Calling all cultured aspies

Post Reply New Topic

I'm sure we have all read JK Rowling's "The Philosopher's Stone" let's start with that...

In America, it’s called the “Sorcerer’s Stone.”

I loved it! I’ve always been obsessed with fantasy. I think most of us can relate to Harry Potter’s sense of alienation in one way or another and feel like we are living among Muggles.

I wish I could be a kid again and go to Hogwarts.

It’s one of those books that seems to read itself. The level of desperation I experienced after I finished each book to get the next one was remarkable. I needed an immediate “fix.”

I just read them within the past couple of years. They were strictly off limits in the religious group I grew up in.

Who invented tragedy? Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides. Were they not great? One could also argue that the classical world lost its soul to Christianity.

I don't have a problem with the tragic genre itself.

Classical paganism was subsumed into Christianity and indeed venerated in its own right. The parallel with the wholesale rejection of Christianity for ultimately cynical and immoral reasons (to my mind) that we're seeing now is not a terribly good one.

Why is the American version called the "Sorcerer's stone"?

I read all the books and watched all the movies. For me none of the books capture the magic and wonder of the "Philosopher's stone". The journey baby Harry took from his first meeting with Voldermort then on to Privet Drive and the Dursleys then travelling with Hagrid to Hogwarts meeting all his classmates and how awestruck they were travelling by boat to gates of Hogwarts (although I never understood why they had to come by boat the first time and then by the Hogwart's express each subsequent time?).

What do you think the appeal is? I mean the obsession with this story has created "Potterworlds" like Dinseylands; I wonder if this tale taps into a deeper sense of connection in both children and adults?

I think it fulfills that longing for escape. A large reason why I became such a voracious reader as a kid is because of the appeal of escapism. I preferred fantasy worlds over the real world. Of course, it probably wouldn’t be pleasant to be chased by trolls, orcs, or Ringwraiths...

Life often seems mundane or boring, though, but in books like the Harry Potter series, it opens up a whole new world of possibilities.

It’s also an underdog story which is relatable to so many people.

The first book in the series is the most charming, but I liked them all. I actually cried in the last book when Harry was going to face what he thought was his death against Voldemort.

I haven’t watched the movies yet. I love the Lord of the Rings movies even though they don’t always follow the books very closely.

The movies are cool and worth watching if you have read the book, however expect Chris Columbus to cut corners and miss out lots of detail that the books cover.

Your reasoning exactly reflects my thoughts (couldn't have put it better). I also loved the other books but found the first most enchanting (perhaps it's because it's the first time one visits Hogwarts in their mind).

But I was also wondering if it fulfils a deeper connection to our lost cultural roots...

I think the series gets darker as it goes along because Rowling figured that her initial audience was older. Some parts in the later books I wouldn’t be thrilled about a ten year old reading, just like there’s darker stuff in Lord of the Rings than in The Hobbit.

I had a hard time reading certain passages such as in “Order of the Phoenix” when Harry is in detention with Professor Umbridge and the words “I will not tell lies” is carved over and over again into his hand.

Anyway, perhaps it does fill a connection to our lost cultural roots. I reread The Scarlet Letter recently, and there’s a lovely passage in which it speaks of Puritan days as being back when witches still roamed the skies. When someone yells at night in the book, it says:

“The town did not awake; or, if it did, the drowsy slumberers mistook the cry either for something frightful in a dream, or for the noise of witches; whose voices, at that period, were often heard to pass over the settlements or lonely cottages, as they rode with Satan through the air.”

In an age of rationalism, perhaps we miss the days when darkness and mist housed more mysteries and secrets than our current scientific knowledge will allow. It’s hard to imagine what it would be like to live in a time when anything, through magic, could be possible.

Yes this is where I was heading. The Harry Potter books tap into an unconcious yearning to connect to our roots. People frame our western history through a Judeo-Christian lens and particularly those of us living in the "colonies" feel disconnected especially when subscribing to the biblical or scientific/rational order of nature. Myths and stories were part of the early culture of Europe and a spiritual connection to land/nature.

