Butler ranks Rowling’s Harry Potter stories as far below the stories of Tolkien and Lewis. Butler sees Rowling’s work as significant but points out significant issues therewith.
Butler says Rowling’s morality system is more emotionally based than principled, that her philosophy and theology are more ambiguous, and that the whole work is generally more shallow that the great writers.
Butler views Rowling’s work as more entertaining, less world changing. I would say the danger on relying on mere entertainment as our sustenance is that it can not only leave us hungry for more solid moral instruction, it can mislead us into strange and unprincipled paths.
The following is a generated summary of Butler’s analysis of the Potter stories in the context of what makes great and enduring literature:
Critique of Literary Depth
Butler is cool to negative on Rowling’s work as literature rather than as entertainment.
He argues that:
- Harry Potter relies heavily on boarding-school fiction tropes blended with fantasy
- The prose and structure are competent but not elevated
- The series lacks the mythic, linguistic, and metaphysical depth found in Tolkien or Lewis
In Butler’s hierarchy, Rowling is popular but not profound.
Moral and Worldview Ambiguity
One of Butler’s sharper critiques is that Rowling’s moral universe is:
- Inconsistent
- Emotion-driven rather than principled
- Dependent on sentiment and personal loyalty, not transcendent moral order
He contrasts this with Tolkien’s clear metaphysical good vs. evil and Lewis’s explicit moral framework.
Butler sees Rowling as offering:
- Sympathy without theology
- Moral instincts without moral foundations
Magic as Power, Not Mystery
A key Butler theme throughout the book is his dislike of over-systematized or instrumental magic.
Regarding Rowling:
- Magic functions as a toolkit rather than a sacred or dangerous mystery
- Rules exist, but they are flexible when plot requires
- Magic becomes closer to technology than enchantment
He sees this as a step away from older fantasy’s sense of awe and reverence.
Institutional Fantasy Without Transcendence
Butler is skeptical of Rowling’s heavy focus on:
- Bureaucratic institutions (ministries, schools, regulations)
- Authority structures that lack higher spiritual grounding
Hogwarts is portrayed as:
- Clever and charming
- But ultimately a closed system, not a window into ultimate reality
This contrasts sharply with Butler’s admiration for fantasy that points beyond itself.
The “Troubled Scribe” Label
When Butler (or the publisher) refers to Rowling as a “troubled scribe,” he means:
- Not morally evil
- Not incompetent
- But artistically conflicted
She has:
- Strong narrative instincts
- Weak philosophical anchoring
Her success, in Butler’s view, came despite these limitations, not because of depth.
Comparison to Tolkien and Lewis
Butler implicitly ranks Rowling:
- Below Tolkien (myth-maker, philologist, metaphysician)
- Below Lewis (explicit moral and theological clarity)
- Above formulaic commercial fantasy
She is a bridge figure — not trash, not timeless.
Cultural Legacy Questioned
Butler doubts whether Harry Potter will:
- Endure as a moral or mythic foundation
- Shape civilization the way older epics did
He sees it as:
- A generational story
- Not a civilizational one
Condensed Butler-Style Verdict on Rowling
- K. Rowling is an immensely successful storyteller whose work delights, but does not elevate; whose magic entertains, but does not sanctify; and whose moral instincts are humane, but unanchored.
