Harry Potter

[jessw]

i know i have never liked harry potter till i started reading the philosiphers stone and now im hooked yeah ive always liked whitch craft but HP never actually tickled my fancy lol ok im bored

[Spite]

Are you kidding me with this, I read those books and found them dreafuly boring and hoplessly... "Fluffy."

[jessw]

well i do have alot on my mind so i guess thats why i started reading it tis the only book remotely interesting

[EAP]

Some of the best literature I have read. There is nothing wrong with 'fluff'.

Glad the sixth book, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince will be out on 16th July, 2005.

[SuicideKitten]

i actually like the series too, and as it becomes darker i've become a bit more into it.
I know a lot of little kids are into it, but is that such a bad thing in spreading literature for something everyone can enjoy

[EAP]

Not at all, and it is this series' something-for-all natural and easygoing, freeflowing laidback style that annoys the hell out of some people who fancy themselves as literature critics.

[Aimee]

I love Harry Potter. I'm trying to cram in as much classical fiction before my G.C.S.Es, and sometimes there just so goddamn difficult to get through. So it's nice to have any easy ready that's actually got quite a good plot.
I can't wait for the sixth one!

[EAP]

Aimee which classical works do you have to prepare for your GCSE's?

[Jester]

Well, I ain't obsessed with HP but find them entertaining and a great read when your stuck with in teh airport or on a bus for eight hours... same with the left behind series, don't believe any of it but hey their entertaining... and thats what counts... (I'll never make a good literature critic)

soemtiems we all need fluff but i though the fifth one was not fluffy at all, it was so dark and i could not not not not not believe the ending.... I'm refusing to acdcept it and hoping that its not true and that itll be rectified in the sixth book

[Aimee]

Aimee which classical works do you have to prepare for your GCSE's?

Well, my English teacher has given us a list and told us to read at least some of hem on there, and she's going to check our knowledge about the books to make sure We've read them. Apparently it will improve our English techniques if we read a lot of classic literature.
Right now I'm in the middle of Wuthering Heights and next on my list Jane Eyre. Also I'm planning to read some by Dostoyevsky and Austen quite soon.
If anyone has any 'classic' pieces of literature to recommend then I would welcome any suggestions.

[EAP]

Would your teacher consider 'Dracula' by Bram Stoker a classic?

One classic which I have always found easier to plod through then most others is 'Vanity Fare' by William Makepeace Thackery.

Then there are always American classics like Huck Finn, Scarlet Letter, Moby Dick etc.

[jessw]

ive read dracula for my english class when i was in highschool and have seen the movie a thousand times lol

[arao]

I've read a lot of classic works ,like wife and daughter,the works of Jane Austine,and the Bronte sisters,Dickens.But the most I think worthing reading is " Count XXXX"(I cannot remenber it exactly).The iron will the hero presented with an old professor is so explosive and if we have that one ,everything is possible.
P.S.-----I love HP two,it fantasy and wierd world and can fly just with one broom.can't wait to see the sixth one.

[simon]

HP is entertaining, though not realy as so inflamed myfans, but the fantastica world is fun and light and easy to read. But hes last couple did not stike my fancy, they seemed to be lacking the same vivdness and fun. I think the author may be tiring and the story getting drug through the mud so to speak with overkill publicity.

[ihaveaheadache]

It's a little bit better than Eragon but is dragging.

[EAP]

Bit better then Eragon?!?!

Comm'on. Eragon is to Harry Potter what Earth is to Universe.

[welshwiccan]

Hi I'm new and I must say that the Harry Potter series is truely entertaining, we all need to get away from reality on occasion, and that's what these book do

[Bongitybongbong]

I've read some of the Potter books and they were okay. Eragon on the other hand was much better in my opinion. If you're looking for some fantasy books though I think the series is called Narnia. They're good books, but they're light reading.

[ihaveaheadache]

The world of Harry Potter is easier to understand cause it explains things from a "real" human boy's point of view from the "real" world. Eragon, on the other hand, is a little bit hard to follow at the beginning, and it simplies several concepts (e.g. mind-reading). I find it hard to believe that Eragon just can do it.

[Levenbreech Vor]

Although Harry Potter is a nice, quick, entertaining read, I was wondering whether anybody on this forum shares my view that it is incredibly overrated.

Harry Potter is the bestselling book in history, better then great literary classics, suspenseful mystery novels, and in-depth sci-fi and fantasy worlds. WHY? J.K. Rowling's characters are poorly developed, the plots are full of annoying angst, the villains are cliché, and the writing style is childish.

I have often, on other message boards, expressed by views on Harry Potter and was shunned. I was hoping that on a forum full of well versed, literate people, I could find someone that would agree with me.

Whether or not you agree with me, tell me your views on Harry Potter.

[Stanislaw]

I agree, the series is seriously overhyped. It isnot that great, and towards the end of the series becomes whiney, irritating, plain frustrating and generally stupid.

Personally I think the books are escapist, masochistic, books for those who enjoy self-pity.

[Pensive]

HP series is great and specially its characters are very developed and engage me....
A very nice series. It was the first novel I read at late night because I did not want to leave it for a "tomorrow"
It made me love the books although its my not favourite boom right now but I do agree that its a very good novel, indeed.

[byucougs]

What you have to remember is that Harry Potter turned a generation that would rather sit in front of a TV for hours on end to play video games into a generation that has read 6 novels (some extemely long) and are waiting paitiently for the seventh. Harry turned a large part of the population that would otherwise never have read a book into avid readers. For that, we must salute him.
Maybe the plot isn't the best sometimes. Rowling's writing isn't the best out there, but it has done wonders for literacy.

[ponynikki]

I personally dislike the Harry Potter books- but I know so many adults and children who read these novels that would never normally pick up a magazine, let alone a 100 page book. I have to give the author support for this- Harry Potter or Charles Dickens- It's all about reading something, and perhaps Harry Potter will lead to reading more.

[Levenbreech Vor]

Harry turned a large part of the population that would otherwise never have read a book into avid readers. For that, we must salute him.

Ahhh...

The typical argument in favor of Harry Potter: "Anything that make people read is good."

But is reading Harry Potter really any better then watching TV?

Harry Potter books don't add anything to people. They don't have good vocabulary, they don't teach good writing, and they don't improve peoples intelligence.

I am all for reading and think it is incredibly sad that TV is taking books place, but it not like someone that reads Harry Potter is next going to read Great Expectations.

[PeterL]

The Harry Potter books are not great literature, but J. K. Rowling is a good writer, who created good round characters, plots that follow logical patterns (if you accept the premises), and used universal themes. They are aimed at an audience from about 9 to 18, and for literature aimed at that audience the Harry Potter books are great. I don't know what books have popular with that audience in the recent past, but most such things from past times were much shallower and the characters were not as well developed.

[papayahed]

Ahhh...

The typical argument in favor of Harry Potter: "Anything that make people read is good."

But is reading Harry Potter really any better then watching TV?

Harry Potter books don't add anything to people. They don't have good vocabulary, they don't teach good writing, and they don't improve peoples intelligence.

I am all for reading and think it is incredibly sad that TV is taking books place, but it not like someone that reads Harry Potter is next going to read Great Expectations.


I like to think of HP as a "gateway" book. HP made it cool to read, and perhaps someone who would have never picked up a book before will continue reading because of it..

When I was younger I spent the week at my cousins, they thought there was something wrong with me, that I actually wasn't feeling well because I wanted to stay in and read (it was a star wars book) instead of going to the neighbors house. Reading was not something cool kids did.

[kren]

Well i do not consider the books to be literature in its true essence, i'll give the writer some credit because she created a good formula, or she got really lucky. But still it's not that good at all, and very unoriginal. It is a children's book when you come down ,ll, and i guess thats why it has become immensly popular. since the larger number of readers are children. But sadly, i would prefer it if people read something more in the lines of Neil Gaiman, but then again thats not for children.
(look up his "Books of Magic" for a surprise) The Harry Potter series are good books, but that all they are; once the younger generation gets older i hope they'll realize that. But then again you never know.(oh and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092115/
for another surprise, scroll down to cast list)

[Kiwi Shelf]

You know, I have noticed that a lot of people read Harry Potter because their friends do. I think liking Harry Potter is more of "cool" thing than actually something that people enjoy. A lot of kids I know own the books because they got made fun of for not, but they don't actually read them. They just go see the movies. More adults seem to like Harry Potter than children, I think it just got blown way out of proportion. I refuse to get bought into it, I did read the first book, but I borrowed it. I just think that it has got too big for its breeches and there are a lot better things to read. A lot of the sales, too, could be because parents think that every child would love to read it because there friends child has it, so they buy them for them. That's what I think a lot of Harry Potter is, a popularity ploy.

