meaning in Eclipse. Heathcliff, the tortured hero, is predictably dark, ruggedly handsome, and mysterious (his sudden adoption by Cathy’s family masks his secret origin; he disappears for a time and returns enormously wealthy, but he never reveals the source of his fortune). However, Heathcliff has many villainous qualities as well: he is violent, vengeful, frequently cruel, and possibly insane.

Edward Cullen declares that he might be more sympathetic to Heathcliff and Cathy if either of them had any redeeming qualities, but Bella contends that their all-consuming love, which extends beyond the grave, IS the redeeming quality. The comparison to Wuthering Heights emphasizes Bella and Edward’s undying commitment to one another, but it also raises some red flags: Is Edward as dangerous as Heathcliff, despite his best intentions? If Bella and Edward cannot be together after all, will their love prove as destructive as Heathcliff and Cathy’s romance?

SECRETS

In Dracula, Jane Eyre, and Wuthering Heights, secrets are dangerous and sinful, threatening not only the heroine but the entire society. The fact that Dracula, Mr. Rochester, and Heathcliff are able to hide their secrets so well actually compounds their guilt. However, Meyer redeems her secretive hero by alluding to a different trope – the superhero with a secret identity.

The first time Edward saves her life but refuses to explain how he did it, Bella starts thinking about Bruce Wayne and Peter Parker, who never lay claim to the heroic deeds they perform while masked as Batman and Spiderman. It’s notable that she doesn’t include Clark Kent, the Man of Steel’s mild-mannered alter ego. After all, Superman is not a tortured hero: he has no reason to feel guilty about his secret (he’s not from this planet), and his conflicts are almost entirely external. Bella shows great insight in associating Edward with characters who turn superhero to compensate for past guilt, such as a failure to protect or avenge loved ones.

The Vampire as Superhero

We now recognized tortured characters with guilty consciences and secret identities not as villains but as heroes: Bruce Banner (aka The Incredible Hulk), Buffy Somers, Angel, Sydney Bristow (Alias), Batman, Spiderman. We accept heroes who are at war with internal demons rather than external enemies; thus, the vampire is not automatically evil. He has a choice to resist his own evil impulses, and his secret struggle to defeat them makes him a hero we can admire . . . and love.

Reports of My Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

Hello again! Sorry it's been such a long time between postings, but teaching and tutoring have been taking up A LOT of my time. I appreciate the not-so-gentle nudges from Kat, my loyal reader, and I promise there won't be such a long dry spell between postings from now on.

It is Margaret I mourn for

I never wrote a fan letter in my life, but over the last few months I have thought seriously about writing to Madeleine L'Engle. A brief but heated argument about A Wrinkle in Time reminded me of how much L'Engle's books have meant to me, both as a reader and as a teacher, and I wanted to offer my hero belated thanks.

After learning of Ms. L'Engle's death, I deeply regret that I never wrote that letter. I doubt seriously that my letter would have made much of an impression (it would have been a mere drop in an ocean of fan mail, I'm sure), but I would feel easier in my mind. As it is, I am left with an enormous debt, which could never be repaid but which should have been acknowledged.

Gerard Manley Hopkins's poem "Spring and Fall: To a Young Child" reminds me that the sadness I feel at Ms. L'Engle's death is mostly for myself and not for a woman who lived a full and rich life and is now beyond the reach of grief or pain.

Margaret, are you grieving
Over Goldengrove unleaving?
Leaves, like the things of man, you
With your fresh thoughts care for, can you?
Ah! as the heart grows older,
It will come to such sights colder
By and by, nor spare a sigh
Though worlds of wanwood leafmeal lie;
And yet you will weep and know why.
Now no matter, child, the name:
Sorrow's springs are the same.
Nor mouth had, no nor mind, expressed
What heart heard of, ghost guessed:
It is the blight man was born for,
It is Margaret you mourn for.

Remembering Madeleine L'Engle

I learned today that Madeleine L'Engle has died, and suddenly my world is a darker place.

I have loved Madeleine L'Engle since third grade, when I first read A Wrinkle in Time. I've read it many, many times since then, and it has never failed to touch me with its message of hope and redemption. I strongly identified with Meg Murry, a social misfit who travels across space and time to rescue her imprisoned father and discover her own unique worth. (Perhaps the story resonated more personally with me because one of my best friends was another Meg with glasses, braces, impossible hair, and an attic bedroom.) I still remember thrilling to Meg's declaration "Like and equal are two entirely different things!" and her revelation that she had something the supremely evil IT lacked: the ability to love.

As I look back, it seems to me that I rediscovered L'Engle at every stage of my growing up. I read A Wrinkle in Time and A Wind in the Door in elementary school; Meet the Austins and The Moon by Night in middle school; A Swiftly Tilting Planet, The Arm of the Starfish, and A Ring of Endless Light in high school; and An Acceptable Time and Troubling a Star after college. Along the way, L'Engle taught me about Einsteinian physics, empathy, genetics, Shakespeare, grace, marine biology, Robert Frost, interdependence, the value of poetry, and the restorative properties of cinnamon toast.

L'Engle also taught me that it is possible to be both an intellectual and a Christian, to combine a faithful heart with an active mind, a lesson I value all the more because I hear it so infrequently in this increasingly polarized society.

My husband struggles to comfort me as I mourn my hero's passing. He wants to be sympathetic, but he's clearly bewildered by my grieving for a woman I didn't even know. True, I never met Madeleine L'Engle, but I did know her, or at least she knew me. She was my friend and teacher all of my life, and I would not be the person I am without her loving and thoughtful influence.

"She was eighty-eight years old," my husband reminds me. "That's a long life by any standard." He's right, of course, but this is not the way the heart reasons. How can Madeleine L'Engle be old? How can Madeleine L'Engle die? This simply isn't possible.

The authors we read as children become our parents, ideal mothers and fathers frozen in time. It never occurs to us that these beloved perfect parents might be only human after all.

In Defense of Jacob Black

Contains some oblique spoilers

I've been reading some of the customer reviews (at www.Amazon.com and www.bn.com) of Stephenie Meyer's Eclipse, and I have three responses to those readers who accuse Jacob of manipulating Bella.

1. Yeah, he does.

2. She deserves it. I'm not defending his choice to kiss her without permission--that was clearly over the line--but Bella's been playing mind games with Jacob since she met him, and it's about time he called her on it. Bella's always known how he felt about her, even before he openly declared his love. The fact is, she took shameless advantage of him, particularly when she was so devastated by Edward's leaving in New Moon. Bella calls Jacob her best friend, but the closeness they share--the time they spend together, the wordless intimacy, the frequent hugging and hand-holding--goes well beyond simple friendship. What Bella has demanded of Jacob in the past is the emotional intimacy of a romantic relationship without any strings attached. As someone who's been on both sides of such a relationship, I can tell you that this is not only blatantly unfair but cruel.

3. Edward is every bit as manipulative as Jacob, but of course Bella and the reader adore Edward, so his manipulation appears romantic and forceful or, at worst, endearingly annoying. I'm reminded of the film Say Anything, in which John Cusack fights for the girl he loves by standing outside her house with a boombox blaring out "their" song. When I first saw the film, I thought this scene was breathtakingly romantic and I wished someone would do that for me. Several years later, someone did stand outside my apartment, ringing the doorbell, calling my name, and throwing things at my window. I didn't find it at all romantic; I found it terrifying, as did my roommate, who called the police. I had a very different perspective on the guy-on-the-sidewalk-with-the-boombox scene after that.

Unfortunately, the line between romance and manipulation is a very subjective one, and it all comes down to whether, in her heart of hearts, the girl really wants the guy to be out there on the sidewalk, refusing to take no for an answer.

Blogging Stephenie Meyer's Eclipse

Let me just begin by saying that I am vindicated! In my first posting about Stephenie Meyer, I called the Twilight series Bronte-esque. Sure enough, I have learned that one of Meyer's favorite books is Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre, and she explicitly references Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights in her latest novel, Eclipse.

Eclipse is, quite simply, wonderful. Sometimes by the third novel, a series begins to run out of steam, but Meyer's imagination continues to astonish me. I should also admit that Edward, the vampire love interest, has finally won me over. I didn't like him much at all in the first book, Twilight: he was so cold, superior, and remote, even in his love scenes with Bella, the protagonist. In fact, Bella was the one who insisted on his superiority: "You're so beautiful and perfect and wonderful, let me throw away my worthless life for you." Grr. By the end of the second book, New Moon, I'd warmed up to Edward considerably, although I still preferred Jacob, the werewolf who also falls in love with Bella.