I am not sure if Rowling was really trying to capture this? it might be more accidental than intentional but she has managed to draw on some element of the mystic this using a relatable framework people can understand (i.e. modern Britain, school, family etc)



It's interesting that many of the most rational minds like the late Steven Hawking and even Einstein invoke unknown forces in the universe. BTW one aspect of the movies that makes them successful is the brilliant music of John Williams which adds to the enchantment.

Dude, that doesn't make any sense.

Either he was confused, or you are confused somewhere along the line.

The Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians, ( coming from what is now the Netherlands, and northwest germany) all invaded AND settled Britain in the dark ages. The Frisians were not the exclusive founders of English.

Modern German, and Dutch, are not "north Germanic", but (like modern English and modern Frisian) "West Germanic" languages.

Later Britain was also invaded, AND settled by Vikings from Scandanavia who did speak north Germanic languages.

The Danish Vikings actually conquered and ruled a big chunk of what is now England. And Norwejian Vikings settled in Scotland and tricked down into England as well. All of these groups left their mark on English.

Its possible that modern Frisians may have some kind of folk memory (based upon fact, or not) of being descended from a group that did not speak a Germanic language (maybe they were even pre Indo European). And maybe they did become assimilated linquistically by contact with the Germanic branch of the Indoeuropeans. But that was long before the migrations to Britain. But by the time of the Dark Ages they spoke languages akin to their Germanic neighbors, and they settled and they elbowed their way into what is now England alongside other these related speaking groups as well.

That's why England is called that. The place means "land of the Angles". Le Angleterre in French. And why there places in southeast England called "west saxon" south saxon and east saxon ( Essex, Wessex, and Sussex). The Saxons and Angles were mainland neighbors of the Fris to the East in what is now north Germany.

Yeah this is the conventional history in the textbooks.

However the period when the Romans left Britain and what happened next is shrouded in complete mystery. Even Scholars of English history are struggling to understand how the Anglo-Saxons arrived in Britain "en-mass" and displaced the celtic tribes that existed there.

I recall a lecture given by a history lecturer back in university who said the Anglo-Saxon invasion is a myth and that the English speaking people who settled in Britain are more accurately described as "Franko-Frisian. There is also a question mark as to whether there these original inidigenous populations were ever displaced at all
http://theconversation.com/why-the-idea ... myth-88272

Genetics suggest the pre-Celtic and Pre-Anglo-Saxon populations make up the bulk of DNA in Britain and they originally looked like this
https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... is-reveals

John Williams is an amazing movie music composer. Sometimes music in a movie is the difference between like and dislike for me.

Pagan myths do demonstrate an interconnectedness with nature. It’s a more palatable spiritual outlook in my mind. Rather than espousing a need to rise above our physical experience, it’s more of a celebration of sorts.

We first learn of Harry’s love for Ginny due to a sensory experience. One of his favorite smells was the scent of flowers that was in Ginny’s hair - this blossoming wasn’t made any less romantic by being rooted in a physical sense of perception.

I felt disconnected from biblical religious ideals. I found being in nature and using my imagination a more spiritual experience than going to church or reading a Bible (*yawn*). Perhaps it’s sublimity or even just the complete sensory experience that we can glean from nature that makes it such a fulfilling experience.

Or perhaps it is a link to our evolutionary past. It’s just sad to be in a place in which we think we have all the answers and there’s nothing left to discover. I wonder how pagan mystics felt after the newness of conversion wore away and any “mystery” was viewed as Satanic.

It’s the possibility of the unknown that’s so emotionally satisfying. When everyday is strategically planned for the foreseeable future, life loses a lot of its magic.

One of my favourite bits in the last book (Deathly Hallows) which was echoed in the movie was invoking a childhood memory of Severus Snape lying on the grass with Lily Potter underneath a weeping willow near a river. Severus chanted a spell that made the falling willow leaves that made them spin like propellers flying through the air.

Sometimes I wonder if I'm cultured or just plain old-fashioned.

Actually I think everyone follows some type of culture

i've been following Yoplait and their silly@$$ed upside-down and totally counterproductive yogurt containers for ages now.