[Wendigo_49]

The typical argument in favor of Harry Potter: "Anything that make people read is good." yes (subjective opinion)


But is reading Harry Potter really any better then watching TV? Depends on what your watching. I have never read Harry Potter so I will not comment on it. I do however think TV can be beneficial. I liked to watch the Discovery, Learning, and History channel before they all got on the kick of every show has to involve an automobile of some type. I also loved Mr. Wizard and got up every school day at 6:30 am to watch it then go back to sleep before school started at 9:30 am.


Harry Potter books don't add anything to people. They don't have good vocabulary, they don't teach good writing, and they don't improve peoples intelligence. I don't know about the first two since i've never read Ms. Rowling's books. I do however think that they can improve a kid's intelligence. I think that the first Harry Potter book was about the sorcerer's stone which is something like the philosopher's stone? If true read on if not just go to the next question. When I was around four or five my mom bought a 7 book encyclopedia set from a salesman with each book being a different color. In this set were 2 I especially liked, the purple which was the history of America and the green which was basically a science book from Archimedes and Pythagoras theorem to why your brain and senses are kind of like a computer and equipment (videocamera are your eyes, microphones are your ears). My favorite story in the green book was a story about alchemists an the hunt for the philosopher's stone. I made my mom read it to me every night and soon I was reading it to her. At eight after reading how chemistry is modern day alchemy I decide to get Asimov's inside the atom out of the school library. That book and the green science book has spurred me to learn everything I can in any science related field. That is how books like the Harry Potter series could improve a kid's intelligence.


I am all for reading and think it is incredibly sad that TV is taking books place, but it not like someone that reads Harry Potter is next going to read Great Expectations. No they probably will not read Great Expectations next but maybe farther down the road they will not be intimidated by such a novel

[Levenbreech Vor]

I like to think of HP as a "gateway" book. HP made it cool to read, and perhaps someone who would have never picked up a book before will continue reading because of it..

When I was younger I spent the week at my cousins, they thought there was something wrong with me, that I actually wasn't feeling well because I wanted to stay in and read (it was a star wars book) instead of going to the neighbors house. Reading was not something cool kids did.

I wish HP was a "gateway" book but it isn't. People are more likely to think "Cool a book about magic...I'll go watch the movie." then "I liked that book, I'll go to my local library and look for other books with similar topics."

Speaking as a kid, 15 years old in fact, I don't think it is considered cool to read and I definitely don't think that Harry Potter changed the statues of the well-read.


However I respect Harry Potter for what it is, a well done ploy to make money, not a well written novel.

[faith]

OK, so now I have to defend the Harry Potter books.

First: Here's an (my) emotional view of the books. (I wrote it in my review of the latest book soon after having finished it.)

"Well, well, well. The Harry Potters are lilke no other books. To me they are special and shouldn't be rated like other books, so I can't give any of them anything else than the top grade. Rowling just is an awsome writer, and the world of Harry Potter is a world of it's own, and still it feels very real. To me it's real in a way. The characters are so familiar, as well as the places. And this isn't because of the films, but because of all the time I've spent in the world of HP through reading. The Harry Potters are the kind of books of which it's hard to let go. Off course they are pageturners, but I can't even let go after having finnished the book. Mentally that is. I kept thinking of HP at least a whole day after having finnished it."

This is why I personally like Harry Potter. It is purely emotional, and no argument in any direction in the question about if Harry Potter is good literature or not. But the question is, can u develop such a relationship to just any books as I have developed to the Harry Potter books? Well, maybe u can, and maybe the meaning with litterature isn't to make people develop relationships to it. But the previous at least is an example of how somebody can feel about the books.

In the same review I also wrote the following:

"What Harry Potter basically is about, is the battle between good and evil. Harry represents the ultimate good and Voldemort the ultimate evil. Harry is throughout good and Voldemort throughout evil. About this there is no doubt. None of the other characters are as strictly either good or evil as they. It's not like I would ever dream of not trusting Ron and Hermione, althou they aren't as heroic as Harry or as powerful. And after the Half-Blood Prince I'm quite sertain that Snape is the most evil character in the book next to Voldemort. But take for example the Malfoys. They are on the evil side, but in the H-BP it turns out that they and especialy Draco, are actually quite human. Draco Malfory isn't troughout evil. Actually he isn't really very evil at. He isn't able to kill. So basically in the HBP it turns out that good-evil thing isn't as simple as it seamed in ex the Philosophers Stone. Nothing is very simple in the Harry Potter world, just like it isn't in the real world."

The battle between good and evil is the main theme in the books. It's a basic theme, it's a traditional theme. Yes. But there's nothing wrong with that. It's a good theme, and I think that Rowling has managed to complicate it in the later books.

My main argument for why the Harry Potter books are good (and good for people) is that they offer an healthy view on life.

That's all for now (all thou there are other aspects too).

//Passinate HP fan and literature student (waithing to get attacked)

[el01ks]

But is reading Harry Potter really any better then watching TV?

Harry Potter books don't add anything to people. They don't have good vocabulary, they don't teach good writing, and they don't improve peoples intelligence.

I am all for reading and think it is incredibly sad that TV is taking books place, but it not like someone that reads Harry Potter is next going to read Great Expectations.

I don't mean to be rude, but this comes across as being really quite intellectually snobbish!
1) What's wrong with watching tv? Sure, it's not fantastic if you turn into a goggle eyed addict who never does anything else, but if you want to watch a couple of hours a day what's wrong with that? It's quite relaxing after a day at work (though if you are fifteen you probably don't have an office job yet!), it can be informative, as there are some great documentaries around at the moment - if you're not sure if you will be interested in something, it's easier to sit at home and watch a hour long programme on it then spend a while researching it and realise you're not interested! (bearing in mind you can go and do proper research afterwards if it does interest you). I don't agree that it is taking the place of reading, as not that long ago historically, it would only have been rich/privileged people who could actually read. Literacy rates are still not 100% either by the way, so good adaptations of novels are the only way for some people to see them! I agree that those members of our society who come home from school, watch cartoons, have their dinner in front of the telly and don't read anything after "the cat sat on the mat" are not ideal, and it makes me upset that there are people like that, but each to their own. Having done an english degree, it does depress me that there are people who will never read some of my favourite novels, but it's not really any of my business.

2) You think a novel has to have a good vocabulary, good grammar and make you more intelligent? What about interesting plots and characters, descriptive backgrounds and scenery? I don't think there are many classics that improved my iq, though they may improve the vocab - but look at the language in some 'classics' - do you really want to talk to someone who is using shakespearean slang?

3) As has been mentioned, Harry Potter is mainly a children's book. I've seen 6 year olds reading it! Don't really think any of them are ready for Great Expectations.

There is no guarantee that kids will read other books because of HP, but maybe one in ten will go back and read something like the Narnia chronicles... And at any rate, at least it does get them past the dreaded 'cat sat on the mat' style of writing!

[Pensive]

Ahhh...

The typical argument in favor of Harry Potter: "Anything that make people read is good."

But is reading Harry Potter really any better then watching TV?

Harry Potter books don't add anything to people. They don't have good vocabulary, they don't teach good writing, and they don't improve peoples intelligence.

I am all for reading and think it is incredibly sad that TV is taking books place, but it not like someone that reads Harry Potter is next going to read Great Expectations.

As you says that Harry Potter books don't have good vocabulary and they don't teach good writing. To some extent I agree with you, ofcourse, Rowling's writing can't be compared to Charles Dickens, Austen and George Eliot. (no offense to HP lovers) but there is something in the world called "entertainment"
I found the series very entertaining and witty and her style is also not bad. We can't call it bad. The said that the question is why do teens/kids like it and prefer it rather than to watch TV... To me, it looks like, they found it quite entertaing and its world is beautiful. I myself, reads novels for entertainment. The main reason is entertainment and pleasure. In my opinion, her wit and imaginary world made the kids/teens love the book and they prefer the enjoyment with the book rather than the one with TV. There is a certain scale for the enjoyment...they must have found the book more entertaining than the tv. I will not say that watching telivision is a bad thing...
Books and TV are two totally different thing and I think both are quite entertaining and useful as well. My friend is a great TV lover and I love books, We both take pleasure with our hobbies and both of us learn new things. Like el, I will say that there is nothing wrong in watching tv - ofcourse, we should not do access of anything. We should do everything mdoerately not in excess even reading books in excess can done a great harm to us.

[Nightshade]

Right heres my 2 piece worth-
Escuse me people buut dont you think charles dickens rated as popular fiction in his time a novel in fact!! so quit being snobbish about new books
as for harry potter well its my opinion that the series is any les or more great then oh Alice in wonderland or the lion the witch ect books and yes its had way too much hype but I started reading because of Malory towers (enid blyton)and I now read about 6 books a week (granted a magority of those are so called junk reads) but still.