In Eclipse, Edward fully redeems himself (in my eyes, that is; I know there are plenty of readers who share Bella's belief that he's perfect just the way he is). Not only does Edward drop the superior act, but even he expresses annoyance with Bella's idolization of him. "The way you regard me is ludicrous," he growls. (You'd better believe I stood up and cheered when I read that!) I still have a soft spot for Jacob, but as the love triangle emerged, I found myself more torn, just as Bella is.

No spoilers, but here's a brief synopsis for those who are still waiting their turn for the library copy:

In their senior year of high school, Edward pushes Bella to apply for college and plan a normal life, but Bella is eager to become a vampire so that they can truly be together. When she attracts a mysterious stalker as well as the attention of the Volturi (the supreme authorities in the vampire world), Edward reluctantly admits that Bella might be safer undead. Even so, he insists on one condition before the conversion, and this is a decision Bella is not prepared to make. Meanwhile, Jacob declares his love for Bella and challenges her to confront her true feelings for him. Just at the moment when it seems Bella must make her most difficult decision, a new threat forces ancient enemies into an uneasy alliance.

Blogging Stephenie Meyer's New Moon, Part 2

Contains some spoilers

I finished New Moon last night, and I must say that I'm impressed with Stephenie Meyer's imagination. She constantly surprises the reader with plot twists, new characters, and seemingly irresolvable conflicts. I'm trying to avoid the hackneyed phrase "emotional rollercoaster," but I think Meyer's strongest appeal lies in her ability to involve the readers in the characters' intense and richly textured emotional lives.

I was also trying to avoid the terms "suicidal" and "self-destructive" when I wrote yesterday's post, but I've discovered a very striking parallel between Bella Swan and Harry Potter. Several times in the Harry Potter series, the orphaned hero finds that when he is in danger, he hears the voices of his parents just before they died, which distracts him from fighting for his life. Harry finds that he is slow to master the Expecto Patronum spell, for example, because he's eager for any contact with the parents he never knew. Similarly, Bella finds that when she's in danger, she hears Edward's warning voice in her head. Bella has been in a deep depression since he broke up with her (to keep her safe from himself and other vampires), but when she discovers this connection to her ex-boyfriend, Bella becomes a thrillseeker, deliberately putting herself in danger so that she can hear Edward again. Ironically, the angrier he sounds, the happier she is because this is proof that he still cares.

Eager to do something rebellious and risky, Bella buys a decrepit motorcycle and asks her friend Jacob to fix it up and teach her to ride. Despite her desire to endanger herself, Bella finds that her friendship with Jacob is a lifeline, and she hangs on desperately even after she realizes that Jacob is falling in love with her, while she sees him as a best friend. This romantic conflict is not the only plot complication; as anyone but Bella herself could have predicted long ago, Jacob is destined to become a werewolf, the ancient enemy of all vampires or "cold ones," as his Native American tribe calls them. (C'mon, this isn't really a spoiler, is it? I pegged Jacob as a werewolf from his first conversation with Bella in Twilight.)

I can tell from the readers' comments at Amazon.com and Stephenie Meyer's website that most readers see Jacob as a distraction or, at best, a placeholder in the plot until Bella's vampire lover comes back into the picture, so I know they're going to be aghast at what I say next. Sorry, guys, but I really prefer Jacob to Edward.

Take a minute to catch your breath. I'll wait.

Yes, I know that Edward is the great love of Bella's life, the Romeo to her Juliet, but he never seems quite real to me. This is not a disparagement but an acknowledgment of Meyer's characterization. Again and again, Bella describes embracing Edward as hugging a large piece of unyielding granite; whatever he looks like, his touch is cold and hard as stone. Edward can't stand in the sun because his skin catches the light and sparkles like a diamond, a sure tip-off that he's not human. Beautiful and desirable as he is, Edward is not alive; essentially, he's a statue. Certainly Bella responds to him as if he were a walking piece of precious art, which reminds me of the Pygmalion myth, in which a sculptor falls in love with a statue he has made. Could her love make Edward real, or is Bella really in love with her image of Edward, a product of her own romantic imagination?

Jacob, on the other hand, is definitely alive. Not only is he physically hot to the touch (werewolves have a higher temperature than regular humans), but his emotional warmth heals Bella from her frozen state of depression. He gives her a sense of fun, normalcy, and acceptance she hasn't had since she arrived in Forks. She feels safe and comfortable with Jacob; secure in his regard for her, Bella never feels inferior or wonders what he sees in her. She's tempted to see him as a child because he's two years younger (the distance between a high school senior and a sophomore is significant), but Bella has to change her ideas about Jacob's maturity even before his metamorphosis. They are equals in a way Bella and Edward have never been, and even in his wolf state, Jacob has more in common with Bella than Edward does. (Hey, a wolf and a human are both mammals, right?)

I know I'm probably alone on this, but I wish there had been a real love triangle instead of only the appearance of one. I hope Jacob becomes a real contender for Bella's heart in the next book, Eclipse, and gives Edward a run for his money. Jacob deserves better than to be cast as the forgettable Paris in Meyer's retelling of Romeo and Juliet.

Blogging Stephenie Meyer's New Moon

I'm back from my second-life vacation (if only there'd been a vacation in my first life as well), and I'm reading New Moon, the second book in Stephenie Meyer's best-selling YA vampire series. Of course, the big news is about Eclipse, the third and newest book in the series, which just hit shelves two weeks ago. Eclipse is getting the star treatment, sharing display space with the final Harry Potter book in the power aisle at Barnes & Noble.

It seems that Meyer has been tapped to replace J. K. Rowling as the YA media darling, although they're writing for rather different audiences. If the Harry Potter books are Dickensian, Meyer's vampire series--which includes Twilight, New Moon, and Eclipse--might be called Bronte-esque. Despite the trappings of fantasy, Meyer is writing classic Gothic romance in the style of Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights, with a dash of Romeo and Juliet for extra pathos.

Bella Swan, an accident-prone high school student, falls madly in love with Edward Cullen, the most breathtakingly handsome boy she's ever met. Edward is mysterious, intelligent, rich, and a vampire. He struggles to keep his distance, but Bella's frequent brushes with danger force him to rescue her again and again. It's easy to see why the series is so popular, especially among teenage girls. Meyer takes an innovative approach to the conventions of vampire lit, and she masterfully conveys all the breathless passion and profound significance of first love without a hint of condescension.

You're Too Good For Me

As I read New Moon, however, I'm troubled by the same thing that marred my enjoyment of Twilight: the heroine's utter lack of self-worth. Bella sees herself as average and plain, remarkable only for her klutziness, and she can't imagine what Edward (gorgeous, sophisticated, and immortal) could possibly see in her. Doubtless many readers can identify with this feeling of unworthiness ("he could have any girl he wanted, so why would he choose me?"), but Bella constantly grovels before Edward's perceived superiority. She begs for his kisses, which inflame her with passion while he remains cool (literally as well as figuratively). When another vampire attacks her, she apologizes. She's ready to die for Edward, willing (even anxious) to throw away her soul so they can be together.

Like Jane Eyre, Bella regards her lover as her master and is in danger of making him her idol. The difference is that Jane does assert her own worth, and she doesn't wait until the end of the novel to do it, either. She accuses Edward Rochester of toying with her emotions, insists that she is his equal, and even risks hurting her lover in order to do what is right. Bella, on the other hand, consistently submits to her Edward's manipulation, miserably telling herself that she's not good enough for him.

Enthralling as Meyer's story is, I believe Bella's masochism sends a dangerous message to young women about what it means to be in love. As I read through New Moon, I'm hoping to see Bella become less like Heathcliff, a man of violent passions who insists that his soul is buried with his dead love, and more like Jane, a woman who is able to love passionately without losing herself.

Top Five Strategies for Dealing with Controversial Texts

These are lessons I've learned the hard way from teaching first-year university composition and literature courses and from facilitating book group discussions. I presented these strategies at the Children and Youth Conference for Librarians in Fort Worth, Texas, on 10 August 2007.



1. Prepare the ground. Not all readers like surprises. Give them some idea of what to expect. Let them know if the text you're presenting contains profanity, violence, sexually explicit scenes, or other offensive or distressing elements; don't let these come as a shock.

2. Give the reader a choice. Nobody likes being forced to read a book, particularly when that book may be offensive and disturbing. Suggest, encourage, recommend, but leave the reader room to make his or her own decisions.

