A Christian Perspective on Harry Potter

Dislcaimer

I'm only on the fourth book: The Goblet of Fire. Something could come up later that throws the rest of this post out the window.

I did start reading them a while ago, and got further (the fourth book, I think), but I read through them faster, basically racing through them. I'm now reading them at a slower, more enjoyable pace.

Background

This post is an extension of my previous post: My Harry Potter Fan Theory where I ultimately conclude that in the Harry Potter universe, magic isn't magic per se; it's technology.

I have recently started reading the Harry Potter series of books, and am so far enjoying them.

When the books first came out, there was discussion amongst Christians as to what the Christian perspective on them was. The books easily lend themselves to comparison to Lord of the Rings and Narnia. There seems to be a "completeness" about 3. We seem to want triologies. So many jokes involve three similar, but contrasting things. (A priest, a pastor, and a rabbi walk into a bar...)

Tolkien and Lewis make two. They were both Brits who wrote fantasy highly popular, other-world epics, which are often enjoyed by younger readers, which have thus far stood the test of time. Where's the third?

Enter J.K. Rowling and Harry Potter. We don't know if Harry Potter will stand the test of time, but the other criteria are met.

But, for the Christian reader, Narnia is blatant allegory. Middle Earth mythology are not allegory, but are laced with Christian themes, and clearly from a Christian world-view. What about the Harry Potter universe?

Most Christian parents would be happy for their kids to read Narnia. For Middle Earth writings, it would be more a question of age-appropriateness. We read The Hobbit as a class in grade 4 (9 years old), and I just loved it! That summer I tried reading Lord of the Rings, and I just couldn't get past the birthday party! Now that I'm older and more used to longer, slower stories, Lord of the Rings is a much more enjoyable read.

But what about Harry Potter? Some would say "No way. That's witchcraft and it's of the devil!"

What I Heard Others Saying

When this discussion first came to my consciousness, I was still a post-secondary student living in Sault Ste. Marie. The default position was "Harry Potter promotes witchcraft, and is therefore evil."

So, at first I just went with the default position. I was too busy with school to be doing all that reading, and it's easy saving money on a movie ticket when none of your friends want to see the movie.

A friend, whom I greatly respect, disagreed with the default position.

"But, what about the spells? They use spells! Surely that's evil." I asked.

She replied to the effect that the Harry Potter spells are mostly just Latin, and that "nobody had a problem with 'Bippity-Boppity-Boo.'"

Then years later, on Twitter (I'm not calling it X) Tim Keller, in an AMA said that he enjoyed Harry Potter "as a story of friendship and redemption" or something to that effect.

Okay, if you're going to argue with Tim Keller on whether or not a Christian should partake, you'd better have some solid ammo.

Time for my own reading. I picked up a box set of the Harry Potter books, and started reading. And I noticed a few things that lead me to develop my own fan theory, which I will delve into now.

My Own Findings

First, in order to decide if Harry Potter is evil by Christian standards, we need to understand the basis for why we think witchcraft and wizardy is evil.

In Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis says that the reason we don't have witch hunts anymore is that not that we don't think that witches are evil, but because we don't believe in witches anymore.

“Three hundred years ago people in England were putting witches to death. Was that what you call the 'Rule of Human Nature or Right Conduct?’ But surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. If we did—if we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather—surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did? There is no difference of moral principle here: the difference is simply about matter of fact. It may be a great advance in knowledge not to believe in witches: there is no moral advance in not executing them when you do not think they are there. You would not call a man humane for ceasing to set mousetraps if he did so because he believed there were no mice in the house.”

― C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

So, the primary issues with witches are:

1. They do evil things (ex: kill neighbours, destroy crops, etc.)
2. They call upon evil beings (ex: the devil, demons, etc) for them to use their power

I'll look at each in turn.

Witches Do Evil Things

Yes, they do do evil things, especially "he who must not be named".

But they also do good things.

In the Harry Potter universe, magical powers seem to be like any technology; it can be used for good or evil. In The Philosopher's Stone, Snape talks about curing poison. Surely that's good.

Are you using your smartphone for good or for evil? Or are you just using it to facilitate whatever else you're doing (communication, research, entertainment, education, etc.)?

Furthermore, Dumbledore does talk about sin with the assumption that sin is something bad. "Curiosity is not a sin", or something like that.

The Harry Potter universe acknowledges good and evil, and their versions of good things and evil things seem to be pretty much in line with Judeo-Christian versions. Curing poison is good. Killing people is bad.

Witches Call Upon Evil Beings

Here's where things get interesting.

There's no mention of any specific supernatural being (that I've gotten to). But in my reading I noticed a couple of things: First, they celebrate Halloween (aka: All Hallows (ie: Saints) Eve), not Samhain. They celebrate Christmas, not Winter Solstice. That is to say: they're celebrating Christian holidays instead of the actual pagan holidays! (It gets a little tricky with Easter because the word Easter is pagan in origin, not Christian.)

If the Harry Potter universe were truly trying to indoctinate kids into the occult, why not introduce them to Samhain and Winter Solstice? Rowling is already introducing everyone to a world of new vocabulary (like Muggle and Squib), a whole new sport with complex rules, new magical creatures, a history, etc. Introducing the audience to Samhain and Winter Solstice would have been small potatoes compared to the rules of Quiddich.

