All Things Philosophical on Harry Potter

current film: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone

I’ve been reading Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, and it is a really charming read. Delightful prose, interesting characters, and a magical world that should guarantee that any Buffyverse fan also become a Harry Potter fan (alas, if only the reverse were true as well!)

So as I’m reading the book and walking down the sidewalk simultaneously, I find myself veering over to the video store to rent the movie. The US version of the movie, of course, with its repeated references to the “Sorcerer’s Stone”, because we are woefully ignorant and have never heard of the legend of the Philosopher’s Stone. After all, if it aint practical, it’s just worthless nonsense. And why do philosopher’s need stones, anyway? They’re up there in their ivory towers sucking up student tuition and the working man’s taxes contributing nothing to the economy.

Anyway, I digress. This is only the third time I’ve seen the movie, and I rented the VHS tape from the corner video store instead of netflix ’cause you can’t video tape the feed from a DVD. Ssssh! Don’t tell anyone. It’s not like I’m going to sell copies or anything. I want it for my private collection.

I’m still digressing. OK, so towards the end of the movie, Harry is confronted by Professor Quirrell/Voldemort, who is looking for the aforementioned stone. He is trying to persuade Harry to help him get it, and he thinks Harry is warming up to doing just that. Pleased, he says,

“There is no good and evil, there is only power, and those too weak to seek it.”

This pricks up my ears. Now, I’m only on page 126 of the book, but I sneak ahead to the end and check to see how the scene goes there. Sure enough, these are Rowling’s words as well. Well, words she puts in the mouth of Quirrell/Voldemort.

And it’s interesting. Any Buffyverse fan worth two shakes of philosopher’s salt would recognize that statement. It’s almost word for word what the First Evil says to a trembling, half-crazed souled Spike in “Lessons”:

“It’s not about right. Not about wrong. It’s about power.”

But this isn’t the first time Mutant Enemy has put such words in the mouth of their Big Bads. Jasmine-in-Cordelia or “The Beast’s Master” says the same thing in Season 4 of Angel:

“What does that mean, really? Being good? Doing the right thing? By who’s judgment? Good, evil–they’re just words, Connor. Concepts of morality they forced around your neck to yank you wherever they please. You’re with me now. You don’t have to live by their rules. You remember why?”

Connor: “‘Cause we’re special.”

It was behind Faith’s infamous words in Season 3 of BtVS:

“Want, take, have.”

And her belief that Slayers could do whatever they want by virtue of being stronger than others and saving them from unspeakable demons.

Holland Manners of Wolfram and Hart has a similar philosophy in Season 1 of Angel:

“I’m talking about that sharp, clear sense of self a man gains once he’s truly found his place in the world. It’s no mean feat, since most men are cowards and just move with the crowd. Very few make their own destinies. They have the courage of their convictions, and they know how to behave in a crisis.”

Observing the actions of Wolfram and Hart over the years and the rationalizations they give for them, this is indeed the governing philosophy of the “evil” law firm:

The world is designed for those who know how to use it, those who can control themselves and others. You must find your role in the scheme of things–you are either the user or the used. “Good” and “evil” are mere constructs invented by the losers to feel better about their lot in life. But the weak deserve their lot because they lack of courage to do what they want and take what they want.

One of the reasons Mutant Enemy and Joss provide us with such intelligent shows is because their “evil” characters aren’t running around hurting people for no apparent reason. This is the problem with a lot of books/shows/movies. Trying to figure out the motivations of the bad guy. A lot of two-dimensional bad guys have to be finally just called “megalomaniac evil over-lords” because their actions lack the courage of any convictions.

But this philosophy I’ve been quoting is so compelling as a way of demarcating “bad guys” because it has a certain rational ring to it. Ultimately, this philosophy comes down to self-interest, and the willingness to do whatever it takes to serve your own. Indeed, many would not call this a “philosophy” at all, they’d call it “Reality. That’s just the way things are.”

Who says there’s any “Good” or “Evil”? These are social constructs that every society defines differently, by the way. Look around at nature and at human life, and all you see are plants, animals and people pursuing their self-interest, even these so-called “heroes” who believe in “Good”.

If you want to use such an outlook on life as a way of demarcating the bad guys from the good guys, it becomes a very rational way to tempt the morally upright, law-abiding hero into doing things s/he’s been taught are wrong. Especially if they use “any means necessary” to accomplish ends they think are “good”.

And so Faith tempts Buffy.
Voldemort tempts Harry (you were wondering when I’d get back to Harry Potter, right?)

And the fact that both Rowling and Mutant Enemy have seized on this philosophy as a way of explaining their “bad guys” outlook makes me think their Hero’s struggle is also the struggle of western society at large.