3. Don't just teach the text; teach the controversy. Don't pretend that the controversy doesn't exist or assume that any criticism of the text must be invalid. Be respectful, and try to create a safe space for discussion. Exploring the debate with young readers gives them practice in explaining and defending their own reading choices.

4. Choose your battles. Why is this text important to you? Don't make the mistake of presenting a text simply because it is controversial or because everyone else is doing it (peer pressure doesn't end in high school, folks). If you have serious doubts about a text, don't push it; you won't be doing yourself, your readers, or the author any favors. Save your energy for the texts you value and believe in.

5. Take responsibility for mistakes. Perhaps you've misjudged the text or your readers. For example, let's say you discover something objectionable about a book you scheduled, without reading it first, for your teen-and-tween book group. Don't get defensive and don't make excuses. Waste no time in apologizing to the readers for the mistake, and move on.

Bonus lesson: If you do make a mistake, don't freak out or beat yourself up too much. Young readers aren't always as sensitive and sharp-eyed as the adults who care about them; odds are good you haven't scarred anyone for life.

The Gryffindors Have Moved!

The Gryffindor Book Group has a new schedule and meeting venue. Beginning in September, we will meet at 4:30 p.m. on the 3rd Thursday of each month at Emily Fowler Central Library. Check the Gryffindor Book Group Schedule sidebar for dates and books.

Chick Lit: Bridging the Generation Gap?

Lately I've noticed quite a bit of crossover between chick lit and YA fiction for teen girls. Meg Cabot, best known for her Princess Diaries series, has also written several romances for adult readers, including The Queen of Babble and Size Twelve is Not Fat (one of my favorite titles).









Similarly, Ann Brashares, author of the bestselling Sisterhood of theTraveling Pants series, has recently published her first work of adult fiction, The Last Summer (of You and Me).











If the traffic only flowed one way, we might assume that YA authors like Cabot and Brashares are simply trying to retain their audience by adapting to the changing tastes of their maturing readers. As Brashares writes to her fans on Sisterhood Central:

The characters are a little bit older (in their early twenties) and the themes a
bit more sophisticated than ones I've written about before. So it's probably
not right for younger readers. But if you are a seasoned reader of the
Traveling Pants series--probably fifteen or older--I think this book would
be appropriate and (hopefully!) enjoyable for you.

However, authors are moving in the other direction, too. Sarah Mlynowski, author of several chick lit novels published by Red Dress Ink (a Harlequin imprint), has staked out YA territory with Bras & Broomsticks, a fantasy series about a high-school girl who covets her younger sister's newfound magical powers.

So is the distinction between YA and adult fiction simply a matter of packaging? Is there any real difference between books written for teenage girls and those written for women? Author and essayist Deanna Carlyle has no problem with calling YA books for girls "chick lit":

In the U.S. publishing industry, the line between chick lit, young adult fiction and women’s fiction is blurring.Some editors are calling the new developments “humorous women’s fiction,” “romantic comedy” or “tween lit.”
But don’t be fooled.
Chick lit by any other name is just as fun and just as fresh.

In an April 2005 interview with Carlyle, Sarah Mlynowski explains that she made the transition from adult to YA lit because she wanted to emulate her hero, Judy Blume, in reaching out to young readers and helping them fall in love with books:

Judy Blume is my inspiration. I grew up reading her novels. They were the first books I read that made me laugh out loud and want to become both a reader, and a writer. It was a compete revelation for me to see my experiences and pre-pubescent angst affectionately reflected in print.

People always call Helen Fielding the mother of chick lit, but I think it’s Judy Blume. She’s who we all (chick lit writers) grew up reading, and she’s the one who helped shaped our consciousness.

Yesterday

I wrote yesterday's posts on a computer at the public library before I headed out to a tutoring session. Not only was I worried about being late for my appointment, but I was racing the clock, trying to get down my thoughts and hit "Publish Post" before my session timed out. This may account for the urgency. :-)

On the other hand, I'm relieved to see that they're not quite as rant-y as I remembered them. I thought I might have to apologize for being a little too self-righteous and over the top, but it doesn't seem necessary. I doubt any of my three readers (you know who you are!) require an apology. Or maybe I really AM self-righteous and over the top on a regular basis, so it's hard to tell if I've exceeded my usual background levels. You'll let me know, right?

I promise I'll get back to doing the thoughtful, reflective thing soon.

Dealing with Controversial Texts, Part 2

Okay, no book is every going to please everyone. (And if it does manage to please everyone, or at least a whole lot of someones, critics will claim that it can't possibly be any good. Witness the Harry Potter backlash.) But there seem to be an awful lot of folks who are afraid of books--they'll spread subversion, create anarchy, destroy our values, and confuse our children.

I'm the last person in the world to deny the power of the written word. It drives me up the wall when well-meaning defenders of literature say soothingly, "Don't be so upset. It's just fiction, after all." As if we don't express our highest truths, our darkest fears, our deepest desires, and our most profound convictions about the human experience in story. Or have these people forgotten about Uncle Tom's Cabin and To Kill a Mockingbird and The Grapes of Wrath and A Christmas Carol and Pride and Prejudice (never out of print for a single day in almost two hundred years) and Frankenstein and Don Quixote and, dare I say, the parables of Jesus?

But the problem lies in exaggerating the power of the book and diminishing the power of the reader. People who fear books appear to regard texts as authorities whose pronouncements are law, or as teachers who irrevocably shape (or deform) the student-reader's mind, or as stealthy viruses that infect the reader's thinking and cannot be purged.

But readers have their own power--to resist, to question, to critique, and to interpret. They're free to argue in the margins, to air their views in classrooms and coffeeshops, to write their own review, to send a letter to the author, even to write their own book and assert their own "authority." They're even free to stop reading. But they're not free to stop others.

Dealing with Controversial Texts, Part 1

If you look at the Upcoming Appearances sidebar, you'll see that I'm scheduled to present at the Children and Youth Conference for Librarians on Friday. My topic is "Dealing with Controversial Texts." I've been looking forward to giving this presentation for months, and therein lies the problem. Sometime last spring, when I was first invited to present at CYC, I wrote out the whole talk in great detail, probably more than I'd ever need, but now that I do need it . . . you guessed it. I have no clue where my notes are.

Well, I know roughly where they are--probably in one of the many spiral-bound notebooks littering my office floor. I'll go on a search-and-destroy mission this afternoon, but I'm already resigned to the fact that I'll need to recreate my whole talk from scratch.

So what do I want to say about controversial texts? A lot, actually, but I'd like to address the problem of taking a zero-tolerance-for-defects approach to literature, which I think is closely related to popular attitudes toward the Bible. Stay with me here. A number of Christians pride themselves on an all-or-nothing approach; either every word of the Holy Bible is literally, factually (as opposed to metaphorically) true, making it the ultimate authority on every subject under the sun, or every word of it is false and we might as well throw the book away.

My intent is not to argue about biblical inerrancy but merely to say this: if it IS valid to say the Bible is either entirely true or entirely false, we can only say this because the Bible is a unique case. All other books are imagined, written, revised, edited, published, and marketed by fallible human beings who may well be right about some things and wrong about others. To insist that every element of a literary work be factually accurate, orthodox, inoffensive, and clear as daylight is absurd. No Shakespeare play could stand up to it.

• Othello includes racist comments, vulgar fart jokes, and numerous sexual references.
• A close reading of Ophelia's mad songs (all about seduced and abandoned maidens) and Hamlet's puns on the word conceive strongly suggest that Ophelia is pregnant with our hero's child when she drowns (accident? suicide? abortion gone wrong?).
• And in Romeo and Juliet--well, you get the idea.

As I've told my students at the beginning of every lit class I've ever taught: In order to read and enjoy any work of literature, you've got to be willing to accept some discomfort. You're not going to like everything the author says. You're not going to agree with every point she makes or accept every "fact" she offers. You may not approve of everything the main character says and does. And you may HATE the ending. But you'll also find that your own thoughts, beliefs, and values are clearer after you read a book that isn't inside your comfort zone.

Denton Public Library Events in August

Join the Denton Public Libraries for these great events!

FAMILY-FRIENDLY MOVIES
Children under 8 must be accompanied by an adult.