The books are not fantastic yes but everyone starts somwhere and if a child gets enough enjoyment out of a harry potter book they might come into a library and get somemore similar books.
For example ther is a shelf in one of the liibraries I have worked at once called Hotter than Potter and most things that go on that shelf leave quite quickly so yes I think harry potter is a great escapist book and yes it can be entertaining I havent reda the whole series because I gave up at 5 but will eventually read 6 when 7 comes out not because I love it but as someone working in libraries I should know what s in the book.
also I have a therory that shes gone kill off potter and I want to be proved right.
also it s not such a simple good vs bad story really I mean look at 5 black is killed and he was Good think its suprisingly more balanced and realistic then alot of critics will admit.
:D

[Levenbreech Vor]

Point taken.

Congrats to you el01ks, you are one of the few Harry Potter fans that have been able to offer me a concise opinion that is persuasive!

We may disagree but at least we can talk about HP openly.

I was wondering, what were some of your favorite books?

[papayahed]

I wish HP was a "gateway" book but it isn't. People are more likely to think "Cool a book about magic...I'll go watch the movie."


Have you seen the sales numbers? People are buying the books.




However I respect Harry Potter for what it is, a well done ploy to make money, not a well written novel.

well, duh! Why would she do it for free?


Don't get me wrong, I've never read the books and I'm not saying they're great books, but at the same time I'm not going to call them crap either. There's no denying that Rowlings did something right...

[Nightshade]

[QUOTE=papayahed]Have you seen the sales numbers? People are buying the books.

yes but to take the otherside of the argument for a bit...
libaries by tons of the things for eg my libary which is only really very smal has atleat 3 copies of every book! :eek2:

Still I did enjoy the first 4 and probably would have enjoyed them all if I hadnt started with four then worked my way back to the begining by the time I got to harry in 5 I did like who he was becoming teenagers :rolleyes:
;)

[Levenbreech Vor]

well, duh! Why would she do it for free?

No need to be so rude, I was just expressing my views as I let you.

[el01ks]

Congrats to you el01ks, you are one of the few Harry Potter fans that have been able to offer me a concise opinion that is persuasive!
I was wondering, what were some of your favorite books?

Lol, I like you!

I'm not sure anymore if I have a favourite book, and favourite books is still difficult! There are some authors I like, but I don't like all of their work. I do like Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels. I'm currently eagerly awaiting The Knife of Dreams, which is the latest book in Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series (I'm too cheap to buy it in hardback - plus I have the other ten in paperback, so it just wouldn't go with my collection ;>). Some of my most well-read books are period romances by Georgette Heyer. They're generally quite light, not trashy, well written and have happy endings - perfect for curling up on the sofa with a hot chocolate when I'm feeling a bit down. I also like Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility by Jane Austen, I do like Persuasion and Mansfield Park as well, but am not so keen on Northanger Abbey or Emma, and prefer the former. I really like Scott's Ivanhoe, and want to read more by him. I've just finished Trudi Canavan's Black Magician trilogy, and enjoyed that, and I like some Dickens, particularly Nicholas Nickleby. Really need to start reading more different writers though, I have a bad habit of just sticking to the ones I'm comfortable with.
Hmm, probably more info than you were looking for, but nevermind!
Who do you like to read?

[papayahed]

No need to be so rude, I was just expressing my views as I let you.


Sorry, didn't mean it to come of as rude.

[Levenbreech Vor]

To papayahed:

No problem, I just don't want any animosity on my thread.


To el01ks:

I haven't read many of the novels you listed, however, I loved Pride and Prejudice and Nicholas Nickleby. Have you read The Good Earth by Pearl S. Buck (one of my favorite storys).

[Logos]

I haven't read any HP stuff and I won't, I've heard and read enough reviews to conclude it's mediocre stuff :)

I don't like HP converts trying to tell me why I *should' read it either, that is the most annoying thing about it to me. But then I usually go against the grain on a lot of stuff.

[Logos]

No need to be so rude, I was just expressing my views as I let you.

I didn't find papayhed rude.

Interesting how this topic is bringing out some, erm, expressive posts by people :D

[Logos]

And uh, let's not get personal or take things personally, we're talking about a book, right? :)

[el01ks]

Logos - you go against the grain? But as you haven't read the books, you're just taking other peoples' viewpoints without any firm critical base for yourself. If you read the books and hated them that might be more 'against the grain' as the majority seem to like them! Just taking someone else's ideas on something and letting them form your own lacks originality, and to be honest, sense - how can you know if you like/dislike something if you never try it?
I'm not trying to convert anyone - I like the books, prefer them to the films, don't think either are great literature, and don't really care if people like them or not! But it's not rebellious or anything to let other people form your opinions.

(ps - not supposed to be personal!)

OOOPS! I'm very sorry I hit the wrong button I did not mean to `edit' your post.

[Logos]

el01ks, I didn't mention being a `rebel'.

Actually at this point in my life I'm pretty aware of the fact that most pop culture bores me to tears, I came to that conclusion on my own :) so this is no exception.

If it's a #1 hit in movie in theatres, number one song or "Best-selling Book" most likely I have no interest in it.

[Levenbreech Vor]

Logos - you go against the grain? But as you haven't read the books, you're just taking other peoples' viewpoints without any firm critical base for yourself. If you read the books and hated them that might be more 'against the grain' as the majority seem to like them! Just taking someone else's ideas on something and letting them form your own lacks originality, and to be honest, sense - how can you know if you like/dislike something if you never try it?

Yet again el01ks I agree with you! (Gosh we must be reading each-others minds) I am not a fan of Harry Potter but I have read all of them for two reasons.


1. Firstly, so no one can frame me as a hypocrite because there is nothing that upsets me more then a hypocrite.

2. Secondly, because there are entertaining. I will be the first to admit that it is fun to read Harry Potter. The reason I am against it is because it is so overrated.

[el01ks]

I didn't say you said that you were a rebel, but that was my interpretation of your use of against the grain!

I don't care if something is popular or not - you don't know if you like it till you try it. I wouldn't decide not to see/read/listen to something just because it was popular.

[simon]

I find the books to be adversely overrated, but they do nonetheless have the semblance of entertainment. They have also decreased in effort and enjoyment as the series has continued. Though there are more books coming, I think the author is tuckered out. And there are other series of fantasy and fiction that are not as poorly written, are more creative, and might have actaul impact on my life. That said when the next one comes out I shall still read it if anyone one I know has a copy. But I can wait a long time on that.

[faith]

It's all about your view on literature.

I think the purpose of literatur is the following:

a) to make/help us understand other people and see things from their point of view (and maybe undertand ourseves too)
b) to be an escape from the real world (problems and stress etc)
c) entertainment

I think the Harry Potter books fullfill all of this.

[MrAcademics8290]

Harry Potter rules!! And you're correct that all does apply. Yuo have great taste.

[Levenbreech Vor]

Harry Potter rules!! And you're correct that all does apply. Yuo have great taste.
These are the type of pro-Harry Potter responses I normally get. Incoherent statements that the author does not back up. I thought that on a forum full of bookworms and intelligent people I wouldn't find this, I was wrong.

[Scheherazade]

These are the type of pro-Harry Potter responses I normally get. Incoherent statements that the author does not back up. I thought that on a forum full of bookworms and intelligent people I wouldn't find this, I was wrong.Levenbreech Vor,

You have started this thread to see whether there are other people on the Forum who share your view that HP books are overrated. As you might have expected, some people do and some don't. If you are not willing to hear their opinions and respect them, maybe you should not have asked for their views in the first place.

Not so long ago, within this thread, you asked another member, who simply expressed her thoughts, not to be rude. Now, I will ask the same thing; please respect others' views and do not resort to name calling simply because their opinions differ from those of yours.


Going back to the subject... I have read all the HP books except for the last one, which I will read in future as well. They are aimed at a certain age group and, keeping that in mind, they are good. However, we hardly all agree on what a good book is. It is simply something we will have to agree to disagree that we have different tastes.

[PeterL]

These are the type of pro-Harry Potter responses I normally get. Incoherent statements that the author does not back up. I thought that on a forum full of bookworms and intelligent people I wouldn't find this, I was wrong.

I am curious as to what you find wrong with the Harry Potter series. Do you disapprove with the themes, plots, characters, style, or something else? I have been accused of being a bookworm for decades, I am usually classified among intelligent people, and some people think that I am a fair writer. Although J. K. Rowling targetted an audience that I am no longer part of, I liked the Harry Potter books that I have read. I think that Rowling injected universal themes into an interesting setting that allowed her to create characters and situations that she couldn't work with in the England of the Muggles. Fantastic literature has been used since ancient times to emphasize themes that were easier to address outside of the ordinary reality. For books targetted at teens the style and vocabulary were quite sophisticated.

[Levenbreech Vor]

I now realize that my statement was uncalled for and I'm very sorry about it.

However, when discussing HP I like to have in depth conversations where I can be persuaded and I can persuade my "opponent". The statement "Harry Potter rules!!" is not supported and can not be debated beyond a simple I'm right your wrong argument.