To me, that was the first thing I noticed that suggested that my friend and Tim Keller might be right; these aren't manuals of witchcraft the way we think of witchcraft.

So, where do they get their power?

I explore this further in My Harry Potter Fan Theory. In summary, they're not witches and wizzards in the Harry Potter world; they're more like X-Men. They have a genetic mutation (or several) that allow them, through the use of a wand and incantations, to manipulate the electromagnetic field. It's not magic. It's technology that's not understood through the lens of scientific method.

And that doesn't make a thing evil. Simply using a power that you don't understand doesn't mean you're grasping at power that you shouldn't. Do you understand how your phone works? I don't. And we still use our phones.

Aren't They Using Power For Their Own Ends?

This is a common objection from Christians about Harry Potter. If I understand it, the object could be summed up as follows: "In Narnia and Middle-Earth, power is to be used for the betterment of others, not achieving one's own objectives, like it is in Harry Potter. Those witches and wizards are using magic for their own means, rather than for others'."

But is that what's going on? Let's look into it.

Power in Narnia and Middle Earth

Narnia

There are a few instances where people are put in positions of power, and saying they do not feel ready, and Aslan assures them that it's that feeling that says that they are ready, and if they had said they were ready, they wouldn't be. And, of course, The White Witch would like to rule Narnia and prevent the four humans from ruling; and Edmond would like to be at her side bossing Peter around and putting him in his place, all while he eats Turkish Delight. Then there's the Last Battle, where ape tries to basically take over by being the puppet master who controls "Aslan". And the green witch in The Silver Chair.

So, yes, there do seem to be themes of the dangers of the pursuit of ill-gotten power and authority. All true authority and power belongs to Aslan. And, yes, any unrightful power is often self-serving, rather than others-serving. It seems to be a theme that a king or queen's primary duty is to their own people; servant leadership.

But, how apparent would this be to Lewis' target audience: 7 to 9 year olds? I don't think it's the main point of the books. It seems more secondary.

Middle Earth

(Forgive me if I conflate the movies with the books.)

In Middle Earth, the pursuit of power is largely a Sauron thing. (A whole series of posts could be written on these themes in Middle Earth from before the end of the Third Age, which is when The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings take place. And most people are only familiar with those writings, so I'll stick to them here.)

Sauron wants to take over, so he created the rings of power (minus The Three). This would help him take over the world. I don't think it's ever stated what his end-game was. Was it to take over, then bring Melkor back to Middle Earth to finally rule? Or just to rule himself? Then what?

Gandalf and Galadriel are both offered The One Ring, and decline, but not without saying they would start off with the best of intentions, but would eventually go bad, serving themselves. Same thing would happen with men.

The special thing about hobbits is that they have enough interest to keep the ring around without succumbing to it for long enough to return it and destroy it. Others would likely go bad before reaching the mountains bordering Mordor. Whereas Tom Bombadill, who's so self-sufficient, wouldn't even care about the ring, and would likely lose it.

I think Tolkien's warning about the pursuit of power could be summed up as following: "You may start out like Superman, but eventually you would turn into Homelander."

It seems like the pursuit of power is a substantial theme in Lord of the Rings. Power must be kept in check. No one should have absolute power.

In other words, Tolkien isn't trying to say "Power is to be used for others, not for the self." He's trying to say "The pursuit of power is a problem."

Power in Harry Potter

Lewis and Tolkien warn us against the perils of power. It's more subtle, but Rowling warns us of the same thing! Remember, in the Harry Potter universe is that magic is not the power like, say, the one ring. Magic is not the power. It's a talent based in genetics.

It's like if you found out you had perfect pitch as a kid, you should sign up for music lessons; you need to hone that skill to be useful; to be a gift to the world, to fulfill your God-given purpose. When Happy Gilmour finds out he's better at golf than hockey, he develops the skill of golf to win enough money to buy his grandma's house back (or whatever it was for).

If you had the "magic gene" that exists in the Harry Potter universe, you need to learn to control it. (In Fantastic Beasts we see what happens when magic is suppressed. It's not good.) You don't go to Hogwarts to learn to summon satanic powers, or communicate with the under-world. It's closer to taking music lessons when you find out you have perfect pitch.

And, really, what do they use these spells for? They're not destroying crops or killing babies. They're using it the way we use technology. We have cars and airplanes. They have broomsticks and portkeys. We have phones. They have owls and some can communicate through fires. We have microphones and PA systems. They can amplify their voices with wands. We have flashlights. They can create light with their wands. They do hunt vampires (implying that vampires are inherently evil), or train dragons, or keep magical creatures out of view of muggles. It seems like they're just going about their lives as we are, just differently. If the existence or use of "magic" is evil, then so is any of our technology.

In fact, there's a whole government body overseeing the use of magic, making sure everything is done properly, and people aren't abusing their magic.

The "magic" isn't the power. But power still exists in the magic world as it does in our world, Narnia, or Middle Earth. It's the domination of other people. It's ill-gotten authority. And the Harry Potter books and movies have plenty of warning against that; just like Lord of the Rings, or the Chronicles of Narnia. So, don't take a throne that doesn't belong to you; don't use the One Ring to fight against Mordor. And don't use any spells to dominate or kill others.