First Friday Movie: Bridge to Terabithia (PG, 98 minutes)
Aug. 6, 3:30 p.m., South Branch

Wednesday Family Movie: Happy Feet (PG, 100 minutes)
Aug. 8, 4 p.m., North Branch

Third Friday Movies:
Flushed Away (PG, 90 minutes)
Aug. 17, 3:30 p.m., Emily Fowler Central Library

High School Musical (PG, 98 minutes)
Aug. 17, 3:30 p.m., South Branch


PAPER MAKING

Aug. 2, 3:30 p.m., South Branch

Aug. 7, 4 p.m., North Branch

Aug. 23, 4 p.m., Emily Fowler Central Library

Always running out of paper? The City of Denton Recycling Department can show you how to make your own! For kids 10 and up.


BABYSITTING CERTIFICATION WORKSHOP
Aug. 7 & 8, 2 - 4 p.m., South Branch

Aug. 22 & 23, 2 - 4 p.m., North Branch

If you want to become a certified babysitter, attend this 2-day workshop presented by the Denton Fire Department. Learn great babysitting strategies, emergency procedures, and more! Pre-registration is required, so call 940.349.8752 to reserve your place. For teens, ages 12-18.

CRITTERMAN: AROUND THE WORLD
Aug. 9, 3:30 p.m., South Branch

Aug. 24, 10 a.m., North Branch

Meet animals from around the world and learn about their amazing survival strategies and adaptive abilities. Features live animals!!! Children under 8 must be accompanied by an adult.


PIRATE ADVENTURE!
Aug. 14, 3:30 p.m. South Branch

The famous Pirate Lady leads an exciting, informative, hands-on exploration of a treasure chest filled with replica pirate artifacts.


READING IS MAGIC
Aug. 21, 3 p.m., Emily Fowler Central Library

Join us for an afternoon of magic with Gerald Edmundson, one of the world's top sleight-of-hand artists.

Violence in Harry Potter

I was talking the other day with a friend who was concerned about the violence in the final Harry Potter book. "I understand that there's a war going on between good and evil," she said, "but I just don't know if nine-year-olds should be reading such violent scenes."

I found myself flashing back to my days as a drama major at the University of Georgia when Matt Williams came to talk to the students about the film industry. Williams is probably best known for creating and producing hit shows like Roseanne and Home Improvement, but at the time I met him he was still writing for The Cosby Show.

Williams told us a story about a screenplay he was very proud of but couldn't seem to sell. He saw it as a heartwarming story about the close relationship between a boy and a dog, but nobody wanted to make the movie because it was "too violent." Williams couldn't believe it. He'd written a sweet story about a dog who dies, but it was considered too violent to commit to film, even though the most popular show on TV at the time was Miami Vice, which featured a weekly body count higher than that of the average Shakespearean tragedy.

We measure violence, Williams concluded, by how much we care about the victims. Every week, Miami Vice casually dispatched scores of villains we'd made no investment in, so their passing was unimportant, even comic: "BAM! BAM! Cancel this man's dinner reservation. Come on, Tubbs, let's go." But the death of one dog was meaningful because Williams had spent an entire screenplay developing the audience's relationship with this character.

Is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows violent? Yes, no question. There are ambushes, attacks, duels, and at least two major battle scenes I can think of. But Rowling is never, EVER casual about death, even when it comes to characters who aren't particularly likable. The violence is never random but always placed in the larger context of war between good and evil. As Harry learns in Order of the Phoenix, it is not easy to use an Unforgivable Curse to kill or torture another living being; you have to mean it. Only completely evil characters, like Voldemort and Bellatrix Lestrange, are careless about inflicting pain.

On the other hand, characters demonstrate their courage and nobility by the way they respond to pain and suffering, and most of those who die in this series are prepared to accept this consequence for their actions. Rowling herself has said that each of the characters is defined by his or her attitude toward death. For example, in Prisoner of Azkaban, when Peter Pettigrew protests that he had no choice but to betray Harry's parents because Voldemort threatened to kill him, Sirius Black thunders, "Then you should have died!" In a quieter moment in Order of the Phoenix, Sirius insists again, "There are things worth dying for," which gives the readers some comfort in his death. Sirius dies as he surely would have chosen to, defying Voldemort and protecting Harry. It is significant that the character who fears death most is the supreme villain.

There is no question that the Harry Potter books contain violence; no series so preoccupied with death could avoid it. But Rowling has worked hard to develop a completely believable world peopled with characters we know and love (or love to hate). When death comes to characters in whom we have made such a great investment, we can't shrug it off. We have to grapple with the concepts of mortality and grief, but also with the necessity of courage, the power of love, and the persistence of hope.

By confronting young readers with death and challenging them to think about its meaning, Rowling does not glorify violence; instead, she celebrates the significance of each individual life.

Technical Difficulties with Comments

A couple of people have had difficulty posting their comments. I think I've fixed the problem, but please email me if you have any further trouble. Thanks!

Jaw-dropping Photos

Just found a great slide show of Harry Potter events on the Denton Record-Chronicle website. See if you recognize anybody.
Link

Review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows--No Spoilers

Since I last posted, I've read Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows twice, led two small group discussions on the book, corresponded with other fans, and watched televised interviews with J. K. Rowling, but I'm still not sure how to write about the seventh book without giving away any of the secrets. However, today (July 31) is Harry's birthday, so it seems a good time to break my long silence and give the review my best shot.

We've known since Book 5 that Harry must duel Voldemort to the death, so the first thing anyone wants to know about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is, of course, "Who dies?" This deceptively simple question is actually quite tricky (not that I'm going to answer it here), but readers should be prepared for the "bloodbath" Rowling promised just before the book was released. There are many more than the two deaths we were led to expect, but there are also surprising compensations, as befits a novel whose twin themes are loss and redemption.

The final book finds Harry preparing to leave Privet Drive, his Muggle home for sixteen years, on his quest to defeat the evil Lord Voldemort, whose Death Eaters have infiltrated the Ministry of Magic and begun a new reign of terror. Although the Order of the Phoenix have rallied around the "Chosen One," Harry is increasingly isolated as the supports he has depended upon are kicked out from under him, one by one. Friends are lost, weapons are broken, and even memories become suspect when a new biography of Dumbledore (penned by the vitriolic Rita Skeeter) shakes Harry's faith in his mentor's wisdom and benevolence. Ron and Hermione urge him to focus on finding and destroying the Horcruxes (while these cursed objects exist, Voldemort cannot be killed), but Harry is distracted by his search for the truth about Dumbledore ... and about himself. How can Harry kill Voldemort without becoming the thing he's fighting against? Can he defend his life without losing his soul?

Despite the ominous prophecy that shadows the hero's every move, Rowling uses her characteristic wit, energy, and lively imagination to make Deathly Hallows as enjoyable as it is dark. She masterfully interweaves a new and compelling plotline with outstanding mysteries from the previous books and deftly reconvenes her dizzying cast of characters. It is particularly gratifying to see the young wizards and witches (not to mention their professors, who are positively awe-inspiring) use every spell and scrap of magical knowledge they've learned at Hogwarts in a gloriously chaotic final examination.

All in all, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is an exciting and satisfying ending to a groundbreaking series, and it's hard to imagine a more fitting graduation ceremony.

The Moment We've All Been Waiting For

I've just returned from the big release party for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Everyone else at my house is asleep. I've cleared my weekend. There's nothing stopping me from seizing the book and reading straight through until morning, but the book is still sitting in the chair where I dropped it on my way in. I haven't even taken it out of the bag yet.

I keep thinking, "This is it. This is the last one, the last Harry Potter book." Oh, I know J. K. Rowling has started making teasing statements about how she might possibly write another series in the same fantasy world she's created for Harry, but it won't be the same. I'll never get another chance to read a Harry Potter book for the first time.

Millions of fans around the world rejoiced tonight, just as the hundreds of folks at the Denton Barnes & Noble cheered when the boxes were opened and the first book was taken out. I wonder how many of them are pausing, like me, and feeling a little sad that this phenomenon has come to an end.

Will Harry Potter continue to dominate the news after tonight? Will the excitement die down after the mysteries are resolved? When the smoke clears, will the series be recognized as a modern classic or just a fad?

All good questions, but I don't have time to ponder them any longer. I have some serious reading to do. See you on the other side.

Everything I Need to Know I Learned from Harry Potter

10. Never put your wand in your back pocket. This isn't just elementary wand safety (although good wizards have lost buttocks this way). A wand represents a wizard's power, and you should never put your power in your back pocket: don't sell yourself short, and don't take your strengths for granted.

9. Life is like a bag of Bertie Botts' Every Flavor Beans. You never know what you're gonna get. Sometimes it's chocolate; sometimes it's pepper. Sometimes it's earwax (ick).

