Rowling and Consecrated Virgins

Since most of my recent posts have been on things tangential to Harry Potter, I thought I would quickly throw up a post from my store of observations on the Potter books. This is the observation that first started me thinking of Rowling in the vein of a direct descendent of the Inklings because it is the first place I noticed what I saw as a concretely Biblical image used in the books and much of my thinking on the inklings has coincided with noting Tolkien's use of Biblical imagery and types. MOLECH There is a difference between the way the book and the movie portray the statue of Slytherin in the Chamber of Secrets. In the movie we see only the face but in the book there is the whole statue and, as Harry enters, he sees Ginny lying between the feet of the statue. There is a direct correlation with ancient pagan idol worship as evidenced in the Old Testament. Children were sacrificed in the arms of the idol of the god Molech. Hence, Rowling echoes the image of the innocence of youth and feminine youth in particular (what Riddle refers to in the movie a "a stupid girl") being sacrificed to the god (in this case the "idol" both Slytherin and Riddle have made out of their own identity as wizards). Rowling on the Matter On her site Rowling has definitively ruled against Ginny's name coming from "Virginia," stating that it comes from "Ginevra." (Extras - Characters - "Some Random Facts About the Weasley Family") I am not sure if there is some symbolic meaning behind the name "Ginevra" that makes Rowling prefer it but I think I can explain why she is against "Virginia" and how that does not cause a problem for my reading of Ginny as symbolic of feminine purity of youth. The name "Virginia" obviously comes from "virgin"/"virginity." In the Christian West the primary symbol of this has been the consecrated/celibate virgin. In a setting such as our present one, to use the name "Virginia" in a highly symbolic story such as Rowling is writing almost automatically calls to mind the consecrated virgin, the nun. For her to do this would not only cause problems with Ginny being Harry's "courtly love" counterpart, but would make the story allegorical in a bad way, in the way criticized by Tolkien. As I said, the consecrated virgin is the primary symbol of innocence/purity. But Rowling wants to appeal to is the core thing itself. The two are intrinsically connected, but this does not mean that Rowling is using the institution of consecrated celibacy as the image-source for her instantiation of her image of innocence/purity. I think sub-consciously Rowling does mean Virginia, but that she means it as the core idea of a vibrant innocence and purity of youth (as vibrant as Ginny's fiery attitude, infamous bat-bogey hexes, bright red hair and flaming eyes - "Harry looked around; there was Ginny running toward him; she had a hard blazing look in her face as she threw her arms around him".) But Rowling's aversion to what she knows would be the "polemical" results of her stating the same is a healthy aversion. In the end I have a hard time believing that somebody as well versed in ancient myth, in which there are common threads among several of children symbolizing purity in being sacrificed to a god, could use the image and not be cognizant that that is in there and part of the meaning of the picture she is painting. Post Script Some ascribe their own boorish thoughts on celibacy to the institution itself and give it a bad rap. To be sure, it has a unique and deservedly revered position in our world as a special symbol of Christian purity. But if you read about a Saint such as St Sir Thomas More you find that the "marriage is a second class state" mentality is precisely one of the things he had to battle against. Personally I have known at least one nun whom I consider to have more flare of personality than I will probably ever have. A young Dominican nun from Poland. Her order used to wear the full habit with everything short of the "wings." But in conversations in the library she could bust my chops and razz me about my occasional academic laziness as well as any [for one she was gutsier than most, my general appearance/disposition is a bit like Hagrid such that many sort of shy away] ... never in an inappropriate way, she was just always very much herself ... actually when I noticed her being more reserved was when her order decreased the habit they wear. Of course there are different valid forms of the practice as well. I have a friend who is an artist in Brooklyn and quite as loopy in the head as myself if not more. He has a sister who is a cloistered nun. If he visits her he has to talk to her through a screen ... but he and she think that is fine so I think it is fine - the seclusion is one particular way that that order lives out the symbolic speciality of consecrated celibacy, and that I know of they are not saying it is the way it has to be done everywhere, although it is good for it to exist in some orders. According to Carl his sister can still joke with him like sister with brother, even from behind a screen.