18 July 2007

Harry Potter's dirty little secret

What's this whole Harry Potter phenomenon about, you ask?

Here in the Bible Belt, people will tell you they're books secretly designed to draw children into sorcery. The Christian coalition is wrong, though. They're actually books secretly designed to draw children into the world of sexual exploration.

Over the next week or so I'll be giving you examples to prove my point. For today's lesson, we'll look at Book One, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone." I'm using First Edition, the Scholastic -- a.k.a. the American, or "correct" -- version. So class, please turn in your texts to the following:

* Page 9 (Rowling apparently couldn't wait long to get her randy party started): He found what he was looking for in his inside pocket.

* Page 101: Ron had taken out a lumpy package and unwrapped it.

* Page 235: The baby dragon flopped onto the table.

* and, for the most glaring example, turn to Page 147, wherein Rowling writes: His broomstick was still rising higher and higher, and started to drift lazily toward the forbidden forest...

And for more soft-core porn, you can check out my compatriot, Sonya Sorich's Walk of Shame, where she's begun posting random bits of romance novels, which at least have the gumption of being up front about their sexuality.

Young Harry suddenly realizes there are
multiple definitions for "magic wand"


Anonymous said...

These are my favorite blog posts ever! I'm on book three right now, but I feel a strong urge to go back and re-read the first two for its explicit sexual content! I love it. These books just get better and better!

Varun said...

there's a proverb in Kannada which translates like this: We see the world not as it is; but as we are!
First change the way u think.. Vulgur is in ur mind.. not in HP book..:-(

Anonymous said...

Anon is pleased. thank you for noticing these AWFUL, AWFUL sexual undertones in this popular "children's book". i have burned all copies of it within my home, as well as all books by these depraved perverts: george orwell, charles dickens (even his name is innuendo), herman melville, ernest hemmingway, jack london (who was a communist, no less), Agatha christie, dean koontz, well, you get the idea. thank you once again! may the gods smile upon you, and may you drink in the sorrow of your enemies!

Andrea said...

I think you are all absolutely crazy and if you got you mind out of the gutter you wouldn't be thinking about sexual things when you were reading a childrens book. And, how exactly does "Ron unwrapped a lumpy package" have anything to do with sex????? And, if that has to do with sex then every time you asked someone else to sharpen your pencil or fill or your cup you were talking dirty. How about we all just stop talking completely.

Anonymous said...

BUAHAHAHAHA!! How's simple lines like ''He found what he was looking for in his inside pocket.''
''Ron had taken out a lumpy package and unwrapped it.''
''The baby dragon flopped onto the table.''

..are sexually implicit??

It's a children's book for Christ sake! They're implied to things unrelated to what may be on your minds (if you are perverts!)

something ''inside pocket''... maybe a wallet, room key, name card holder, etc.
''lumpy package'' to me may be pot-pourri covered in a delicate silk, prada bag in a smooth bag even a chinese takeaway!
''baby dragon''... well, a baby dragon! a fantasy creature! What else would you expect it to be?

Edmund said...

Oh my goodness, you are right. I am going to go and destroy every single book that I own because they might have a reference that could be associated with sex. I am so grateful that you have helped me to see the light and thank you so much for showing me that all books are evil. In fact I will never read again for fear of coming across a sentence that might imply sexual connotations, when actually it doesn't.

Seriously though, are you sure that there isn't something wrong with you? To make such outrageous claims of sexual reference in Harry Potter is the same as saying that there are no sexual references in Sebastian Faulk's Birdsong.

I'm sorry if I'm being a bit harsh, but really you must understand that what you are saying is absolutely ridiculous

Brad said...

From our good friends at Wikipedia:

"Sarcasm is the rhetorical device of using a characterization of something or someone in order to express contempt. It is closely connected with irony, in that the two are often combined in the same statement."

Thanks for reading, guys, even if you didn't get the joke.