8. People can be a bit stupid about their pets. And Hagrid ought to know. This is a man who thinks dragons are cuddly and Blast-Ended Skrewts are "interesting." Even when you suspect your friend's cat may have eaten your pet rat, remember: we're all a little blind about what we love most.

7. How do you spell relief? C-H-O-C-O-L-A-T-E. Whether you've been battling dementors or you're just having a bad hair day, chocolate works like magic to cure what ails you.

6. When in doubt, go to the library. Bookworms don't get a lot of credit for being practical, but think about how many times Hermione has saved the day through some bit of knowledge she learned from a book. Knowledge is power, so when in doubt, READ.

5. Courtesy matters. "I don't mean to be rude, but . . ." As Dumbledore says, "Sadly, accidental rudeness occurs alarmingly often." But whether you're dealing with obnoxious Muggles or saving the world from an evil wizard, you have the power on your side if you can keep your cool and remember your manners.

4. Anything is possible if you have enough nerve. Ginny's the one who says this, but she learned it from Fred and George, who know that there's more than one way to pick a lock or exit a room. Courage can set your imagination free!

3. Expecto Patronum! (That's Wizard for "think positive.") The only way to beat a dementor is to focus on a happy memory. Hold on to your positive thoughts; they could save your life.

2. If you want to win, you've got to make some sacrifices. It's true in chess, and it's true in life. Ron let himself be taken by the white queen so that Harry could win the chess match and save the Sorcerer's Stone; Harry's parents sacrificed themselves so that their son could live. If we have courage and think positive thoughts, we can reach our goals, but we'll still have to give something up to get what we want.

And the most important thing Harry Potter can teach us:

1. The most powerful magic is Love. It's stronger than wisdom, stronger than fear, stronger than death.

Harry Potter: Happily Ever After?

I know this blog is beginning to look like an "all-Harry, all the time" site. I promise that after the book release and the initial flurry of reactions to the final Harry Potter book, I'll be able to concentrate on some other books and issues in children's/YA fantasy and science fiction, but for right now, Harry still has the spotlight.

My first set of predictions focused on who dies in the final book. You've probably noticed that I didn't include Harry among my candidates. I know things look bad for Harry--J. K. Rowling's comment that "Harry's story comes to a definite end in book seven" is particularly ominous--but I'm still hoping that he'll pull through.

This set of predictions is more optimistic. Let's assume that Harry successfully vanquishes Lord Voldemort without losing his own life. What happens next?

Professor McGonagall will remain as Head of Hogwarts.

Remus Lupin will return to Hogwarts and teach Defense Against the Dark Arts.

If Severus Snape survives, he will refuse to return to his teaching post, preferring a solitary life. Snape will publish a ground-breaking textbook on potions and travel around the world in search of rare ingredients.

Harry Potter will become an Auror, striking fear into the hearts of all dark wizards (just because Voldemort's gone doesn't mean all danger is past). When McGonagall retires and Lupin becomes the new Head of Hogwarts, Harry will take his place as the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher.

Ginny Weasley will become a professional Quidditch player, but after bringing home the World Cup to England, she will retire, marry Harry, and become the Quidditch coach at Hogwarts, which will establish a reputation for turning out more professional athletes than any other wizarding school.

Hermione Granger will join the Ministry of Magic in the Muggle Relations department, where she will argue for greater openness and cooperation with the Muggle Prime Minister. Her tireless efforts on behalf of house-elves, werewolves, and other marginalized groups will lead to her meteoric rise through the Ministry, resulting in her appointment as the youngest Minister of Magic in history. On a personal note, Hermione will grieve for Ron for some time (yup, he's a goner) and remain in close contact with his family, which will lead to her eventual marriage with the brilliant Charlie Weasley.

Fred and George Weasley's joke shop will be so successful that they will open a chain of stores, become the wealthiest entrepreneurs in England, and routinely make Witch Weekly's "Most Eligible Wizards" list.

Neville Longbottom will become famous for his patented "Don't Bug Me" line of pest-resistant fruits and vegetables, which will revolutionize the EU organic foods market.

Luna Lovegood will join the Ministry as a research analyst and special advisor to the High Court. Although she is highly valued for her abilities to see and speak the truth, Luna remains disappointed that her work on the Blibbering Humdinger and the Crumple-Horned Snorkack has not received more attention.

Date Correction

The North Branch of the Denton Public Libraries will host a discussion of J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows on Thursday, July 26, at 4:00 p.m., NOT July 27. I've corrected the previous posts that gave the wrong date.

Predictions for Deaths in Harry Potter 7

I've put this off for as long as I possibly can, but if I don't make my predictions for the final Harry Potter book now, it will be too late and I won't be able to claim prescience if any of my guesses turn out to be right.

Who dies, Harry or Voldemort? Voldemort, of course. If Voldemort doesn't die, then the series has no closure, and J. K. Rowling has said from the very beginning that there will only ever be seven books. This is it. Besides, if the hero dies and the villain lives, that means evil triumphs over good and who wants that? No, no, no--Voldemort definitely dies.

Who else dies? Remember, Rowling has promised there will be two deaths. I have three major candidates.

Ron
A significant scene from the first book, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone, may foreshadow Ron's eventual death. Remember that in order to reach the sorcerer's stone, Harry has to get past several obstacles, including a giant chessboard that he must play across. Ron, who is a far better chess player than Harry, directs all the moves and chooses in a dramatic moment to sacrifice himself (a knight) in order to win the game. When Harry protests, Ron reminds him to keep his eyes on the goal, pointing out that defeating Voldemort is far more important than saving a single life. (Sirius echoes this thought when he declares, "Some things are worth dying for!")

I believe that the final book will include not only a personal showdown between Harry and Voldemort but an all-out war involving werewolves, trolls, centaurs, merpeople, and other magical creatures. Ron's strength, as proven in the chess game, is long-term strategy, and I think it likely that Ron will act as one of Harry's generals, perhaps the most important one, so he will be in a position to make the decision to sacrifice himself. Harry would never ask it of Ron, but Ron might well choose to do it of his own accord. The HP movies have tended to play up Ron's fears and insecurities, especially about spiders, but don't forget that Ron is a Gryffindor (from a long line of Gryffindors) and Gryffindors are most famous for their courage.

Snape
Ron has been my front-runner for a long time, but lately I've been considering the possibility that Snape might die. I believe that Snape, unpleasant and mysterious as he is, has been on the side of good all long. I think the reason he was willing to pledge himself to kill Dumbledore should Draco fail is that he had already make a similar unbreakable vow to Dumbledore himself. Remember that Dumbledore is the secret-keeper for the Order of the Phoenix (and probably for a lot of other things we haven't been told about), and Voldemort is highly skilled in Legilimency (mind-reading). Perhaps Dumbledore foresaw the possibility that his mind would be weakened (as it might well have been during the search for the false Horcrux) and Voldemort would have access to all the headmaster's secrets, so he made Snape promise to kill him should the threat appear too great. Remember that Dumbledore, unlike Voldemort, is unafraid of death. He has always maintained that death is not something to fear; love is much stronger.

It would make sense that Snape would make a similar sacrifice, although not out of love. Snape is incensed when Harry accuses him of cowardice, and after working so long as a double agent, he would probably want to die in such a way that explains his actions and makes his allegiance crystal clear. I could even see Snape dying to protect Harry as a way of avenging himself: "See, you always thought I was evil, but would a Death Eater save you? You're not as clever as you think you are, Potter. Remember that after I am gone."

Neville
This one just recently occurred to me. Books 5 and 6 strongly emphasize the idea that the prophecy about the "Chosen One" fated to kill Voldemort could just as easily have been meant for Neville as for Harry. Although Dumbledore argues that Voldemort himself marked Harry as the Chosen One (both literally and figuratively) by attacking him sixteen years ago, Voldemort might feel that it's safer to hedge his bets and try to kill both potentials. Certainly Neville would seem the lesser threat, so Voldemort might go after him first.

Then again, Neville has made significant progress in his magic-using ability since the first book. He is certainly a valuable and enthusiastic member of Dumbledore's Army, and he demonstrates great courage in the Department of Mysteries when he urges Harry not to give the prophecy to Lucius Malfoy, even though Neville himself is being threatened. Harry is not the only person who has lost his parents to the dark side: Voldemort's minion, Bellatrix Lestrange, tortured Neville's parents into madness. Of course Neville would want to avenge them, so he might well play a role in the climactic showdown; Neville and Harry will confront Voldemort together, but Neville won't survive.

