Mail Bag: How About a Book on the Meaning of Spells?

January 10, 2014 by Leave a Comment

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 2:13 PM, KR wrote:

Just a suggestion but what if you put together a book on all the spells from Harry Potter and all their meanings… Kind of like a dictionary for spells from the Saga. Thanks for the explanations and ideas. Keep writing and keep smiling.

Best regards,

Your fan,

KR

Dear KR,

Thank you for this suggestion!

Three quick thoughts:

I have five book irons in the fire already and I’m making little progress on any of them. I fall over unconscious with the idea of beginning another…

Filed Under: Mailbag

Stephenie Meyer ‘So Over’ Twilight? Yes! and No, Not Really…

January 9, 2014 by 2 Comments

It occurred to me when writing yesterday’s post, which began with Stephenie Meyer’s refusal to answer a question about abortion rights, that her refusal to answer, her refusing to answer, was probably driven by humility and, perhaps, by a little practical wisdom. Was the reporter really looking for insight on the issue? Or was he hoping she’d oblige him with the PC ammo that critics would use (citing his interview as a source) to bash Mrs Meyer once again as a neanderthal nobody from nowhere?

That’s a rhetorical question. I’m guessing she could see the downside of stating her beliefs about the rightness or wrongness of abortion, either agreeing with or standing apart from the position of her LDS faith. Either way, it’s headlines and unpleasant blowback from all sides of the political spectrum. By saying, in effect, “I’m an artist, ask me about my work, numbskull,” she neatly sidestepped the pathetic faux controversy that would have blown up her life if she had answered.

If you think I’m exaggerating how anything she says is misconstrued or her fatigue in being treated this way by the Fourth estate, read her answers to this interview in Variety and the statement she had to put out later on her website to calm the back-lash:

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Twilight

Celebrity Writers: What Socrates, Stephenie, and Solzhenitsyn Teach Us About the Insight of Poets Outside Their Inspiration

January 8, 2014 by 2 Comments

Thank you to everyone who has sent me and my family Christmas greetings on Orthodox Nativity. Joyous Noel! On to business!

Although the meme survives that everyone who reads Stephenie Meyer with admiration or fondness is a loser (and the contrary, those who despise her work and her fans are by definition winners, at least in comparison), I confess to being a Meyer-Reader and an admirer. I don’t recognize myself in the people being ridiculed in the Twilight of Our Literacy posts — 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10, thank you Alix —  and I do see my reflection, an unpleasant snobbish side, alas, in the attitude of those rolling their eyes at others who are beneath them in literary taste or acumen.

I say all that to introduce an aside Mrs. Meyer made in a recent interview about celebrities, politics, and the real world. And the wisdom of knowing when your opinion isn’t worth the consideration that many might give it for all the wrong reasons:

Stephenie Meyer on Twilight, feminism and true love

I ask whether she’s anti-abortion, and she says: “You know what? I never talk about politics, because that is one of my pet peeves, when people with any measure of celebrity get on their soapbox and say: ‘You should vote this way.’ First of all, celebrities don’t know anything about real life. They live in an ivory tower … I lived in the real world for 30 years, enough to know I’m not in it now.”

There are author-celebrities, alive and dead, whose view on political issues I do want to read. The two I think of immediately are both dead — C. S. Lewis and Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn — and I can honestly say I do not hold with the opinions of either with respect to partisan issues of governance. Their ideas, however, on all things including politics are more than worth my time and serious consideration because what made these men great artists and Christians, their gravitas and spiritual achievements won the hard way, demands my respect and deference, if not total agreement.

Do such giants walk the earth today? I assume they do but their names do not come to mind (please educate me in the com boxes below with your literary-celebrity guru list). I will add that I believe that the muses of more than one artist are more perceptive and more edifying than the expressed political positions of those they inspire — and who believe their fame entitles, even obliges them to speak out, truth to power!, on issues and concerns having little to do with what made them famous and without the depth or breadth of understanding that such commentary requires, if only in order not to be just psychological discharge or another voice of the age in which we live.  [Read more…]

Filed Under: Hog Pro Notes, Twilight

Essays and Articles on the 50th Anniversary of C. S. Lewis’ Death

January 3, 2014 by Leave a Comment
2013 was the 50th Anniversary of C. S. Lewis’ repose and the occasion merited much public reflection, perhaps especially in light of his death having been on the same day as John Kennedy’s assassination. The peak of the celebration and observances, I think it’s fair to say, was the dedication of a memorial to CSL in Westminster Abbey. Many interesting articles regarding the memorial at Westminster Abbey, as well as Lewis’s enduring legacy in general, can be found at publications such as The Christian Science Monitor, The Guardian, and The Daily Beast.
I’ve collected links to eight other articles below the jump for those who missed this in the Thanksgiving/Christmas rush of 2013. Enjoy!
Filed Under: C. S. Lewis

Guest Post: David the Mysterious in ‘Allegiant’ Finale

January 3, 2014 by 1 Comment

A Guest Post from Fr. Isaiah Mary Molano, OP, to re-open our discussion of Allegiant, the controversial finale of the Divergent trilogy; enjoy!

Within pages of starting Allegiant, we are introduced to a world outside the fence. A new world, a new life concept, new presuppositions, and new characters. One character I would like to ponder about is David, the head of the Bureau.

David is the Lord and Master of all of the experimental cities in the new United States. The Bureau of Genetic Welfare’s goal is to make more perfect humans by manipulating certain behaviors and life concepts of the people inhabiting the cities—like the faction system. David has the singular purpose of maintaining the experiments at all costs, even to the cost of taking away lives and memories, in order to allow the experiments to continue for the sake of the betterment of humanity.

There is another David I would like us to compare him to: King David of the Hebrew Scriptures. This King David had a singular purpose of loving God, taking care of his people, singing and dancing his praises.

Both Davids have that singular purpose for taking care of their respective communities, whether it be the experiments or the nation. Both were in charge of maintaining their cities and doing their best to keep the peace. Both were prepared to go to extreme lengths to protect their own. For the David of the Bureau, he was willing to erase the memory of Chicago’s inhabitants in order to keep the experiment going. David of Jerusalem, he fled his own city when his own son Absalom pursued him in order to take the crown from his father. Both loved the wrong women to their eventual detriment. David of the Bureau loved Natalie, whose daughter was David’s eventual demise. David of Jerusalem loved Bathsheba, and his copulation with her led to a curse upon Israel and a downturn to his rule. [Read more…]

Filed Under: Divergent, Guest Posts