The warning is in the four houses: Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, and Slytherin. As Hagrid (inaccurately) points out "There's not a witch or wizard that went bad that wasn't in Slytherin." But, he's correct in most instances. Part of the traits of students in House Slytherin are they desire power and cunning and ambition. They want to get on top. They want to be better than others. (Not all, but some.)

Slytherin exists as a warning to us what happens when those traits (which, as C.S. Lewis points out, are not evil in and of themselves) get out of hand and take over as the top thing. There's a whole 43 minute video on YouTube exploring Why does Slytherin still exist?. I didn't watch the full thing (it seems like there may be spoilers), but it seems like we don't know of any good Slytherins. There probably are good Slytherins, but their stories are probably not interesting enough to make it into the stories. (I understand there may be some repentance later on in the stories. But no spoilers, please.)

And it's clear that your personal preferences play a role in what house you're placed in. Harry could have gone Slytherin, but he wanted Gryffindor, and there he was placed. It's as though Rowling is warning us: "Don't desire Slytherin. It's better to desire friendship, loyalty, bravery, knowledge than power."

The Imperius Curse 

Furthermore, it can be said that the real problem with the power is to dominate or control other people. Ultimately, that's what the One Ring gives you.  The Green Witch from The Silver Chair is in the wrong for doing this.

And in Harry Potter, the Imperius Curse allows someone to do just that!  "Ah ha!  See!  EVIL!"

Except that the Imperius Curse is one of the three "unforgivable curses" which lands one a life sentence in Azkaban without possibility of parole.

So it seems that Harry Potter is teaching us that there is right and wrong; and it's wrong to control other people for your own ends. Just like in Middle Earth and Narnia.

Divination

But what about Divination? That's clearly frowned upon in the Bible, and that's in Harry Potter.

Rodney Dangerfield gets more respect than Divination does in the HP universe. They downright make fun of it, often saying or implying that it's not a real thing.

Conclusion

"Power" or "magic" in the Harry Potter world is derived from genes, and not evil spirits, demons, or the devil. We're "fearfully and wonderfully made." (Psalm 139:14) If some people have the genetic ability to interface with the world in a different way than others, then it's God that gave them that gift. Magic people in the Harry Potter universe aren't getting their power from Satan. The source of the magic is not in conflict with a Christian world and life view.

Any technology can be used for good or evil. Harry Potter uses technology and genes to do mostly good.

Since the two problems with witchcraft (source of power, uses of power) are inconsistent with the Harry Potter universe, we can conclude that there's nothing inherently wrong with Christians enjoying the writings or the movies.

Lastly....

I will continue to update this post as I read through the books and find further supporting, or contradictory evidence.

“Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed.”

― G.K. Chesterton

My Harry Potter Fan Theory

Dislcaimers

I know I'm probably not the first one to come up with this. I haven't looked for others. These are just my own conclusions. I guess I'm writing this out in case one of my old English teachers stumble upon it. "See, I can do this sort of thing, but only if I find the subject matter interesting."

I'm only on the fourth book: The Goblet of Fire. Something could come up later that throws the rest of this post out the window.

I did start reading them a while ago, and got further (the fourth book, I think), but I read through them faster, basically racing through them. I'm now reading them at a slower, more enjoyable pace. And during that time, I noticed a few things that have led to my current theory which I outline here.

Theory: Harry Potter et al aren't actual wizzards and witches; they're basically X-Men

Allow me to explain.

While reading the first book, something jumped out at me: At Hogwarts they were celebraing Halloween (ie: All Hallows (ie: Saints) Eve) and Christmas. Why would British witches and wizzards celebrate Christian holidays, rather than their pagan equivalents: Smahain and Winter Solstice?

Then I noticed that everyone is either magic or a muggle. There's no going back and forth. If you're a muggle, you can't learn these spells and do magic. If you're magic, you can certainly not do, but you can't stop actually being magic.

And, for the most part, magic people come from at least one magic parent. Occasionally, two magic parents produce a muggle (i.e.: a Squib). And occasionally, two muggle parents produce a magic person. But, it's noted that there is often a magic person somewhere in their ancestry. It really seems like genetics are involved.

I don't understand genetics well enough to understand how things like recessive genes work. But I think it's that a gene can be passed down for generations without the thing it codes for appearing. For example, my brother and I both identify as gingers (but not as much as the Weasleys). But no one else on either side of our family has a hair colour even close to ours! So, out of nowhere, we have this reddish/strawberry-blond hair. And out of nowhere, Hermione, a talented witch, is born of two muggles.

And what if several generations ago, like hundreds or thousands of years ago, there was a genetic mutation that somehow allowed a person to interact with, and manipulate the electromagnetic field? And this if generally what we see in the Harry Potter universe. They can manipulate objects as a whole (move things without touching them). And they can transform objects (this would be maniupulation of molecules, atoms, and subatomic particles). But they can't create ex-nihilo; hence their need for money. (I don't know why they need their own currency though.).

(In The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe, Mr. Beaver tells the Pevensie children that Jadis is not a "daughter of Eve", but a "daughter of Lilith". What if that's where the magic started? This isn't a part of my theory, per se, but I'm currently reading through the Narnia Chronicles, and that thought occurred to me. It also fits in with a popular meme that the four Hogwarts houses equate to the Pevensie children. Maybe there is a Narnia/Harry Potter cross-over!)