Once again sorry,
Levenbreech Vor

[Aurora Ariel]

There is a high degree of subjectivity involved when assessing a book, but I think one can look at it from the point that it's good that people are reading at all.Even if you are not a huge fan of Harry Potter yourself, it is rather refreshing to hear that many little kids have started to read because Harry Potter introduced them into a whole new world of books.I think the comments about young children choosing to read, instead of watching another mind-dulling TV show or playing video-games all the time, is a positive step for literacy and may encourage these developing minds to read much more in the future.They may eventually decide to try and explore a whole wide range of genres which may increase their love of literature, which originated with the exposure via the Harry Potter series.An exciting and new horizon may lurk around the corner of the bookshop as they discover their own passion for stories and now wish to read extensively.Personally, I have only read the first one(ages ago), but will consider reading the others in the future.I have seen the first films though, but haven't found the time the read any of the others as I always seem to have so many on my read next list already.So from this perspective, I can't see any detrimental effect and problem with young people reading Harry Potter; even if the writing itself is not the most exceptional in the whole history of literature, it still provides an enthralling story for many and allows one to use and open the mind in a realm of imagination.

[samercury]

I am all for reading and think it is incredibly sad that TV is taking books place, but it not like someone that reads Harry Potter is next going to read Great Expectations.

I disagree with that. Harry Potter was the first book in English that I read by myself and that I actually liked. The school that I was going to my first year here gave us this list for summer reading and frankly, I didn't like them (later I read them again and they weren't that bad)... Anyways, after I read Harry Potter, I got more interested in reading :D. I read the second and third volumes and afterwards, when I started school, I had this teacher who had a very large library at the back of her classroom.
First book after HP- Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen...been reading ever since

[Pensive]

I disagree with that. Harry Potter was the first book in English that I read by myself and that I actually liked. The school that I was going to my first year here gave us this list for summer reading and frankly, I didn't like them (later I read them again and they weren't that bad)... Anyways, after I read Harry Potter, I got more interested in reading :D. I read the second and third volumes and afterwards, when I started school, I had this teacher who had a very large library at the back of her classroom.
First book after HP- Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen...been reading ever since

Same happened to me, Chamber of Secrets was in my summer reading list. It was the first english book I read leaving fairy tales. ;)
I loved the series. It made me love the books. :D

[Apotropaic]

...shares my view that [Harry Potter] is incredibly overrated.

Harry Potter is the bestselling book in history, better then great literary classics, suspenseful mystery novels, and in-depth sci-fi and fantasy worlds. WHY? J.K. Rowling's characters are poorly developed, the plots are full of annoying angst, the villains are cliché, and the writing style is childish.

....not like someone that reads Harry Potter is next going to read Great Expectations.

I find your obloquys against the HP series to be unfair and somewhat invalid. I see that you are comparing HP with "the great classics" you speak of. Yes, perhaps someone who reads HP would not read "Great Expectations". Why would they? The styles of writing of both books are greatly unalike. Great E. was written in the 1800s. The text has an old English quality which could prove difficult to read for the modren general reader. HP however, is, as you said, written in a childish manner, therefore attracting a larger audience, and therefore outselling those great classics.

Don't get me wrong, Great Expectations is a wonderful classic. I just feel that most of us, sometimes, just wants to quit reading those books that require of us to think greatly and deeply before we may understand the story, and grab an easy-to-read book and be entertained.

Do you feel HP is overrated because it is written in simple plain English language and not the lyrical prose you find in classics? Or is the story really that bad? Choose the former and you'd be unfair and quite discriminatory. Choose the latter and I'd be baffled, since I found HP fun and entertaining.

[Kiwi Shelf]

I guess I always thought the best selling novel of all time would not be about some kid that is magic... There are just better books out there, and I am not even talking classics because I go through periods of reading classics and I am not in one right now.

[Levenbreech Vor]

I disagree with that. Harry Potter was the first book in English that I read by myself and that I actually liked. The school that I was going to my first year here gave us this list for summer reading and frankly, I didn't like them (later I read them again and they weren't that bad)... Anyways, after I read Harry Potter, I got more interested in reading :D. I read the second and third volumes and afterwards, when I started school, I had this teacher who had a very large library at the back of her classroom.
First book after HP- Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen...been reading ever since
WOW! :eek2:

I guess I have never heard a story like that. If Harry Potter really does get people reading then I might concede that it’s not so bad.

I wonder what the statistics are about Harry Potter and books read next.

[imaditzyreader]

I completly agree with the first post, however, I must say that I contradict myself. It is one of the easiest reads one will find out there, and one of the easiest to loose your self in. I read the last one between 2:30 one day and 10:00 the next.
However, they offer no necesary thought at all to read and comprhend. In a world when very few kids read, let alone adults, it forced people to begin to look at books. In my high school if you ask any one if they have read harry potter, they will most likely say yes, but if you ask them if they are readers, they will all say no.
For this i am thankfull to it, for it has made some people in this Telivision controlled world turn them off and open a book.

[Nocturnal]

Harry Potter seriously annoys me. I actually bothered to try to read the first book, before the whole HP insanity kicked in but I couldn't get myself to actually enjoy it. Everyone was simply...contrived. At some point I felt I was reading a strangely silly version of The Magician's Nephew by C.S Lewis, so I put it back and re-read the classic Narnia story instead. To this day, I haven't regretted it.

[Jack_Aubrey]

I feel like Harry Potter is a sorry excuse for literature. The writing is poor,and the stories are pretty adolescent.

[Darlin]

After reading the latest installment of Harry Potter I've found I'm enjoying the books less and less. The series seemed to peak with the fourth book when it was fun and intriguing but now Harry's become a bit of a snark, irrelevant and moody although I must admit some teenagers do make the changes he has.

I think the thing I dislike most about the books, and I've enjoyed the first four mind you, is that they take so much from other good author's. Reading book six, the Half Blood Prince, I felt somewhat like Nocturnal except my reaction was less spontaneous as I did read the entire book. Afterwards I felt like calling the plagiarist police! That’s a little annoying and yet I’m curious to see what the last book will be like and I’ll probably snag that book up from a friend like the latest. No point in buying it.

[Charissa]

Harry Potter is not an educational book. it' s more for enterainment. As for me, I like it. I like adventure and fantasy book you know. I don't care if it's non-EDUCATIONAL. :argue: :rolleyes:

[novellover]

Hello guys
I think I joined in a bit late as most seem to have had their say in the matter. And I see that I am probably the only avid Harry Potter fan here. And I am an adult!!!
Before I state my views, I'd like to confess my lack of sophisticated knowledge of literature. I read books as a hobby- so my choice of books is probably not the most intellectual, but I love Harry Potter. And I find that besides the tight plot, the books do try to delve into deeper issues- growing up, dealing with the loss of loved ones etc. In fact, one of my best quotes from the books is the one when Dumbledore consoles Harry about the early loss of his parents and says, "Your parents are alive in you". I don't recall all of what he said, but in essence he talked about how the dead are alive in the minds of the ones who loved them the most. It might be just me, but I felt really touched by these lines. And the fact that JK tried to talk of such profound matters in books that are mostly targeted at kids was quite impressive to me. The loss of loved ones is probably the most heart-wrenching and difficult thing to live with even for the most mature adults and her take on it was quite profound and interesting. This is just one example, but there are numerous others in these books. I feel that the worth of a creation should be decided by how many lives it can touch and by that measure, Harry Potter is assuredly a modern classic. It has left an indellible mark on the publishing and reading world and who knows, it might even lead our new-young readers to classics like Shakespeare and Joyce!!

[rachel]

i too am very late at expressing myself. I admit that the sheer overwhelming consumerism of the hp books has prejudiced me somewhat against even picking up my first one to read. however having read some of your opinions i will do so because to judge a matter before hearing the evidence seems to be grossly unfair. and i hate that sort of thing. so even if it is with a lack of excitement i will get going and buy my first harry potter and see what all the talk is about.
i too love the good earth by pearl s. buck. in fact her writings made a huge impact upon my life and life choices. her thoughts and her worlds, her two worlds captivated me and forced me to evaluate my life and what i would do with the years allotted to me, to make a difference somehow in this world i roam about in.

[cruciverbalist]

I only started reading the Harry Potter books after the fourth one came out. I wasn't much interested in reading them before that because all the hype sort of put me off. But after reading the first, I did get intrigued enough to read the others and have been a fan since. (Although the 6th book wasn't quite up to par in my opinion and has taken the plot in another direction...but let's see how it turns out.)
I don't think it's true that readers of the series are all people who don't read books other than popular literature. I enjoyed the HP series and read other 'serious' works as well. My favourite writers include Joyce, Shakespeare, Faulkner, Virginia Woolf and many others. And there's plenty of evidence if you only read some of the fansite editorials that there are other Harry fans who have much deeper knowledge of literature. One editorial even detailed how Rowling used Proust's literary techniques in her work. Rowling's writing style has to be simplistic as her main audience comprises children. But she does draw from mythology and literature. Harry Potter may not be a literary classic or even the best fantasy fiction, but it is a compelling read in my opinion.