So . . . Ron, Snape, or Neville? Any of them would make sense, but I have to go with my first (and saddest) choice: Ron.

Midnight Magic Harry Potter 7 Release Party

MIDNIGHT MAGIC COSTUME PARTY
Friday, July 20, 8 p.m.
Barnes & Noble, Golden Triangle Mall, Denton, TX

Hurray! The final Harry Potter book is almost here! If you're looking for a place to celebrate, dress as your favorite character, mount your broom, and join me and hundreds of other fans for these exciting events:

• Panel discussion by Harry Potter experts Lucinda Breeding, April Kendra (me!), Bryan Lankford, and others
• Musical performances by harpist Patricia Diers, the Denton Childbloom Guitar Ensemble, and Miss Polly and Her Tiny Big Band
• Staged reading from Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince by the Denton Community Theatre
• Build A School of Wizardry group project
• Games with the Gryffindor Book Group and Denton Public Libraries
• Create An Amulet booth
• Photo booth and frame decorating
• Trivia contest, scavenger hunt, prizes, and more!

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows goes on sale at midnight - sharp!

Serendipity

Sorry it's been several days between posts, but I had an opportunity to make some very sweet lemonade out of some lemons I was handed last Thursday.

I was really looking forward to talking with the Gryffindor Book Group about Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne, but nobody showed up. Not one person! It's possible that Verne was just too intimidating, even for folks who said they wanted to read him. There is quite a lot of science in his science fiction--he's obviously fascinated with the potential uses of electricity, for example, and he explains exactly how to calculate the amount of pressure exerted on a submarine as it descends underwater. (Interesting stuff, but a little of this goes a long way.)

I also wonder if Thursday night is just not a good time for our teen and tween readers. We'll still plan to meet at 7 p.m. on August 9 to talk about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (5 days to book release--hurray!), but we'll consider changing the day and time for future meetings. If you're in the Denton area and you'd like to join us, please leave a comment about what days and times you'd prefer to meet!

Anyway, I was talking about these issues with Thom Anderson, the friendly Community Relations Manager at the Barnes & Noble store where our group meets, when a man came over and asked if he could sit with us. There was no point in saving chairs for people who weren't coming, so I said sure. It turns out that this gentleman is the managing editor of the Gainesville Daily Register and after we'd talked for a while, he invited me to submit a review of the newest Harry Potter movie. Of course, I said yes! I spent Friday beefing up the preliminary review I'd written for this blog (July 11, 2007), and this morning I drove 30 miles to Gainesville to pick up several copies of the Daily Register. Hurray! (If my review becomes available online, I'll be sure to add a link to it.)

So that's my serendipity for this week. Although I'm still disappointed that the Gryffindors didn't get to discuss Jules Verne, if even one person had shown up for the meeting, I wouldn't have talked with Mr. Osborne or gotten to publish a movie review in his paper.

Have you had a serendipity this week? If so, leave a comment and tell us about it. Be sure to look for serendipity in your own life in the coming week. I bet you'll find it!

Movie Review: Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

It's probably too early for me to write this review, since I went to see Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix just this morning. We HP fans are a difficult bunch to please because we tend to view every act of artistic license as a betrayal of the books we love so much. During my first viewing of the fourth movie (HP and the Goblet of Fire), I kept a running count of all the characters and plot elements missing in action; however, when I saw the movie a second time, I was able to relax and appreciate the film's many strengths. I have no doubt that the same will hold true for this movie as well, but for now, here is a quick rundown of cheers and jeers.

Cheers
... to the wonderful Imelda Staunton for her absolutely dead-on, pitch-perfect performance as Professor Dolores Umbridge. She gets it all exactly right, from the fussy pink sweater to the annoying little laugh, and the scenes and montages narrating Umbridge's rise to power are uniformly terrific.

... to Alan Rickman, who was once again underutilized. We really should have seen more of him, but Rickman's Professor Snape is so deliciously oily that he steals every scene he's in.

... to Daniel Radcliffe, whose strong performance allows him to hold onto our sympathy even during Harry's tantrums.

... to the art direction and really superb visuals. I particularly liked the use of newspapers and the large poster of Cornelius Fudge, which simultaneously recalled 1984's Big Brother and Orson Welles' Citizen Kane.

... for the much-publicized first kiss between Harry and Cho. Even after all the hype, it didn't disappoint.

... for the spectacular fight scene in the Department of Mysteries. I was a little disappointed that some of my favorite exchanges between Dumbledore and Voldemort were lost, but the filmmakers have made a valid choice to keep the focus on Harry's inner struggle as much as possible.

... for the superb psychological realism of the entire film.


Jeers
... for violating the laws by which at least two, and possibly more, magical objects/processes work. One of J. K. Rowling's greatest talents lies in the creation of an internally consistent fantasy world. She always respects her own rules; the director and screenwriter should have followed suit.

... for prominently featuring a spell Harry doesn't learn until the sixth book.

... for dumping the Quidditch plotline, which leaves Ron almost nothing to do but follow Harry around and be quietly supportive. Joining the Gryffindor Quidditch team gives both Ron and Ginny a chance to emerge from the shadow of their older brothers and develop on their own, but the film denies them this opportunity. The HP movies have consistently shortchanged Ron, portraying him as a rather fearful sidekick rather than a valuable ally, and Ginny does not fare much better. Although she does some impressive wandwork, she asserts little individuality.

... for also dumping the plotline in which Hermione and Ron (not Harry) become prefects. The Inquisitorial Squad, which makes only a brief appearance in the film, is meant to be a corrupt foil to the traditional, legitimate form of student authority; the Squad has little meaning by itself. In Book 5, we see students like Hermione and Ron (and, in flashback, Remus Lupin) struggling with their new power as prefects. Without this plotline, an important theme about the responsibilities of authority is compromised; viewers are more likely to come away with an image of smart kids rebelling against cruel and stupid adults than with an understanding of the obligations and abuses of power.

To give one example: Rowling's Hermione knows she is subverting the system when she talks Harry into teaching the kids Defense Against the Dark Arts, but she is careful to stay within the letter, if not the spirit, of the law: "[E]ven if Umbridge does come in here there's nothing she can do to stop us, Harry, because I've double- and triple-checked the school rules. We're not out-of-bounds . . . . And I've looked up everything I can think of about study groups and homework groups and they're definitely allowed" (Order of the Phoenix 336). In the book, Hermione is prepared to use Hogwarts law as a defense; in the film, however, she merely giggles and says, "Sometimes it's fun to break the rules." Ron's response is both ironic and appropriate: "Who are you and what have you done with Hermione Granger?"

... to the screenwriter and director for ignoring the lessons of their own movie. Over and over, the film insists that Harry is the stronger for being part of a group while pushing Ron, Hermione, and the others further into Harry's shadow.

Harry Potter Spoiler Alert!

My Harry Potter Spoiler of Doom is: Hermione Granger goes on a hot date with Colonel Mustard with an army of furious ghosts Get your Harry Potter Spoiler of Doom

How to Grow Forbidden Fruit

My dad likes to tell a story about when my brother was just a toddler and started messing with something my parents didn't want him handling.

"Billy, if you touch that, you're going to get a spanking," my dad warned.

Billy reached out his little hand, stopping just short of the forbidden object. My father swears that he could see the wheels turning in his son's mind: "I know if I touch this, I'm going to get a spanking, but it might be worth a spanking if I could just touch it ONE MORE TIME!"

How many of us have had this same experience? As soon as someone tells us no, we're immediately inspired with a craving for the forbidden fruit. To quote my father, a man who knows a great deal about human nature, once more: "Everyone wants what they think they can't have."

It's worth remembering that this wisdom holds true for books. For an excellent example, read Judy Blume's introductory essay to Places I Never Meant to Be: Original Stories by Censored Writers.

An Interview with H. J. Ralles

H. J. Ralles is the author of many critically-acclaimed YA novels, including Darok 9, Darok 10, and the Keeper series (Keeper of the Kingdom, Keeper of the Realm, Keeper of the Empire, and Keeper of the Colony). Her newest book, Keeper of the Island, is the fifth and final book of the Keeper series, which chronicles the adventures of Matt, a young man who has been sucked into a video game and has no choice but to play his way out.

I caught up with the busy Ms. Ralles at Barnes & Noble Booksellers in Denton, Texas, where she was signing copies of her latest book and co-hosting a pirate-themed activity with Cindy Vallar (a.k.a. “The Pirate Lady”).