At one point it's even mentioned that a lot of electronics don't work at places like Hogwarts because of all the magic concentrated in one location. Why would magic interfere with electronics? But this is exactly what you would expect if magic were really just the manipulation of the electromagentic field!

There also seems to be some complexity and precision to magic. You can't just say an incantation and make something happen. A wand is needed. And not just any wand, it has to be a wand that works with you specifically. And incantations need to be pronounced properly ("Wing-gar-dium Levi-o-sa", not "Wingardium Levio-sa"). And the swish-and-flick of the wand needs to be done properly. This seems to be more in line with science than magic.

And they can't bring people back from the dead. (There doesn't seem to be any explanation (so far) why some people die (like Harry's parents) and some people become ghosts (like Nearly-Headless Nick)). This implies there's more to life than electronic impulses. Either that, or no one's figured out how to get those impulses going again. But the spirit-world does exist in the Harry Potter universe.

Hogwarts or Dumbledore's School For Gifted Youngsters?

Any sufficiently advanced technology looks like magic to a primitive society. It seems like this is more like technology that was derived without scientific method. They don't understand it at the sub-atomic level. They just know a set of causes and their effects without understanding the underlying relationships. (And that's okay. Do you know how your phone works? I don't. But we can still use our phones. Nor does our lack of understanding make it magic. But someone understands it.)

And since they take kids out of muggle school long before they can learn about scientific method, maths, science, and other muggle subjects, and concentrate entirely on their own subjects, it's unlikely that science will ever be appreciated or applied by magic people. They'll continue to hand down their potions and spells to the next generation without understanding why they work, all the while calling it "magic" rather than what it is: technology.

Conclusion

Wizards and witches in the Harry Potter universe are more like mutants a la X-Men, and not like witches and wizards like we normally think of them. In the L. Frank Baum books, after The Wizard of Oz leaves Oz, he does return and Glinda teaches him some basic spells. He does become a wizard. Dudley Dursley will never become a wizard.

I will continue to update this post as I read through the books and find further supporting, or contradictory evidence.

My New Kobo Clara Colour

I recently (Christmas of 2024) acquired a new Kobo Clara Colour. Here are my thoughts:

What I Want

I still have plenty of dead-tree books left to read. For me, an e-reader will be for reading classics (ie: public domain, available for free from sites like Global Grey E-Books and Internet Archive Books). Furthermore, I'm looking for something light and portable so I can take a whole bunch of books with me. I may want to highlight, but I doubt I'll ever anotate.

I wish I wish I wish whenever you bought a book, you'd get a code that you could enter into a site somewhere and download an e-version of that book. Even if it was DRM'd, I'd be happy. But it seems like book publishers are worse than record labels, and long-time readers will know how I feel about them.

This is what I want with an e-reader:

1. I want a desktop app and a mobile app.
2. On the desktop, I want to drag'n'drop EPUBs, MOBIs, PDFs, etc. onto the app, apply any metadata, and organizing, then hit a sync button.
3. Upon syncing, I want that EPUB, MOBI, PDF, etc. to show up on my e-reader device, and my phone app.
4. As I read that book on any of those devices, I want my progress to be synced automatically to the other devices.

To me, that's the minimum of any e-reading software. If you make an e-reader device, your app should do all of the above. And it should do it all seamlessly.

My Thoughts and Observations

1. I thought e-Ink needed external light to read, but e-readers have added backlights lately that can be switched on or off. This one has a backlight that can be dimmed, but not turned off. The blue light dims later in the day, but still isn't as good on the eyes as no back-light.
2. I was disappointed that the Kobo desktop app doesn't work the way I described above. There are desktop and mobile Kobo apps. They do allow you to purchase from the Kobo store, and borrow from your local library (with OneDrive). And those books are synced across devices and apps. But you can't drag'n'drop books into the desktop app.
3. The way to get books from elsewhere onto your device is by using Calibre, which is what I'm doing. IMO using Calibre feels hacky. I don't mind hacky....but it feels like you should use hacky solutions for things outside normal operations (like, say, removing DRM from a book, or using a lesser-known e-reader). But normal usage should not require hacks like that. And adding ebooks from places other than the Kobo store or library should be considered normal operations.
4. Also, it's a wee bit heavier than I was expecting. Lying down and holding it it one hand above me can get tiring.
5. If I add a series/number in a Series to a book's metadata in Calibre, that never shows up after I sync. According to a bunch of tutorials, you're supposed to sync to your Kobo, eject the Kobo, plug it back in, and then the Series data will show up. But that hasn't worked for me, ever.

Overall, though, I'm not unhappy with my Kobo. But I am now curious about lesser known ones.

My Leaky Roof

This post continues the series of My avoison of Covid-19 where I thought that staying the blazes home would be fine, as long as I didn't need to have any service people into my house.

But then I had Appliance Troubles which caused me to have 6 service people into the house. Then there was my My basement issues which brought 9 more service people into my house. Plus two movers and a furnace maintenance person. That's a total of 18 service people in my house in less than two years, compared to 17 the previous 5.

And I'm not even done yet.

The Roof

I don't know if it was the siding project a few years ago, or if being home all day during the day, and spending most of that time in an upstairs room lacking in proper insulation caused me to turn the heat up more than I used to, but for the first time since living here, an ice dam formed during the winter on my roof above where I sat at my computer whilst working. I wasn't alone. Other houses had ice dams too. The property management company sent people around to break the ice dams off of people's roofs including mine.