Regarding Henry

current snackfood: Tortilla chips for breakfast

I’ve been cleaning out the movie cabinet lately, trying to get rid of the large volume of video tapes I own. Making some tough decisions about what to keep and what must go. Some of the movies are easy–definite keepers. Others must be watched again before I reach a verdict.

Synoposis: Rich jerk gets a personality-dectomy from a handgun.

Analysis: The moral message of this movie (“don’t be a rich jerk”) is delivered with an anvil. Everybody loves nicer but mentally deficient Henry. And Harrison Ford, while one of my favorite actors, doesn’t do incompetent well. The mean, morally deficient Henry is a more convincing acting job. Harrison Ford should stick to earnest heroes, rogues, and bastard lawyers.

Verdict: I will keep this movie in my collection because I’m fascinated by the effect brain damage can have on the personality (any one else out there an Oliver Sacks fan?), and because I love seeing rich jerks taken down a peg.

PS: My Highlander Season 2 DVDs arrived today! I am one happy TV ho. My credit card, however, is being punished for it.

The Champion

One of my favorite TV shows of all time is “Highlander”. It’s about Duncan MacLeod, a champion. In fact, looking over the TV shows I like best–BtVS, Angel, DSN, and Highlander–they are all about champions. I don’t apologize for the use of that term anymore than the producers and writers of “Angel” do, even though they do overuse it.

A champion is a warrior who takes on the battles of people who can’t fight (physically) for themselves. I used to wonder why I was so into shows about warriors and fighters, given my own pacifist proclivities. Duncan Macleod helps illuminate this. He is a warrior. He’s killed lots of people and continues to. And yet, at the same time, he is a pacifist. There was a time when he wasn’t a pacifist, at least not consciously. He was raised a Scottish clan warrior. His responsibility was to protect his people from their enemies. He continued to be a professional soldier for years and years until he met Darius, who helped him recognized within himself a feeling he already had–that most killing is senseless slaughter, that the cycle of revenge is pointless. That the only reason to fight is to defend people against those who would slaughter senselessly.

The Duncan we meet in 1993 doesn’t go looking for fights, but if someone challenges him, he will fight if he is forced to. Often he tries to find ways to avoid a battle. But if he must fight, he does, and if he has to, he will kill.

As a warrior, Duncan can never stay far away from battles for very long. He tried to. He stayed on “holy ground” for years avoiding other immortals and their quest for “the prize”. He was an abolitionist during the Civil War. He lived with the Sioux during an era when American Indians were being mass slaughtered. He was a medic in World War I. He helped save refuges in the Viet Nam War. Always in the war zone. Always the champion.

Pacifism isn’t about believing that all war is bad. It’s about recognizing that all war is sad. Sometimes it is necessary for the greater good, but the pacifist warrior is someone who choses his battles carefully, who never seeks them out, who defends the innocent and recognizes that the value of people isn’t based on how strong they are.

Some of his pacifism probably isn’t always wise. He lives by a code of chivalry that won’t allow him to kill people who can’t engage him in a “fair fight”–he won’t kill women immortals, or child immortals. As Methos pointed out to him, there’s more than physical strength involved in a fight. The women and children have their own weapons. Duncan knows this, and he understands the “weapons” they use. But still he won’t kill them, and this may one day be his undoing.

Or maybe he will be the one. He will be the last immortal in the end. He will win “the prize”–all the strength and knowledge of the other immortals will go into him, making him the most powerful person on Earth. Jim Dawson hopes so. And when his clansman Connor forced Duncan to kill him so that they could defeat a powerful evil immortal, Duncan came that much closer to being “the one”, as far as story lines go.

We’ll probably never know if Duncan will be the last immortal, although, what’s the point of telling his story if he isn’t?

Babylon 5

Now I know why, given all the sci-fi shows I have on tape, I don’t have Babylon 5 on tape. The first season is so tedious, and I caught the rest of the show in bits and pieces. I think I have yet to see any of Season 5.

I’ve never been interested in shows that focus on “political intrigue”. If I wanted political intrigue, I’d watch the news or read a newspaper. Both things depress the hell out of me. I prefer shows that focus on personal relationships, like BtVS and Angel do.

That doesn’t explain why I adore Deep Space Nine, which also had political intrigue, but Star Trek never seemed nearly so in-your-face about political story lines. Deep Space Nine was always ultimately about the characters and their interpersonal relationships with each other, not how the Romulans hate the Klingons who hate the Cardassians who hate the Bajorans who hate the blah blah blah. That was part of it, yes, but I don’t remember it bothering me or boring me like it does with B5.

I know enough about Babylon 5 to know some interesting things arise when the races have to ban together against the Shadows. A lot like the DSN war against the Dominion. And I know there is a whole messiah story line involving Commander Sinclair as the Minbari prophet, Valen. It’s funny all the parallels between B5 and DSN, with the Sisko-as-Emissary storyline.