[LightShade]

Well, what a set of interesting opinions :)

one comment, and then I'll write my personal view on hp books

You think a novel has to have a good vocabulary, good grammar and make you more intelligent?
Yeeees, I definitely think a novel should have good vocabulary and good grammar. As for a novel making one more intelligent, well, that depends on the client's material, so to speak :D generally, yes, that should be the case.

I have read the first five hp books. I may read the subsequent ones, because I am curious how the author will sort things out and if the characters will actually grow "up". But not because they are good literature. They're not.

I do believe they are good books for one to start reading in English. The language is pretty easy, the plot is not complicated, therefore I would rather recommend Harry Potter than my favourite Terry Pratchett to someone who doesn't have a very good command of English. However, I had the surprise of some of these people disliking Harry Potter and choosing to read other, more complicated books instead (yes, even TP). Apparently, they got bored. :p

After the first read, when I just followed the story as such, I re-read the books and ended up with an amazing list of what an author should NOT do :D
I have kept that list as future reference for my own literary attempts.

I know why it appeals so much to kids: the idea of a kid just like themselves, who suddenly finds out he's a wizard and goes to study at this awesome wizarding school is a perfect hook. I bet most kids imagine one day this will also happen to them and secretly wish they have been adopted :D

The rest is just the effect of a huge marketing action. Hurray for whomever devised it.

[el01ks]

Yeeees, I definitely think a novel should have good vocabulary and good grammar. As for a novel making one more intelligent, well, that depends on the client's material, so to speak :D generally, yes, that should be the case.


I feel a bit like this has been taken out of context... I am not advocating poor English in literature, but I believe that an expert use of vocabulary is not essential for a book to be enjoyable. If the vocab is too advanced for potential readers, then it would put off a lot of them! Which is why a lot of people have trouble with getting into 'the classics' if the writing style and vocabulary is alien to them.
I don't think I will ever agree that a book must be educational to have merit, it sounds a bit too much like the 18th/19th century belief that well-bred young women should only read 'improving' works, as anything of a less prudish tone might corrupt them! As I said before, what's wrong with just enjoying the plot?
If something is very badly written, it can take away the meaning of the text (as the editor for the reviews/features part of my universty's student website, I once spent an hour re-writing a review of Master and Commander because it was so poorly written - and I hadn't even seen the film!) and make it impossible to enjoy, but the Harry Potter books are readable.

[LightShade]

ah, "expert use of vocabulary". That would indeed make the book difficult to read. I agree with you on this one, sorry for the misunderstanding.

However, I found it upsetting that J.K.Rowling doesn't diversify her wordpool :p repetition is annoying and there are such things as synonyms out there... it's a shame not to use them, really :D

As for the "educational" argument, I have the strong belief that books shape readers. Unknowingly, I might add.
I may read a book just for the plot, but then again there's no telling what my mind will pick up from it and store somewhere safe until it's needed, if you get my meaning.

ps - I cannot say Harry Potter is not educational - it's taught me some fair bits about writing with style :p (as I said in my previous post).

[pcockey]

I'm an English major. I don't watch TV simply because I spend too much time reading--not just what's assigned in class, but what I choose to read on my own as well. The vast majority of what I read on my own would be considered "good literature"--I just reread Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, and I'm currently taking my time over a copy of The Marriage of Heaven and Hell with the original plates.

And, y'know, that's all well and good. But sometimes, just like with anything else, you need junk food. Harry Potter is quick and light and fun, and it fulfills that occasional junk food requirement. I have a close friend who is also an English major, and is just as passionate about literature as I am--maybe even more so, because he came from a home where his reading material was strictly monitored, and he's overwhelmed at what there is to read. A few weeks ago I loaned him a young adult book I'd borrowed from my sister. His response? "Wow. I love what I'm reading, but it makes a nice break to read a high school book again."

I don't look at this as an argument for Harry Potter; rather, it's an argument against taking literature so seriously. Yes, it's vitally important, but what's the point if you can't have some fun once in a while? That's what books are for, after all. I can appreciate the meter of Byron or the phrasing of Wilde perfectly well, but every now and then, the analyzing brain cells must go off and let the having-fun cells take over.

[claudeng]

There is so much better children's fantasy out there that I think it's kind of sad that HP gets so much of the attention, but in and of itself it's not bad. Just . . . not challenging. I don't mean challenging on a reading comprehension level, I think it's fine for that (and I imagine American kids of this generation will be way more literate in British terms than many others are!), I mean challenging in the sense of firing the imagination. For all its magic, most of what goes on in the magic world works just like the Muggle world with shortcuts. They're perfectly fine kids books and enjoyable - it just gets a bit spooky when you find adults considering it great literature. Here's a quote from Ursula Le Guin - I don't think she was talking about HP specifically, but I'm sure the craze is part of the movement she's talking about. (I'll admit to being a much bigger fan of hers than of J.K. Rowling's. I was reading Earthsea at the prime Potter ages)

SP

"Commodified fantasy takes no risks: it invents nothing, but imitates and trivialises. It proceeds by depriving the old stories of their intellectual and ethical complexity, turning their action to violence, their actors to dolls, and their truth-telling to sentimental platitude. Heroes brandish their swords, lasers, wands, as mechanically as combine harvesters, reaping profits. Profoundly disturbing moral choices are sanitized, made cute, made safe. The passionately conceived ideas of the great story-tellers are copied, stereotyped, reduced to toys, molded in bright-colored plastic, advertised, sold, broken, junked, replaceable, interchangeable."
- Ursula Le Guin, preface to Tales of Earthsea

[PeterL]

Tales of Earthsea came out decades before Harry appeared. It was quite good, but it is not as absorbing as the Harry Potter series.

[samercury]

Tales of Earthsea....I don't really like that sery by LeGuin- I like some of her other series though....

On HP:
-Now when I read the whole series back, I think that the books are getting less and less interesting as time goes on...I still think that the 1st book is good :D
....I still want to know what happens in the end...

[clandestine]

Yeah, Harry Potter is fun the first time through, and maybe even the second, but after that...well. I enjoyed the first book the most simply because it was fresh: Hogwarts, Quidditch, etc. The books are not all the same, but neither are they fundamentally different from eachother. It's new and fun at first but the glamour wears off as the story goes on; however, I gotta hand it to the author for creating memorable characters. :)

[starrwriter]

Oh my God! More than two-thirds of the posters actually like Harry PottyTrainer. Am I among philistines here?
*Pulls hair out by the roots*

[PeterL]

Oh my God! More than two-thirds of the posters actually like Harry PottyTrainer. Am I among philistines here?
*Pulls hair out by the roots*

Are those independent observations, or do you have some problem with Rowling's writing?

[starrwriter]

Are those independent observations, or do you have some problem with Rowling's writing?
Yes, I have a problem. I'm an adult with mature tastes in literature.

[Logos]

Amazon says HP books are written for the 9-12 years age range.

I wonder what the actual average age is for HP readers.

[PeterL]

Yes, I have a problem. I'm an adult with mature tastes in literature.

Then why are you concerned about the quality of children's literature?

[Levenbreech Vor]

Then why are you concerned about the quality of children's literature?

Because some day those children are going to be leading our governments and being influential citizens.

[papayahed]

Because some day those children are going to be leading our governments and being influential citizens.

Do you think previous generations read higher quality books? I grew up on Judy Blume and the Sweet Valley High series - No Prize winners there......

[starrwriter]

Then why are you concerned about the quality of children's literature?
Young people the same age as the millions (billions?) reading "Potter" could understand and gain important insights from a book like "Jonathan Livingston Seagull" while being entertained. See my point?

Also, Rowling's book won't teach any of them how to write well.

[PeterL]

Young people the same age as the millions (billions?) reading "Potter" could understand and gain important insights from a book like "Jonathan Livingston Seagull" while being entertained. See my point?

Also, Rowling's book won't teach any of them how to write well.

Do you see less value in the insights in Harry Potter than in the insights in J.L. Seagull?

While reading Harry Potter won't teach anyone how to write well, it exemplifies good character development, plot development, and how to insert theme into a story without appearing to do so. Rowling isn't a truly great writer, but is a very good writer. Her skill in the craft of writing is greater that that of any other writer of children's literature that I have encountered. Some mild changes in the plot and setting would make those very good adult literature.

[PeterL]

Because some day those children are going to be leading our governments and being influential citizens.

Papayahed already made a great reply. Ask yourself whether you would rather have a future government leader or influential person who read Harry Potter or one who never read anything and played video games and watched TV.

Personally, I read Kenneth Roberts and C. S. Forester and a huge amount of history when I was in that age bracket.

[rachel]

Starr,
you are a phillistine? Funny I would have never thought by your picture that you were that old. Have you considered that your taste in what the youngsters should read is generational? What I mean by that is with each generation the older folk always, well a lot of the time say that the new generation's music, literature isn't as good as theirs was. Isn't it a matter of taste?