All was well until the Spring. Then one day we got a heavy rain. It was right at the end of the working day. I was still in my office room. A few minutes after the heavy rain started outside, it started raining inside! I called the property management company, but it was after-hours for them. So I called the emergency after-hours number. But, the rain was a short downspurt, and shortly after the rain stopped outside, it stopped inside.

Nevertheless, they sent someone around to take a look. They said they could see some damage to the shingles. Then they did was put some caulking on the roof.

For the next few rainfalls, mostly light rain, all was well.

But then on July 8^th, just as I was soon getting ready to go out and get my second dose of vaccine for Covid-19, the heavy rain started outside. Then it started raining inside again!

After talking to those who had gone before me, I knew that the next day I was likely to feel like garbage. I had everything all worked out. I had finished my shopping, chores, cleaning, laundry, etc. I had it all planned out that for the next few days all I had to do was lie on the couch watching TV feeling miserable. This would totally put a monkeywrench in my plans. Should I cancel my shot and re-book? If I had to move a bunch of stuff out of my office, I didn't want to do it right after getting a needle. (I hate needles! I consider my arm to be ineffective for at least a couple of days after I get a shot.)

I tried. But you needed to cancel within two hours, and it was about 1 hour and 57 minutes. So I decided to risk it.

Anyway, again, I called the after-hours emergency number, and they sent someone over right away. He came in (person 19) to take a look at the damage inside. (At first he wasn't even wearing a mask! I had to ask him to put one on!)

He couldn't see anything from the inside. So he called the property management company and they sent two guys out tomorrow to take a better look.

When they showed up pretty early in the morning on July 9^th, I was only feeling a little tired. The real side effects (fever, headache, chills, etc.) hadn't kicked in yet. These two guys (one of whom was the guy who cut the hole in my basement wall) cut out a square of drywall in my ceiling. They saw that when the guy was clearning the ice dam, he hit the ice dam with the sharp side of the axe, not the broad side. He put a hole in my roof! And now there's a hole in my ceiling! (Now we're up to 21 service people.)

They took pictures to send to the property management company. Eventually, they sent a roofing company around. "Ahhh, finally! They'll fix the roof, then I can get the ceiling fixed!"

And how did they fix the roof? They put more caulking on it. That was it!

The roof no longer leaks. But it's still broken! If they're not going to fix it further, then okay. But they need to send someone around to fix my ceiling.

I'll let you know how it all turns out when it's finally fixed. I may have to live with it through the winter and see if it leaks again. I'm getting really tired of this property management company. I would sell, but the housing market is nuts, and this place has not gone up in value as much as other places. So I'm further behind than before. And there's no way I can sell with a big hole in my ceiling.

Update: On the morning of January 18, 2022 I came into my office room to significant leaking. I promptly emailed the guy at the property management company I had been dealing with with pictures and a note saying "Since my roof still hasn't been fixed, it's leaking again into my unit." I got an email back from someone else saying that the person I had been dealing with was now elsewhere. I hope this new guy is better.

He did send a roofer around to fix my roof on Jan. 20th. He cut out a small hole and replaced the wood and shingles. Of course, the ceiling still has a big hole in it. But I don't want to get that fixed until the roof itself is fixed.

Then on January 28 we got another big snowfall, and I had more leaking in my roof. So, finally on Feb 18th they sent a couple of guys around to go into my attick and investigate. That was this morning. I'm waiting to hear back what happens next. But I think they'll be waiting for Spring for when everything melts.

Anyway, as of today, we're at 23 people in my house during the pandemic.

Update April 25, 2022

As I was waiting to hear the next steps, on March 1 I got an email saying that we've got a new property management company. *sigh* Will the old company pass all my info onto the new company? And given all the different issues with all the different issues, this could take a while for the next steps. Maybe even go back a few.

After waiting a few weeks for the dust to settle, I wrote to the new property management company to ask if they got any if my file from the old company.

They hadn't.

Now, they have to send roofers around to take another look. They sent two on April 25 (just before I wrote this). They took a look and said I'd have to have my front 3 feet of roofing replaced. Apparently, the repair mentioned above didn't have any weather sheilding on it, so it was bound to leak. And, oh look, we're supposed to get 25-30mm of rain today. So probably more leaking.

Now the count is 25 people in my house during the pandemic.

Update July 31, 2022

Well, after a bit of a wait two roofers showed up on July 21^st to fix my roof. After a few hours of work, they told me they were done. (They didn't need to come in at all, so my count isn't going up.) From my bedroom I could see that nothing had been changed from the underside of the roof. They told me that the previous person to repair the roof only replaced a bit of wood and some shingles. They didn't replace the waterpoof covering that goes between the shingles and the wood. That's why I was getting leaking. But now that's fixed.

So now I wonder: do I wait til we get lots of rain? Do I contact the condo management company to ask that the internal damage be fixed? This would include replacing the insulation in my attic and replacing some damaged (and now missing!) drywall. I am not looking forward to this.

Pictures

Here are some pictures of my roof issues:

My Basement Issues - Part 3

Recap

As of My Basement Issues - Part 2 I found out that my basement does not have asbestos in it, and I've had to have 5 non-appliance service people into my house during the pandemic. But the fix hasn't happened yet. I was contemplating two options: Basic repair, or replace the drywall ceiling with a suspended ceiling.