I’m going to watch all of B5 and give it a chance to impress me, through the magic of cable and rental DVDs. I think I’ve seen it all the way through at least once, but I don’t remember it moving me the way DSN did. We’ll see.

I already am a big Ivanova/Talia shipper. Sexual tension or what? And it’s good to know in advance it gets consummated, even if it was done too subtley.

I’m a TV whore

According to many of my local friends (I am no longer calling them my “real life” friends. The internet is “real life”, too, isn’t it?), television is a vast wasteland of continuing stereotypes and gratuitous violence dumbed down to the level of a ten-year old. A ten-year old boy of course, because somehow in this sexist way of thinking, that’s worse than a ten-year old girl.

The only reason you’d want to watch television, according to this way of thinking, is if you want to ogle half-naked breasts. And *we*, sniff, do NOT want to do that (this is coming mostly from lesbians, and I really, really believe them when they say that. It’s a contextual thing. Ogling breasts is really only enjoyable/appropriate in a non-exploitative context. Otherwise it’s… also uncomfortable).

Of course, you CANNOT convince people like this that a show called “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” has any redeeming social value, no matter how many times you talk about Buffy’s butt-kicking or the number of academic papers on her feminist symbolism.

But, screw them. I find plenty to enjoy on television even if I agree that ogling breasts is really only appropriate in a non-exploitative context.

The whole point of this post is to say I got the rest of my goodies in the mail today–the Queer as Folk season 3 tapes and the Highlander Season 1 DVD set. Oh, this is such a dangerous thing. Not the free QAF tapes from a bud, but the pricey DVD sets from amazon. Scrollgirl can attest to this–the temptations of amazon.com and a credit card. Oh, my wishlist overfloweth–I’ve got ST:TNG, ST:DSN, Highlander, and X-Files beckoning from my wish list.

At home, I have home-made VHS copies of all of the above, not to mention ST: TOS, Voyager, and Enterprise and Forever Knight and H: The Raven and Lois and Clark and Roswell and Space: Above and Beyond (sniff! It died too young!), and “Soap”.

I’ve got drug dealers… er, I mean friends, sending me Six Feet Under and Queer as Folk tapes. I am pre-ordered at amazon for All Things BtVS and Angel, because they’re BtVS and Angel. Plus, they’re cheaper than the aforementioned DVD stuff.

Through the magic that is netflix, I am catching up on Babylon 5, which I’ve only seen once through, Space 1999, which I haven’t seen in 25 years, Dark Shadows, which is impossible to keep up with on cable, La Femme Nikita, and Stargate SG-1.

And ooh! Did you know that Season 1 of “ER” is coming out on DVD soon? I had to stop watching that show after the first season because I just had too many viewing commitments at the time. I’d love to catch up in a more systematic way than the occasional cable rerun. Plus “Alias” is coming out on DVD in September. I haven’t seen it because of the previous conflict with Angel. Ditto on Smallville, whenever it comes out. It conflicted with some show or other I watched/taped back when it debuted.

And ooh! The new season of “The Dead Zone” started last night.

Do you see a trend here? Do you see how this is? I am a TV whore!

What happens next?

So I’ve been watching the “Six Feet Under” tapes Rob sent, and I have to say, the show is a real kick. I’m just not sure if it’s a fun kick or a kick in the ribs. I’ve never seen so many neurotic people in my life, and I come from a family that specializes in all the important neuroses (like my dad, this past week. Oy! The man is the master of the “poor me” guilt trip. Comes by my room towards the end of the week, “I don’t know if you remember me, I’m your father”. As if I hadn’t spoken to the man all week and gone out to meals with him and everything).

I was reading reviews of “Six Feet Under” on Netflix and someone says in there, “I don’t know why Nate is with that high-maintenance Brenda”. And I’m like, “Um… have you seen all the sex he’s getting?” Now that I’m a little further along, I’m beginning to wonder, too. OK, so I’m a big sucker for the serialized drama (we do not call them “Soap Operas” anymore!) I have to know what’s going to happen next in on-going relationships between people.

The only thing that drags me down with SFU is the way someone always dies at the beginning of each episode. If it was mostly the elderly/natural causes or leukemia patients going quietly in hospitals with family at their side, I could deal with it. But it’s invariably someone young-ish and healthy who doesn’t see it coming. Accidents. The episode starts, and you’re thrust into a scene with some characters you don’t know going about their lives, and what you DO know is, someone’s going to kick it tragically by the end of this scene. I’ve started fast-forwarding through these because it’s not my idea of hang-on-the-edge-of-my-seat suspense finding out who and how. Bleah.

Well, I guess I’d better get back to work. I’m still recovering from my vacation and a Benedryl hang-over (Bennie used as a sleep aid, not as an allergy medication).