[PeterL]

What I mean by that is with each generation the older folk always, well a lot of the time say that the new generation's music, literature isn't as good as theirs was.

People have been criticizing the younger generation for thousands of years. If the criticisms had merit, then the human race would have destroyed itself a long time ago.

[rachel]

Well said Peter. There is an emotional something that comes to each generation of youth that they claim for their very own against the winds of the older folk's claiming from their own generation. It is just how it is. But one doesn't make the other's preferences more or less.

[MrBojangles]

Yes well put peter.

[PeterL]

Well said Peter. There is an emotional something that comes to each generation of youth that they claim for their very own against the winds of the older folk's claiming from their own generation. It is just how it is. But one doesn't make the other's preferences more or less.

The importance that some people seem to put into temporary styles of expression that constantly change is something that I just don't understand. Styles change with the seasons, but they have the same content.

[~Maude~]

I have seen HP get my younger brother reading when nothing else would, my son is fond of them and it is fun to share a series with him. My whole family reads them now, my parents, brother, husband, son, cousins, it's fun for the kids to get together and talk about them and it's nice as adults to understand what they are enjoying so much.

While I don't think that they are great books I do like them and they are a path to good reading habits with the younger kids. It gets them excited about books, reading every night and into the book shop & library, I don't think thats a bad thing and it has allowed me to slip some of my old faves into his basket too. As stated before I don't think books that have got so many kids reading can be a bad thing and it hopefully leads kids into the joy and excitement of books, their taste will mature as they do.

[Apotropaic]

Young people the same age as the millions (billions?) reading "Potter" could understand and gain important insights from a book like "Jonathan Livingston Seagull" while being entertained. See my point?
Livingston Seagull's insights and lessons might prove a bit too difficult to grasp fully by children that young. Harry Potter has simpler ones, and they are presented out more effectively, I believe. Livingston Seagull is more philosophical than a real story. I don't think it was meant for 8-year-olds. Harry Potter has an interesting plotline with delightful characters people can relate to with lessons and insights like friendship. What 8-year-old would be concerned about freeing his/her limitations to become master of his consciousness, as is presented in Livingston Seagull?

[starrwriter]

Livingston Seagull's insights and lessons might prove a bit too difficult to grasp fully by children that young. Harry Potter has simpler ones, and they are presented out more effectively, I believe. Livingston Seagull is more philosophical than a real story. I don't think it was meant for 8-year-olds.
First of all, a previous post said the average age of a "Potter" reader was between 9 and 12, not 8.

I don't think the insights in "Seagull" are beyond the understanding of kids 9 to 12 years old. That's a good age to learn that limits are imposed by society until they become internalized and that most "individuals" behave like herd members. Any kid can understand Jonathan's desire to be free.

[LightShade]

While reading Harry Potter won't teach anyone how to write well, it exemplifies good character development, plot development, and how to insert theme into a story without appearing to do so. Rowling isn't a truly great writer, but is a very good writer. Her skill in the craft of writing is greater that that of any other writer of children's literature that I have encountered.
good character development? her characters are archetypes, for crying out loud! that wouldn't be so bad, actually, but they even behave like archetypes, they're giving me the impression I already know what they'll do and say. They don't have many dimensions, they're almost flat.

good plot development? can you hear me laughing at that? :D She's not good at developing plots, there are too many deus ex machina there, too many situations when handy things and people just, oh, happen :rolleyes: to be there when they're needed.

Rowling isn't a truly great writer, but is a very good writer.
She's not a bad writer, no. But not very good, either. Just good.

Her skill in the craft of writing is greater that that of any other writer of children's literature that I have encountered.
:eek2:

I see many people feel her latest books in the series are badly written compared to the first one, as the initial novelty was followed by nothing much in the ingeniosity department. Apart from that, I believe it may be also due to the fact that they were written under pressure and that took its toll on J.K.Rowling. She's only human and fame is a double-edged knife. Correct me if I'm wrong, please: has she written/published anything else before HP? She's practically a beginner in the literary field, raised to the status of VIP. And her skills aren't honed yet, they're still very much in the development stage. And there's the pressure I already mentioned. It's like pressuring a child or teenager to haul weights like a grown man - the strain on their not-yet-developed bodies would be too much and the results disappointing. No wonder she's still struggling.

Yes, the idea is good. I'll give her that. Actually, they idea is great.
It's the development that spoiled it. Please, just for the sake of it, imagine this idea would have been developed by your favourite writer (presumably, he/she is indeed a skillful author). Yes, a children's books writer, since I assume you're going to say "these are children's books after all, let's not be too judgmental". Oh, wait, you said she was the greatest, in your opinion; that pretty much make this exercise pointless :D
Nevertheless... how do your think the characters and plot would have been developed by another writer? :)

[Apotropaic]

First of all, a previous post said the average age of a "Potter" reader was between 9 and 12, not 8.

I don't think the insights in "Seagull" are beyond the understanding of kids 9 to 12 years old. That's a good age to learn that limits are imposed by society until they become internalized and that most "individuals" behave like herd members. Any kid can understand Jonathan's desire to be free.
O sorry, I missed the age limit by 1.

Yes, maybe kids 9-12 may be old enough to grasp the insights, as they may already feel the things you said in school. But still, I don't think they will appreciate it as much as the lessons in HP.

Livingston Seagull is too... direct, as opposed to the lessons hidden as undertones in HP. And really, Livingston Seagull's story is just about a bird wanting to fly, going to heaven, then learning to fly. I have to younger siblings, and I know that when they read that type of story, they will only see that story, not the philosophical insights. It won't have a lasting effect on their mind. Kids that age are concerned mainly about having fun, I think you'd agree with that. They don't care much for those things. Unless of course, they're brilliant.

However, HP's lessons and insights are mixed and hidden in a captivating and interesting story. Well, I think you know where I'm going here.

[Levenbreech Vor]

Kids that age are concerned mainly about having fun, I think you'd agree with that. They don't care much for those things. Unless of course, they're brilliant.

However, HP's lessons and insights are mixed and hidden in a captivating and interesting story. Well, I think you know where I'm going here.

I'm disappointed that you think so little of youth that all 12 year olds think about is fun all day long. Secondly, tell me what HP's lessons and insights are.


good character development? her characters are archetypes, for crying out loud! that wouldn't be so bad, actually, but they even behave like archetypes, they're giving me the impression I already know what they'll do and say. They don't have many dimensions, they're almost flat.

good plot development? can you hear me laughing at that? :D She's not good at developing plots, there are too many deus ex machina there, too many situations when handy things and people just, oh, happen :rolleyes: to be there when they're needed.

Rowling isn't a truly great writer, but is a very good writer.
She's not a bad writer, no. But not very good, either. Just good.

Her skill in the craft of writing is greater that that of any other writer of children's literature that I have encountered.
:eek2:

I see many people feel her latest books in the series are badly written compared to the first one, as the initial novelty was followed by nothing much in the ingeniosity department. Apart from that, I believe it may be also due to the fact that they were written under pressure and that took its toll on J.K.Rowling. She's only human and fame is a double-edged knife. Correct me if I'm wrong, please: has she written/published anything else before HP? She's practically a beginner in the literary field, raised to the status of VIP. And her skills aren't honed yet, they're still very much in the development stage. And there's the pressure I already mentioned. It's like pressuring a child or teenager to haul weights like a grown man - the strain on their not-yet-developed bodies would be too much and the results disappointing. No wonder she's still struggling.

Yes, the idea is good. I'll give her that. Actually, they idea is great.
It's the development that spoiled it. Please, just for the sake of it, imagine this idea would have been developed by your favourite writer (presumably, he/she is indeed a skillful author). Yes, a children's books writer, since I assume you're going to say "these are children's books after all, let's not be too judgmental". Oh, wait, you said she was the greatest, in your opinion; that pretty much make this exercise pointless :D
Nevertheless... how do your think the characters and plot would have been developed by another writer? :)

I am in entire agreement, couldn't have said it better myself!

[PeterL]

I see many people feel her latest books in the series are badly written compared to the first one, as the initial novelty was followed by nothing much in the ingeniosity department. Apart from that, I believe it may be also due to the fact that they were written under pressure and that took its toll on J.K.Rowling. She's only human and fame is a double-edged knife. Correct me if I'm wrong, please: has she written/published anything else before HP? She's practically a beginner in the literary field, raised to the status of VIP. And her skills aren't honed yet, they're still very much in the development stage. And there's the pressure I already mentioned. It's like pressuring a child or teenager to haul weights like a grown man - the strain on their not-yet-developed bodies would be too much and the results disappointing. No wonder she's still struggling.