The Fix

I decided that I would rather the suspended ceiling. This would involve someone coming in to remove the remaining drywall ceiling, install the suspended ceiling, fix the hole in the wall, and then paint.

So on Sept. 2^nd, 2021 the demolition guy showed up (that's non-appliance service person #6). Then the next week two guys showed up (#8) to install the ceiling, and repair the wall, and do some painting. And they were fantastic. They just kept going with the paint, and painted my whole basement! They even fixed some minor issues that had nothing to do with the damage mentioned in this blog. A++++ right there. Then on Thursday, Sept. 9^th someone showed up to do the cleanup.

Total Number Of People In My House

So that's 9 non-appliance service people in my house plus 6 appliance service people. For a current total of 15.

But wait! There's more!

My parents sold their house to downsize. In doing so they sent me a bunch of stuff. So two movers had to come in and out of the house. And it was a hot and humid day. Sept. 23^rd. Some of the stuff was pretty heavy, and sometimes the moves had to remove their masks. So that's two more people.

I had just gotten my furnace cleaned and serviced just before the pandemic. It's something you should do every year; and I pay for one of those plans where it's included. So I needed to get my service when the weather started to cool. So on Nov. 10^th the furnace guy came and cleaned the furnace. I stayed upstairs for most of it. At the end I asked a question about installing a coldair exchange in my basement to increase air circulation. I think that question may have been above his paygrade. But anyway, at some points, his mask was below his nose...so basically no mask at all. Now we're up to 18 service people in my house total. That's more than what I've had my entire time in this house pre-pandemic!!!

Here's some pictures of the basement:

Netflix Won't Take My Money

I want my own Netflix account. I don't particularely want most of the other streaming services for reasons beyond the scope of this post. I want Netflix.

A few years ago I had a roommate living here. When he moved in, he brought his Netflix account with him. My TV has a Netflix app built right in. He put his credentials into the TV, and set up a profile for me so either of us could use the account. Then he moved away, but continued to let me use his account. After a while he cancelled it. So I decided it was time to get my own.

On March 1, 2020 I went to Netflix.ca and created an account. When it came time to pay, I noticed they no longer offered the free one-month trial. I was disappointed, but decided to carry on anyway.

As part of the registration process, I had to give an email and password, and it knew I was in Canada, but didn't ask for a postal code.

When it came time to make the payment, I selected the cheapest option ($9.99/month) and filled in the form. After filling in my credit card information and clicking "Submit" I got a vague error: "There appears to be a problem with the payment method you are trying to use."

That's not very specific. I tried a different credid card, a different browser, a different device, etc. etc. Here are the different things I've tried: (Note Netflix Canada only accepts Visa, Mastercard, American Express, and gift cards.)

1. My laptop
2. Two different desktops
3. Firefox
4. Brave browser
5. Chrome
6. The Netflix app built into my TV (which just told me to do payment details in my computer)
7. The Netflix app built into my BlueRay player (which just told me to do payment details in my computer)
8. MasterCard
9. Visa
10. Putting my middle initial at the end of my first name
11. Putting my middle initial at the beginning of my last name
12. Leaving my middle initial out completely
13. MY NAME IN ALL CAPS
14. My name with only the first letter in capitals

Here are the things I have not tried:

1. A more expensive plan. Maybe this problem only exists on the cheapest plan?
2. A gift card...which may always leave some money on the card.
3. I switched from DSL to Cable Internet (temporarily) so I'm on a different network. Perhaps with this different network I can hit a different Netflix server that may work.
4. I recently got an AppleTV and upgraded my iOS. I can install the Netflix app on each, and the app store says it accepts in-app payments. If I can get Netflix to charge my app-store account, which will charge me, then it's not ideal, but I'd go for that.
5. Use a VPN to try to access Netflix in a different region to see if things could work there. (But they may block a lot of VPNs.)
6. A friend once told me that you can get these "anonymous" credit cards online and use one of those to try. It seems super-sketchy....but perhaps it's something to investigate.

If you Google "Netflix won't accept my credit card" you see that this is a huge problem, and Netflix refuses to acknowledge that the problem may be on their end.

I called Netflix and they sent me a list of questions to ask my credit card companies (and along with the answers of both cards:

Are there enough available funds to cover the charge from Netflix?

Yes

For credit and debit cards, is the card still valid, or has the financial institution recently issued a replacement?

They're all still valid and no recent replacements were issued

For credit and debit cards, can the card be used for recurring billing?

Absolutely

Does the card or account support e-commerce transactions?

Absolutely

Was the transaction processed as an international charge? Does your account support this?

It was processed as a local charge, and I'll return to this question below.

Was the transaction declined for any security reasons?

No, it wasn't declined. More on this below.

Does your financial institution see the transaction attempt from Netflix? Can they explain why it was declined?

They see it as accepted. More on this below

I called both my credit card companies about this. And my cards are both properly set up to accept Netflix. The problem is 100% on Netflix's end. Above I mentioned that Netflix no longer offers the 1-month free trial. I think this may have something to do with it.

One of my banks told me they saw a few Approved charges from Netflix for $0.00.

