I also think, however, that religious authors may have a special propensity or talent for Fantasy literature for another reason: Their experience of faith while living in a modern, empiricist, materialist world could be related to their commitment to “outdated” themes such as “self-sacrifice”, “duty over pleasure” or “eternal love”. To say it polemically, in our modern world, their faith is as anachronistic as is their subject matter. Which of course may be precisely why it appeals to so many people – speak of Eliade, and smuggling the Gospel.

I see a parallel to the Reformation here: When Calvin, Luther and the others abolished the catholic belief in a parallel world full of saints, ghosts, witches and a coexisting purgatory, they couldn’t purge the collective unconscious of these ideas – and as a result, the supernatural retreated into the realm of the fantastic and returned as literature – hence Hamlet’s ghost and the age’s fascination with witchcraft. Similarly, in modern times, many traditional values have become problematic and cannot (or not easily) be treated seriously anymore in “serious” literature – think of honor, chastity, self-sacrifice and the like. However, these values are still with us (if only as a cultural residue that informs our cultural experiences or if because they reflect higher truths is another question), and they find an outlet in Fantasy literature – hence the fascination with it.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to reading the rest of your posts on this topic. Oh, and one problem I had was following your first argument about involuntary meaning on the four levels. You write that, consciously or not, “”just” by writing stories with satirical, allegorical, and alchemical symbols and artistry, Ms. Rowling is writing tales that reflect the four levels of reality as Platonists and Christians understand it. In this, her books engage every level of human cognition as we enter into them fully through our imaginations”. It may just be too late tonight for my mind to operate well – but isn’t this a closed circle? Are you saying that it isn’t the intention of the author, but the content of the books that counts with respect to the four levels of meaning – that whenever a book has a certain content (i.e. satire, allegory and symbolism), well, then the four levels apply, and otherwise they don’t?
Not sure if I’m making sense here – I’d better get to bed P.

Arabella: I’d love to get these articles on Lost you mentioned! That was the one and only TV-series I’ve been watching in, oh I guess more than 30 years… and yes, it was intelligently done, though I never thought it to be more than a mystery show with a clever script and good characterization. What you write makes me wonder if there’s more to it that I related to, subconsciously…
Unfortunately they haven’t shown the last season over here yet, so I’m still in the dark as to what “it” is… and truth to tell, I got “lost” somewhere around season three, what with new miracles and illusions by the handful. So I’d be grateful to read something that makes sense of the story.
John has got my email-address…

rumor: Nice ideas and associations! I especially like the Ophelia-connection…

It’s taking me awhile to catch up on commenting (I didn’t take my computer for the week in FL after all), but I’ve thoroughly enjoyed reading your thoughts and everyone’s comments on the critical reception of Harry Potter and Twilight.

The idea that almost by default, “books by devout authors can be read on multiple levels”, makes a lot of sense. Perhaps it is because the very religious have spent so much time and energy and passion in asking the deeper questions of life; that much love and need can hardly help working their way into the creative output. My mother, an artist, always taught us that “what’s in your heart will come out in your art”.

Curiosity: Do you think Stephenie Meyer used literary alchemy at all? My impression was that she did, though not nearly as thoroughly as Rowling … but I’m no expert.

Funny, Mrs. Figg, but everybody I know who watches Lost absolutely loves it and hangs on every show. I’ve only seen a couple of episodes, which were only enough to tell me that there was much more to the story than I was getting. Most TV comes off as mindless and pointless to me, but it seems that now and again a really clever work comes along.

You write: “…reality is four layered and human beings are designed to perceive these four layers. Story and especially imaginative or fantasy fiction may be the last place in the postmodern world outside of orthodox religious liturgies in revealed traditions in which human beings actually experience reality outside the cave.”

I know you despise TV, but it’s a shame you haven’t followed the mythic and intelligent show ‘Lost.’ It deals with the four levels (and then some!) in intriguing and compelling ways. It’s faith vs. reason theme, traditional and (often quite direct) Christian symbolism, literary influences (books shown, episode titles, and within the storytelling), and inside/outside cave thinking and motives(and resulting consequences) is riveting. I think you’d appreciate this literate show, with it’s huge twists, more than most people. Perhaps sometimes you’ll watch the series on DVD, in order, of course. (Jeff Jensen’s recaps/articles at EW dig into all the above. If you ever watch it, I’ll send them to you.)