Did you intend to create a series when you started the first Keeper book?

HR: No, not at all. I wrote Keeper of the Kingdom for my son, who was ten years old at the time. After I sold it, my publisher said, “You know, this would make a good series,” and he asked me to change the ending so I could continue Matt’s story. When the first printing sold out in six months, we knew we’d made the right choice; there was definitely an audience for a series.

Series are popular with readers because when they read a good book, they want more of the same, only different. Is that a challenge for the author?

HR: It is. I hit on the idea of Matt moving to the next level of the game in every book, which allows me to keep things fresh. Each book is set in a different place, Matt meets a different girl who helps him, and he fights a different enemy. The only constant is the rules of the game; those remain the same at every level. I’ve also tried to make each book a separate story that can stand alone; you can enjoy the fifth book even if you haven’t read the first four.

How does time move over the course of the series? Does Matt get older in every book?

HR: A lot of readers have asked me that question, and the answer appears in Keeper of the Island. I can’t tell you more than that; I don’t want to give away the secret!

In the Harry Potter series, the books have become darker and more complex as Harry has gotten older. This is fine for readers who have grown up along with Harry, because they’ve had to wait a year or two between books, but for young readers who are starting the series now—

HR: Yes, that can be a problem. When kids find something they like, they’ll read the entire series in two weeks, so there’s no maturing period. The Keeper books are all written for kids between 9 and 13 years old. There’s no bad language or anything inappropriate for that age.

Why did you choose to write about pirates in the final Keeper book?

HR: I’ve always been fascinated by pirates. When I was a little girl, one of my favorite stories was about a pirate, and it was set in a place I used to visit quite often with my family. Two years ago I went on a cruise to Belize, which is very rich in pirate history, and I felt I’d come full circle. I knew I wanted to write a pirate adventure.

There’s a trend in YA fiction, and of course in the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, toward a more positive view of pirates. Are your pirates good or bad?

HR: I suppose they’re bad pirates, but again, I don’t want to say too much . . .

CV: I think your depiction of pirates in Keeper of the Island is very authentic.

HR: Oh, do you? Thanks, that means a lot coming from you. I knew I wanted the pirates to be authentic, even though the series is set in 2540 A.D. People don’t usually think about modern pirates, and how pirates can exist in a futuristic setting is another one of the mysteries of the book.

Occasionally, science fiction and fantasy offend people’s sensibilities. Does it bother you when readers try to defend the authors by saying, “Oh, it’s just fiction”?

HR: Well, I do try to make sure that anything factual in my books is as accurate as possible. For example, in Keeper of the Island, I give some information about pirates and their ships. Matt incorrectly calls the pirate ship a galleon—because we always associate pirates with galleons, don’t we?—but the captain explains that it’s actually a square- rigger.

CV: The ships used in the old Captain Blood movies were galleons because they had nice big decks, perfect for staging a sword fight. But real pirates wouldn’t have used galleons because they’re big and unwieldy and hard to steer, plus they have a low draft, which means they can’t sail into shallow water. Pirates preferred quick, agile ships like schooners, sloops, and square-riggers.

HR: Well, that’s the sort of information I try to include in my books. Being a teacher, it’s partly my goal to inform my readers. For the Darok series, I had to do a lot of research on the potential challenges of space colonization, as well as on cryonics and cloning, and I shared what I’d learned with my readers. My books are taught in 7th and 8th grade science classes because they present factual information in an entertaining way. In fact, I was invited to sign Darok 9 and Darok 10 at the International Space Development Conference in Dallas, and the Space Frontier Foundation reviewed those books as well.

HR: My books have good moral values, which are important whether you’re writing fiction or non-fiction. Good wins out over evil. The kids work with adults, not against them, to achieve their goals. As a mother and a teacher, I’m upset by stories where 13-year-olds drive cars. Writers of YA fiction have a lot of responsibility. For myself, I want to show positive interactions between kids and adults: the kids respect the adults’ competence, and the adults listen to what the kids have to say.

To visit H. J. Ralles's website, click here.

Children's Media: Books vs. Movies

On July 4, I wrote about parents' attempts to limit their children's reading as "loving censorship," but in my first post, I mentioned the importance of finding age-appropriate books for young readers. I want to clarify this seeming contradiction. Sometimes parental direction is both beneficial and necessary, particularly when a popular children's book is adapted to a film that "everyone" is going to see. Not only will the movie be marketed to a much broader age group than the original book was intended for, but there's an essential difference between text and images.

As communications theorist Neil Postman explains in his book Amusing Ourselves to Death, written language is a complex system that requires skillful interpretation; thus it functions as a kind of self-authorizing code. If the child is old enough to understand complex sentences, sophisticated vocabulary, and abstract thought, she is probably mature enough to handle the content of the text. Thus it's relatively easy to protect children from "adult" information encoded in books.

Film, on the other hand, presents information in images, which do not require (much) decoding and are fairly easy to understand. Therefore, movies and television have no built-in safeguards to protect children from receiving information they're not intellectually or emotionally ready to receive. I will never forget my shock at seeing six- and seven-year-olds racing up and down the theater aisles at a showing of Jurassic Park. Parents who thought dinosaurs + Spielberg + McDonald's tie-in = children's movie were outraged by the violent images in the film, but they would never have handed Michael Crichton's book to their children (nor would the kids have gotten through more than a paragraph or two).

Adults as well as children enjoy Harry Potter precisely because the series contains so many intellectual challenges: e.g., sophisticated vocabulary (including British slang), complex characterization, subtle foreshadowing, and detailed plotting, not to mention the daunting length (the fifth book, Order of the Phoenix, is 870 pages long). Understanding the movies does not require the same skill and intellectual maturity, however, and there's nothing but a parent's "no" to protect young viewers from frightening images. I would recommend telling kids that they can see the movie only if they read the book first. Readers who are too young for Harry Potter's dark tone and occasionally violent episodes are likely to give up on the book as "too hard" long before they become upset, unless an adult is reading and interpreting the book for them. And this leads me to my final point.

Allowing children the freedom to make their own reading choices means letting them decide when to put a book down. Young readers are capable of figuring out on their own that a book is too hard or scary or "weird" (i.e., out of sync with their beliefs and worldview) for them, and they will put it down without having to be rescued.

Freedom to Read

It turns out that the American Library Association (ALA) has issued a Freedom to Read Statement. It was first adopted in 1953 and was amended in 1972, 1991, 2000, and 2004. Here are some highlights:

Most attempts at suppression rest on a denial of the fundamental premise of democracy: that the ordinary individual, by exercising critical judgment, will select the good and reject the bad. We trust Americans to recognize propaganda and misinformation, and to make their own decisions about what they read and believe.

Every silencing of a heresy, every enforcement of an orthodoxy, diminishes the toughness and resilience of our society and leaves it the less able to deal with controversy and difference.

Creative thought is by definition new, and what is new is different. The bearer of every new thought is a rebel until that idea is refined and tested.

The power of a democratic system to adapt to change is vastly strengthened by the freedom of its citizens to choose widely from among conflicting opinions offered freely to them. To stifle every nonconformist idea at birth would mark the end of the democratic process.

Furthermore, only through the constant activity of weighing and selecting can the democratic mind attain the strength demanded by times like these. We need to know not only what we believe but why we believe it.

Link

The Most Important Freedom

I have a friend whose father used to control her leisure reading so strictly that he actually used a magic marker to black out any objectionable words or passages. At the bookstore and the library, I frequently see children negotiating with their parents for the privilege of reading a particular book: "Please, please, please!" In running my book group, I've met several parent-child pairs who read together, and I've often thought what a wonderful experience that would be, but reading in tandem also opens the door to many opportunities for loving censorship: "I don't think we should continue with this book" or "Let's stop reading this book for now, and we'll come back to it when you're older."

My own childhood reading benefited from a kind of benign, or perhaps benevolent, neglect. My parents gave me books, many of them, which certainly directed my reading, but they also encouraged me to make use of my school and community libraries, where I always had the freedom to make my own choices. I don't remember ever having to plead for the right to read Judy Blume or Norma Klein or Zilpha Keatley Snyder (the closest thing my generation had to J. K. Rowling). My parents may have kept a watchful eye on what I was reading (and my mother assures me that they did), but I was unaware of it. For my part, I never tried to hide what I was reading from my parents. The thought never crossed my mind.