Very interesting. Here's what I think is what's happening:

Netflix Canada, years ago, sets up a one-month free trial. But before they give out any free trials to a new customer, they need to make sure that customer can pay in the second month. So they ask for credit card details. They charge that card for $0.00 to make sure it works. I figure the psuedo-code could look something like:

At Netflix

// planRate and ccInfo would be from elsewhere.
// I'm just making them global here so you can visually see it.
global planRate = $9.99;
global ccInfo;

function checkCreditCard () {
  planRate = 0;  // temporarily set planRate to 0 for the free trial
  let approval = getMastercardApproval(ccInfo, planRate);
  // the 0 is the $0.00 for a free trial
}

At Mastercard

function chargeCard (Amount) {
  if (applyCharge(ccInfo, Amount)) {
    // It worked!
    sender.sendMessage(true, ccInfo.number, Amount);
  } else {
    sender.sendMessage(false, ccInfo.number, Amount);
  }

Back at Netflix

function checkApproval(success, number, Amount) {
  planRate = 0;  // temporarily set planRate to 0 for the free trial
  if (success == true && number == ccInfo.number && Amount == planRate) {
      successFunction ();
  } else {
      fail ("There was a problem with your credit card.");
  }

If you follow that code through you'll see that Netflix is charging $0.00 and then checking to see if $0.00 was charged. Then when the free trial ended, Netflix Canada removed the planRate = 0; // temporarily set planRate to 0 for the free trial from both functions, and somehow the first function didn't make it to every production server. So on some servers, the planRate (say $9.99) is being charged. On others, $0.00 is being charged. Then in the last function, it's checking if the amount charged is the same as planRate. It won't be on the servers that never got the updated code. Since some people hit a server with the updated code they're able to sign up. Netflix sees that some people can sign up, so they don't notice the problem. They see fewer people have signed up than before, but that's to be expected after prices go up, and a free trial goes away. And I suspect the tech support (no doubt outsourced to a private firm in India) has no way of telling Netflix "We're getting a lot of complaints about this. You might want to look into it."

If I'm right about this, then it's the loss of free trial that's the problem. Some people who have complained about this said that the tech support was able to put a one-time charge through and it worked. Someone else mentioned that using the live-chat feature, the tech support guy was able to have the customer fill out a separate form somewhere.

Aside from the list of questions to ask my credit card companies, tech support suggested I use gift cards. I don't want to use gift cards because the amounts you can buy are never exact multiples of the plan amounts! As of this writing, a basic plan in Canada is $9.99 + HST: $11.29/month. If I could get a gift card for $11.29, or $22.58, or $33.87, etc. then okay. Instead I could get one for $30 and charge 2 months to it and have $7.42 left over. If my above suspicions are correct, then I'd be beyond the free trial part so I could switch payment details to my credit card and it would work. Is it worth $7.42 to find out? If it doesn't work then I'll be forever buying gift cards and always having a bit left over.

UPDATE

In order to get the actual text of the credit card error for this blog, I decided to try signing up again. Just to get the error! But the registration worked! I now have Netflix!

I don't know why. I must be a poor scientist. I altered two variables:

1. I used Chrome instead of Brave or Netflix (maybe Netflix only specifically supports Chrome and not Chromium browsers like Brave. If this is the case, I should abandon Netflix.)
2. I tried using my Cable Internet connection (different networks could hit different servers. I'm now on TekSavvy's network instead of Bell's. (I'm not linking to Bell because I don't want to give them any more traffic.)

Now I'll never know if my suspicions about the new code not making it to all servers are correct. Nevermind! I have some serious watchin' to do.

My Basement Issues - Part 2

Recap

This post is a continuation of two posts: My Basement Issues - Part 1 and My avoision of Covid-19.

In My Basement Issues - Part 1 I told the story of how a broken furnace exhaust pipe had wrecked a section of my basement ceiling, and how some shoddy work from a condo siding project caused a section of my basement drywall to be torn out. In My Avoision of Covid-19 I told the story of how I was hoping to get through the pandemic with as little human contact as possible, and how I thought "As long as I can make it through the next few months without any service people coming into my house, then I should be a-okay. And I've hardly had any service people in the house since I bought over 5 years ago, so I should be fine.

Old Basement Damage

Due to the pandemic I had to (or got to?) start working from home every single day from Monday, March 16, 2020 until [insert date here]. My office was down in the drafty, dirty, messy, disrepaired basement. And now that Zoom calls were all the rage, my colleagues got to see the inside of my basement. I tried to keep the damage out of sight, but I wasn't always successful.

One day on a Zoom call, a colleague asked about my basement, and made the comment "Didn't insurance cover that?"

Insurance?! Why didn't I think of that?! I have insurance! Of course, this will mean having people into the house. I wonder, given the time that's passed (about a year) if I'm beyond the window of being able to make a claim?

New Basement Damange

Well, I didn't have to worry about that last part because one morning in April I came downstairs to hear a drip drip drip. "Oh no. Not again!" Thankfully I still had my plastic sheets and buckets around from the last basement issue, so the carpet wasn't getting wet. I looked around to see where this water drip was coming from. Remember the furnace exhaust pipe, and the hole in the ceiling to the valve to the pipe going to the back of the house for the hose? That water pipe to the house is about a foot and a half over from the furnace exhaust pipe — right where a lot of the water damage was. Well, that pipe had sprung a leak. Just a leak. It hadn't burst. There was no flooding. just some drips. But listening to that all day was annoying.