Yes, the idea is good. I'll give her that. Actually, they idea is great.
It's the development that spoiled it. Please, just for the sake of it, imagine this idea would have been developed by your favourite writer (presumably, he/she is indeed a skillful author). Yes, a children's books writer, since I assume you're going to say "these are children's books after all, let's not be too judgmental". Oh, wait, you said she was the greatest, in your opinion; that pretty much make this exercise pointless :D
Nevertheless... how do your think the characters and plot would have been developed by another writer? :)

I will agree that the quality of the series has been uneven, and that might be a result of Rowling's inexperience outside of those books. I wouldn't be surprised if she has run out of things to write about. It has been more than a year since I read any of her books, but "Chamber of Secrets" and the "Prisoner of Azkaban" and "The Philosopher's Stone" are good stories. I don't claim that they are great literature, but they are well crafted stories that were written to entertain, and they do entertain.

The question of how the characters and plot would have been handled by another writer is an interesting exercise in alternate universes. How would Vladimir Nabokov have written The Chamber of Secrets? I'll think about that one. Changing that point of view character would have altered everything, but I think that Ginny as the POV character would have created a great story; although it would have been very juvenile anyway. How would Mark Twain have written it? Or Hemingway? Thinking about that is an interesting game. I wonder if anyone would want to write one of those stories from the POV of Snipe.

Let us be judgmental, but let us judge her in relation to her peers. The kinds of books that I classify HP with are the Hardy Boys and similar collections of stories for children. Within that section of the fiction universe Rowling is a bright star. If I compare her with Joyce, Nabokov, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, etc. she is at the bottom of the barrell. But if I compare her with writers of contemporary "Fantasy", medievalish stories she is also a star.

[Chava]

Hmm, I've read all the HP series, and frankly i don't seem to think they're improving. I enjoyed the world that was created in Harry Potter as a source of inspiration for my own imagination, but as I've been growing older, I'm now labouring through reading them aloud to my little brother, who loves them, but we both agree that Harry Potter is a terribly annoying teenager, and the constant confrontations and conflicts are more than a little exasperating at times. Still, i intend to read the last one as well... can't imagine having read them all and then not knowing how it ends.

May I suggest a healthy alternative in Terry Pratchett? His discworld is a dazzeling source of inspiration itself, and the humour, plot and language are far more advanced.
Or if you're into crazy Sci-fi, find Douglas Adams and fall in love with his abuse of any regular rule of writing. Sheer quality for you... The Hitch Hikers guide is such a blessing... Sigh... :) Yeah, Potter is not great litterature, but so what, there's many others to read if you'd rather do that.

[LightShade]

Chava, Pratchett also wrote some children's books :)

PeterL, pray fantasy fans out there don't read what you wrote about her being a star in the fantasy writing field :D

[Apotropaic]

I'm disappointed that you think so little of youth that all 12 year olds think about is fun all day long. Secondly, tell me what HP's lessons and insights are.

I've spoken honestly about our youth today. Only a few kids are really into those things. Well, at least that's what I believe. That's just based on my observations. And the insights of HP are too obvious, you really want me to list them down? It's the usual stuff like friendship, courage, standing up for what you believe in and pure-heartedness (shame on you Levenbreech Vor!).

Anyway, you may be right that HP isn't as good as a whole lot of other books out there. But I'd just like to correct you on something. Based on your previous statements like:


Harry Potter is the bestselling book in history, better then great literary classics, suspenseful mystery novels, and in-depth sci-fi and fantasy worlds....[Harry Potter] is incredibly overrated.

...but it not like someone that reads Harry Potter is next going to read Great Expectations.

...I definitely don't think that Harry Potter changed the statues of the well-read.

--it seems to me you're under the impression that HP is supposed to be some great piece of literature. HP is a book for young adults. I don't think even JK Rowling would expect HP to be on the same level as Shakespeare. It's not her fault that something clicked with her story with both young and old readers alike and her book ended up becoming a massive bestseller. You say that it's overrated. It is if you consider it a literature masterpiece. But HP is just a book for young adults, like the hundred others out there. It just happened to be more popular.

Why do you think HP is so popular? It could be because it was able to touch an extremely large audience, both young and old, globally. Don't you think that would somewhat qualify it as a great book?

And besides, what is your description of a well-written story? Complex sentences? Big words? Figures of speech? Who made up that rule anyway? HP was able to accomplish something only a few books do. Don't you think there's something in the writing that perhaps others thought was great?

Anyway, you are free to have your own opinions of the book, of course. But just remember what HP is really is. It's like your expecting so much out of it.

[Apotropaic]

Let us be judgmental, but let us judge her in relation to her peers. The kinds of books that I classify HP with are the Hardy Boys and similar collections of stories for children. Within that section of the fiction universe Rowling is a bright star. If I compare her with Joyce, Nabokov, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, etc. she is at the bottom of the barrell. But if I compare her with writers of contemporary "Fantasy", medievalish stories she is also a star.
There! That's what I'm talking about! Judge her fairly, please!

[jakobin]

i think that, as others have said above me, HP is a book for young adults. it cannot be put up against Jane Austen, or Dickens, or any one of the great authors that have put pen to paper. do not judge it in their fields.

JK has done what so many others have not acheived, she has made reading 'cool' and enjoyable. it has drawn them from the TV. someone earlier said, "So? What is the difference, they are not learning anything from HP."

i have to disagree.

reading puts vocabulary into young minds much more efficiently than TV. also, tv is bad for the eyes. reading a book is completely what nature intended our eyes to do, rather than stare a a series of flashing lights.

[PeterL]

There! That's what I'm talking about! Judge her fairly, please!

Then you agree that she is a very good writer. OK

[PeterL]

PeterL, pray fantasy fans out there don't read what you wrote about her being a star in the fantasy writing field :D

It wouldn't bother a bit if they read it. Those "fantasy" books are only literature by virtue of being words on paper. They are without plot or theme, mere;y massive collections of characterizations and events that go no where.

[LightShade]

PeterL, the fantasy genre is HUGE. There are great writings there, and even some of the bad ones that I have read had "plot" or "theme". I don't understand your position.

Are you sure you didn't mean "fairy tales"? :D

[PeterL]

PeterL, the fantasy genre is HUGE. There are great writings there, and even some of the bad ones that I have read had "plot" or "theme". I don't understand your position.

Are you sure you didn't mean "fairy tales"? :D

I certainly didn't mean "fairy tales". I meant the multivolume medaevalish sword, sorcery, and romance things. There is also a huge amount of good 'fantasy' from Dunsany to Tolkein to de Camp and LeGuin. I contrast that George R.R. Martin, Tad and others.
I just looked at a list of "fantasy" writers and found many authors listed who are very good writers, who know when a story has ended. An endless series of episodes do not make good literature.

[Chava]

Chava, Pratchett also wrote some children's books

yes, i know that, but i find that his discworrld series has a wonderful ploy when it concerns being child friendly or utterly mature. It's lovely! has anyone read his "Soul Music"??

[Apotropaic]

...[Fantasy books] are without plot or theme, mere;y massive collections of characterizations and events that go no where.

...There is also a huge amount of good 'fantasy' from Dunsany to Tolkein to de Camp and LeGuin. I contrast that George R.R. Martin, Tad and others.

I just looked at a list of "fantasy" writers and found many authors listed who are very good writers, who know when a story has ended. An endless series of episodes do not make good literature.
Umm... I don't understand what you're talking about. You keep jumping from anti-fantasy books to pro-fantasy, then back to anti. Are you critcizing the books and praising the authors??

[LightShade]

yes, i know that, but i find that his discworrld series has a wonderful ploy when it concerns being child friendly or utterly mature. It's lovely! has anyone read his "Soul Music"??
I agree, the series can be read at many levels and every person will understand (or not) the various subtleties based on his/her previous experience. And even if you don't get most of them, the stories are still thoroughly enjoyable.

I read all his Discworld books up to Night Watch and I am currently re-reading them for what would be the third or fourth time in some cases. And sometimes, as it happens when you re-read a book after some time, I see things and characters in a new light. I love that.


An endless series of episodes do not make good literature.
Definitely. One has to know when to stop, otherwise it becomes rather boring and possibly too thinly stretched.

I see you have reconsidered your position as to the fantasy genre in general. I'm glad we finally agree on the subject. :)

Now, not to be totally off-topic: has anybody read the latest HP book? how did you find it? (I am looking for opinions as to plot, character development and general writing style. Please have good arguments to back up your opinion :D ).

ps - I haven't read it yet, I'm waiting for the paperback and I wish she'd stop writing such big books, they cost a lot :p

[Shea]

Okay, here's my crack at this.

After reading 7 pages of this thread, I come to 2 interesting conclusions. First, it appears that all the English majors (including myself) are in support of the HP books. Second, I was shocked that no one has brought up the fact that much of the inspiration has come from Mythology and classic literary themes.