Today, the Fourth of July, we celebrate our many cherished freedoms, including freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly. Underlying all these is the most important right of all--freedom of thought. Children should not be denied this most important freedom merely because they are children and therefore legal minors. Intellectual independence is not a privilege to be earned but a birthright. Children should and must be free to develop their own thoughts, and this means observing, questioning, and entering into conversation with a wide range of other thinkers. What better way to do this than to read?

Harry Potter Events at the Denton Public Libraries

Are you counting the days until the next Harry Potter movie? Is the wait for the final Harry Potter book driving you insane?

The Denton Public Libraries feel your pain, and they've got some cool events to make the wait a little easier.

HARRY POTTER DEATH POOL
Emily Fowler Central Library
J. K. Rowling has announced that two characters will die in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Can you guess who? Contest begins July 1 and runs through July 20. Fun giveaways for the winner! Call 940.349.8752

HARRY POTTER FILM FESTIVAL
HP and the Sorcerer's Stone
July 9, 2:30 p.m. - South Branch Library

HP and the Chamber of Secrets
July 10, 2:30 p.m. - South Branch Library

HP and the Prisoner of Azkaban
July 12, 2:30 p.m. - Emily Fowler Central Library

HP and the Goblet of Fire
July 13, 2:30 p.m. - North Branch

* Children under 8 must be accompanied by an adult for all movies

HARRY POTTER JEOPARDY!
July 17, 4 p.m. - Emily Fowler Central
Come test your knowledge of Harry Potter trivia (rounds for beginners and advanced players).

HARRY POTTER GAME NIGHT
July 18, 4 p.m. - South Branch
Think you're a Harry Potter wiz? Board games and video games will give you a chance to prove it!

BOOK DISCUSSION: GETTING READY FOR BOOK 7!
July 19, 4 p.m. - North Branch
Join us for a look back at our favorite HP moments and predictions about how the series will end.

BOOK DISCUSSION: HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS
July 26, 4 p.m. - North Branch
Finally, all is revealed! Die-hard fans who've already finished the book should join us for this exciting discussion. Can Harry Potter really be over?

My Romance with Harry Potter, Part 1

Until the spring of 2001, I was only dimly aware of Harry Potter as a popular children's series that some people were trying to ban (I had no idea why). That all changed on the first day of class in the sophomore survey I was teaching--British Literature, 18th century - Present. As I was going over the syllabus for the semester, a young man in the back raised his hand.

"Is this the section of this course that's doing the Harry Potter books?" he wanted to know.

I was taken aback by the way he phrased the question--he seemed certain that somebody would be teaching Harry Potter. When I told him that, as far as I knew, J. K. Rowling wasn't on anybody's syllabus, he was absolutely crushed. "You mean nobody's teaching Harry Potter?" It was as if his world no longer had meaning.

When the class was over, the young man stopped on his way out the door to ask despairingly, "Haven't you ever read the Harry Potter books?" Behind him, another student paused to hear my confession that no, I hadn't. "Oh, you should read them," the young woman announced confidently. "They're hot-diggity."

Maybe I'm reading too much into this episode, but the fact remains: both students dropped my course.

After that, I had no choice. I had to read the books. I hit my local library and slunk my way through the children's section, feeling strangely guilty and conspicuous, like a child molester hanging around a school playground. I expected to be challenged at any minute--"What do you think you're doing, lady?"--so I made up an elaborate story about a sick kid at home who had begged me to bring him a book, any book, to while away his lonely hours. (I don't have any children.) When I reached the Rs, I grabbed the only Harry Potter book on the shelf (The Goblet of Fire) without even looking at it and fled to the adult section of the library, where I loaded up on Margaret Atwood and other "literary" writers to shore up my credentials as an intellectual.

I was feeling pretty good until I saw the librarian at the circulation desk. Studly-looking guy, earring, purple silk shirt. I just knew he was going to give me grief about Harry, and I handed over my books with dread in my heart. Studly Guy checked out my books without comment, but when he came to Harry Potter, he paused and looked up, just as I'd known he would. I readied my cover story, heartlessly giving my fictional son chicken pox and a broken leg.

"Now, have you read the first three?" Studly Guy asked, his voice concerned. "Because you're going to ruin it for yourself if you read these out of order."

Safe!

Why We Should Take Children's Lit Seriously

As a graduate student, I never took a course in children's literature. In fact, I don't remember even being offered the opportunity. I do remember hearing one professor speak disparagingly of "kiddie lit," which I now realize is a controversial but widely-used term, but I had no idea that this was a field of legitimate study (and indeed, some scholars argue that it isn't). Children's/YA lit has gained grudging acceptance in the academy and I've read some truly outstanding scholarship on the subject, but I've learned most of what I know about this field from much younger experts.

Birth of a Book Group
Two years ago, I was asked to put together a fantasy/science fiction book group for readers between the ages of 10 and 15. I figured I could draw on some of my old favorites--A Wrinkle in Time, The Chronicles of Narnia, Alice in Wonderland--but I wasn't up on any current fiction except Harry Potter, so I went to my public library to do some research. I casually asked a librarian if she could recommend a few books and was overwhelmed by her response--Pat led me all over the junior and teen sections, showered me with lists of award-winning books, and fired authors and titles at me until I begged for mercy. We sat down at a table as I feverishly took notes, stumbling over the spelling of unfamiliar names like Sabriel and Abarat. I wish I could remember which title Pat was talking about when a young woman playing a computer game nearby suddenly turned around and said fervently, "That is SUCH a great book!" That's how I met Julia.

Julia joined us at the table and started rattling off all the books I absolutely had to read. After a while, her sister, Katherine, wandered over to see what we were doing, and soon both girls were darting into the stacks and bringing back armfuls of their favorite books, breathlessly providing plot summaries and arguing over which were the best. I've spent my life among books and people who love them, but it had been a long time since I had heard anyone talk about reading with such passion and urgency. I knew I had to get this book group up and running. Julia and Katherine became the first two members.

Next month the Gryffindors will celebrate our two-year anniversary (yes, I live in fear of being sued for copyright infringement, but we love the name). In addition to facilitating the meetings, I publish two newsletters, The Denton Runes and Dragonbites, to recommend books and advertise special events at the Denton Public Library and at the Barnes & Noble store where the group meets.

Here are some of the things I've learned over the past two years:

1. We are living in a second Golden Age of children's/YA literature, fueled by but certainly not limited to the Harry Potter phenomenon. (The first Golden Age was in the 19th century--more about that later.) There's just a lot of good stuff out there right now, including a number of books with very strong female heroes. I plan to talk about many of these books in more detail in future posts, but let me just list, in no particular order, some of the most impressive authors I've read: Shannon Hale, Scott Westerfeld, Jonathan Stroud, Philip Pullman, Patricia Wrede, Maiya Williams, Louis Sachar, Carl Hiaasen, Justine Larbalestier, Terry Pratchett, J. K. Rowling, Orson Scott Card, Gail Carson Levine, Rick Riordan, Vivian Vande Velde, and Gabrielle Zevin.

2. "Children's literature" covers a lot of territory, everything from soft-cover picture books for infants to racy teen reads like the Gossip Girl series (think Sex and the City for the Clearasil crowd and you've got the idea). This tendency to lump everything together under one umbrella term leads to confusion about what is age-appropriate. Harry Potter and Eragon may be extremely popular, but they're NOT for six-year-olds.

3. Children's/YA lit has a much larger audience than you might think. The Gryffindors was intended for tweens and young teens, but we had so many adults attend the first few meetings that I changed the description to "readers of all ages." Some are parents who come with their children; some are aspiring children's authors or fans of a particular book; others are college-age readers who find that YA books are more thought-provoking and original than adult fiction.

4. They may be writing for young readers, but these authors aren't kidding around (sorry, I couldn't resist that one). They're taking on serious issues and creating real art.

• Cornelia Funke's Inkheart raises the issue of an author's moral responsibility for his or her creation.
• Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game and Terry Pratchett's Only You Can Save Mankind confront the moral complexities of war.
• Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy is a rewriting of Milton's Paradise Lost by way of William Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience and "The Marriage of Heaven and Hell."

In her study Kiddie Lit: The Cultural Construction of Children's Literature in America, Beverly Lyon Clark asserts that the study of children's lit raises some fascinating questions about canonicity, commodification, and censorship, but she gives us an even more important reason to take children's lit seriously: "The term kiddie lit captures our culture's ambivalence toward children and children's literature: dismissive? self-mocking? pejorative? ironical?" (2).

Our regard for children's lit has a lot to do with our regard for children, period.