I called for a plumber. They weren't able to send one for a few days. So I did what I could to slow, or stop the dripping. When I didn't need running water, I turned the water to the house off. This would slow the drip significantly.

When the plumber got there (This is service person #1. Long story, but two other plumbers came out for another issue. I'll count them here. We're up to 3 service people.) He cut out a bit of the copper pipe and replaced it with a plastic alternative. Problem solved.

(As an aside I learned something very valuable in this process of constantly opening and closing the main water valve that I'll pass along to anyone here who needs to read this. It's normal for bits of debris to get into your water lines. If this debris makes its way to a faucet with a filter, then it gets stuck there and the waterflow of that faucet will be severly hampered. This was happening with my upstairs bathroom sink. To fix this: shut off the water to your house, turn on all taps in the house to drain the pipes. Once all water stops flowing, close all taps in the house except the laundry room sink faucets. These faucets aren't filtered, and they're typically the lowest faucets in the house. Turn on the water. As the water rushes in and fills the pipes, this will cause the debris to go to the lowest point in the house and get flushed out your laundry room sink. That knowledge alone is going to save me hundreds of dollars in plumber calls.)

In July I decided to stop procrastinating and get the house back into a sellable condition. I had gone through a whole year, a whole winter of constant basement monitoring. No new floods from last year's issue. I was now confident that part was fixed.

Now for the fun part: I called my insurance company. I've never had to make a claim before. I didn't know what was ahead.

The Repair Saga Begins

I told them the whole story; the exhaust pipe, the siding project, and the leaky pipe. They told me that typically you have to make a claim within a year of the damage. So it was too late for the exhaust pipe issues, and the wall, but I'm still good for the leaky pipe. This works out. They both caused the same amount of damage. As for the wall, since that was from a different incident (same time, different cause, different area) it would be a separate claim. So I made two claims: one for the wall and one for the ceiling. And, yes, that meant paying the deductible twice - and the deductible for water damage is high.

They sent out a contractor (non-appliance service person #4) to take a look and give me an estimate. When the contractor came out he took a look and said "Yeah, we'll have to fix up the ceiling. But the wall? That'll be easy to fix. That'll be well below your deductible, so it won't be worth making a claim." And he was right. So I closed that claim. But there was still the ceiling.

We talked about options. My basement celing is drywall with this swirl pattern that was somewhat popular in the 70s. That makes it harder to fix than flat, or popcorn drywall because the pattern and finish have to match. So one option is to tear out the drywall and replace as it was. Another is to tear out the drywall and replace with flat drywall: no swirls. A third option is to install a suspended ceiling. I like this option if it can be done. Basement ceilings have a lot going on behind them. There are pipes and electric boxes, wires, and who knows what else. You want to be able to access that. And, by code, you have to be able to access to electrical boxes and valves. But with a suspended ceiling, you can just take out tiles. I have that in my laundry room. It's great!

Another advantage of suspended ceilings is that if one gets damaged, it's waaaaaaay easier and cheaper to repair than drywall! (I even helped friends install their suspended ceiling, so I kind know how to do it myself.) If my exhaust pipe issues had happened with a suspended ceiling, when I first saw that discolourization, instead of wondering about it and ignoring it hoping it was nothing, I would have just popped out the tile, and took a look. Finding the break in the pipe would have been easier. And I wouldn't be writing this post!

Anyway, I made the inital call to the insurance company on July 23^rd, 2020, and here we are, January 20^th 2021. There's been a lot of back-and-forth with the contractor; a few esitmates, and revised esitmates. They took samples of the wall and ceiling to test for asbestos (non-appliance service person #5). Thankfully the asbestos tests came back negative. Today I sent one final question to the contractor ending with something to the effect of "...if this last peice falls into place, then just let me know when you can start!"

For context, all of Ontario has moved from a Lockdown to a stay-at-home order until February 11^th. Since I've lived with a damaged ceiling and wall for nearly 2 years, I'd hardly think of this as essential work. I can live without it for a few more weeks. Even if it has to wait til April (when I predict Covid-19 case counts will start dropping due to vaccinations and warmer weather and people spending more time outdoors), then that's fine with me.

After a week, I finally heard back from the contractor saying that the last peice isn't falling into place. The last peice being the cost of replacement. If I go with a full replacement (drywall with swirls), then all costs are covered by insurance (minus the deductible). But, if I do anything else (such as suspended ceiling), if it's more expensive than a full replacement, then I pay the difference. During the inital estimates, the suspended ceiling was about $600 less than the full replacement. In revised estimates, it's more expensive by about $150.

Thinking the suspended ceiling (what I want) was going to be significantly cheaper than a full replacement, I was ready to just go with that option. Even if it turns out to be more expensive than the estimate, as long as it's less than $600 more than the estimate, it's still covered by insurance. Now that it's more than the estimate, then if it turns out to be even more expensive than the estimate, then that difference comes out of my pocket.

So, it's a question of one risk over another. If I go full repair, the risk is in further damage causing another insurance claim. After a certain point, insurance may no longer cover me, or it may get more expensive. So that is a risk for the future. This could come back to bite me in 4 or 5 years. Wheras taking the suspended ceiling option reduces risk from the future, it places risk today that installation could be more expensive than the estimate.

So, I'm not sure what to do here. I am leaning towards the suspended ceiling option: Take the risk right now.

I'll keep updating this post as things progress.