Like Logos, if something is wildly popular, I'm likely not to be interested either. Early on while persuing my degree, I established the fact that the closer I get to the 20th century, the less likely I am to enjoy a piece. But I've also found that if I can make comparisons to older classics, I tend to like them (hence my thorough enjoyment of Tolkein). Initially, I condemned the books for religious reasons but then decided that wasn't fair, as I hadn't read them yet. I began reading them after the fourth one came out and found that they were no more harmful than Lord of the Rings or Narnia. Then I began my degree. I was happy to discover numerous parallels between the HP series and classic works of lit, and this was only enhanced by mythology classes.

THEN! At Cambridge this past summer, I took a class on Dickens and another on the Bronte sisters, both taught by the same professor. She expressed the same observations that I had on the HP books (at the time she was comparing the orphan state of Oliver Twist to Harry), and she said that the only reason that she hadn't read the new one was because her daughter hadn't finished it yet. She felt the same as myself that Rowling was quite brilliant for introducing these themes and ideas to children in such an entertaining way that they can more easily identify them later in life while they read more challenging works. I even experienced this for myself. I had never heard of a Basilisk until reading The Chamber of Secrets. For a while I thought she just made up the creature. Then I ran across it while reading for one of my classes. I read the footnote for curiosities sake, but really it wasn't necessary. I already thoroughly knew what a Basilisk was because of Rowling.

Lightshade, perhaps this is why the characters seem so archetypal to you. But even so, I don't think any of the HP characters are nearly as flat as the classic character of Oliver Twist.

About the writing, what I've said above I think must be taken into consideration. Also in agreement to what Apotropaic said about not comparing to Dickens because it's from a different time period I wanted to add: while taking those classes in England, I discovered that a good knowledge of the history of society at that time (Dickens' or Brontes') is necessary in order to fully understand the meaning behind the ideas presented in a novel or even the language. Children (and most adults) don't generally know what happened during Dickens lifetime. They obviously know our own societal issues better and so can adhere to the HP books better. I also believe that the series follows the Dickens and Bronte example of trying to identify and change problems in our society. This leads me to an interesting example.

I found it ironic that many of the people complaining about the books also complained about kids being glued to the TV. Look at Dudley! Rowling has recognized the very issue brought up here, and personified it in one of her more rotten characters that no normal child would want to emulate!

Anyway, as a soon-to-be English teacher, I'm quite glad the books have been so poplular as I'll be refering to them from time to time during my classes for the reasons stated above.

sorry it's so long.

[LightShade]

Shea, I read many, MANY fairy tales and mythological tales when I was a kid. So I approached the HP books with that knowledge already installed :) but no, that's not the reason for my seeing the characters as archetypal - I wasn't referring to dragons and suchlike. I was referring to Harry & his buddies & his enemies.


I don't think any of the HP characters are nearly as flat as the classic character of Oliver Twist.
It's been some time since I read Oliver Twist. To make a fair judgment now, I'd have to read it again and I don't really feel like it. I wasn't saying classics didn't use archetypes - when I was at the University we studied flat characters in literary theory class using examples from classic English writers :D And I remember an exam where I had to write an essay concerning D.H.Lawrence's use of archetypes :) it was pretty obvious he did use such characters. (btw, I got mark 10 (an A, for US students) :D )

In any case, you may start with an archetypal character, but you have to work towards giving it more dimensions than the archetypal flat one. I fail to see that in Harry.

[Scheherazade]

Maybe Harry Potter books are like Marmite: You either love it (http://www.marmite.com/love/) or hate it (http://www.marmite.com/hate/) !

:p

[Stanislaw]

Maybe Harry Potter books are like Marmite: You either love it or hate it!

:p

exactly on the dubloons! there is no real inbetween ground with ol HP (the books, not the barbecue suce, but I suppose you either love it or hate it too)

Personally I think that they aren't so hot, and they don't teach kids some great moral lesson but ohvell.

Personally I think children shouldn't read untill they really have a need to, when they are 12ish, and then they should only read Robinson crusoe! (joke)...(Rousseaue)...:D

I just think it's sad that the classics aren't given to kids and that they aren't encouraged to read higher level literature, like Lem, Sienkewicz, Assimov,Jordan, Clavel.

[Shea]

I was referring to Harry & his buddies & his enemies.

So was I..

[Logos]

exactly on the dubloons! there is no real inbetween ground with ol HP (the books, not the barbecue suce, but I suppose you either love it or hate it too)


BBQ sauce? you've never had marmite have you :lol: it's truely `unique'!

[Logos]

Maybe Harry Potter books are like Marmite: You either love it (http://www.marmite.com/love/) or hate it (http://www.marmite.com/hate/) !

:p

:lol:

OMG :goof:

[Shea]

actually, I've never heard of it. What's it taste like?

[Shea]

My husband once made his own sauce for eggrolls (we were out of soysauce) Worcestershire, ketchup, yellow mustard, and raspberry jelly! He loved it, I hated it!

[Chava]

marmite...(shudders)

[PeterL]

Umm... I don't understand what you're talking about. You keep jumping from anti-fantasy books to pro-fantasy, then back to anti. Are you critcizing the books and praising the authors??

Some people write well and some don't. A variety of "fantasy" has arisen in the last 20 years that is pointless, but there is a variety of "fantasy" that has its roots in ancient mythology that includes some truly great literature. I suspect that role-playing games have led to the split.

[Chava]

hmm, why role-playing?

[PeterL]

hmm, why role-playing?

Role playing games can go on for a very long time, and they are more about the activity than about concluding the activity. Some of the books by role players have a structure that is similar to the games with a section at the beginning setting the scene and general activity, then the action begins and the characters go through a variety of situations.
I am not saying that there is a one to one corespondence between the games and the books, but there appears to be a relationship.

[LightShade]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_character

I actually found Harry Potter and Lord Voldermort given as examples there :D loool

[Scheherazade]

Author JK Rowling has said two characters will die in the seventh and final Harry Potter book, but she has been careful not to reveal which ones.
She told the Richard and Judy show that she had long known how the series would end, because she had written the last chapter "in something like 1990".

"One character got a reprieve, but I have to say two die that I didn't intend to die," she said.

She refused to elaborate, as "I don't want the hate mail or anything else".

Rowling said she could understand why authors might want to finish off their main characters in order to ensure they could never be resurrected.

She would not say if this would be the case with Harry.

However, she admitted she had "never been tempted to kill him off before the final because I've always planned seven books, and I want to finish on seven books".

'Arrogant'

This approach had meant she had been "lambasted" by several people, she said.

"I think they thought it was very arrogant of me to write the end of my seven books series when I didn't have a publisher and no-one had heard of me."

The author also told the Channel 4 programme she didn't expect to create a character more successful than the teenage wizard.

"I don't think I'm ever going to have anything like Harry again. You just get one like Harry."

On Sunday, Rowling attended the Queen's 80th birthday party at Buckingham Palace, and said she was "doing well" with the final book.

However, she did not confirm a publication date. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5119836.stm

[WhimsySA]

Are you kidding? I love Harry Potter, in fact the only reason I started reading in the first place was because of it! I was one of those I-hate-reading-it's-for-dorks kind of girls untill my friend convinced me to read the 3rd HP book! Now I read everything that I can! J. K Rowling rocks!

[Pensive]

Now, I wonder which two characters are going to die. Any guesses? I think that Ginny can be the one to die and the other can be Voldemort.

[grace86]

I do not think I have put my opinion in this thread yet, and it comes awfully late. I strongly enjoyed Harry Potter, and probably wouldn't have picked up Chronicles or LOTR if I had not read those first. Someone said in an earlier post that the series deals with a lot of growing up issues and death, they also mentioned that there were some really nice quotations. I think so as well. I am not sure if it was the first movie only or in the first book as well, where Dumbledore found Harry at the mirror and he told him "It does not do to dwell on dreams alone and forget to live."

There is also a book out there (and a college class surprisingly) that deals with philosophy and Harry Potter. The book is called something along the lines of "Philosophy of Harry Potter: If Aristotle Ran Hogwarts" I have not checked it out though.

For someone who said that the theme is extremely adolescent, well, yes, it is a child's book. But reading it for entertainment is no crime either. I think it expands the imagination and does have the capability to start something that will blossom into habitual reading habits. But then there are those who just follow the trends, it won't make readers of them all. But don't bash it please.

[Ryduce]

The first Harry Potter book came out when I was about 8 or 9,so it is neccessary for me to read them because they are essentially the reason why I read so much today.Granted they do not have the signifigance of Faulkner or Dostoevsky,but I will read everyone that Rowling puts out.I enjoy them very much! :D

[Bysshe]

Hmmm....Harry Potter. Let's see.

I was young enough to properly appreciate the books when they first came out, and loved them (although I don't think at any point I thought of them as "my favourite books"). I was a keen reader even before I discovered Harry Potter, so I can't say that they made me fall in love with reading, but I think it's good that they've managed to turn a whole generation into book-worms!

But as for me - by the time the last book came out, I had lost interest. I think they are good books for children, and I can see why they're so popular, even though I'm a little sick of the hype. But personally, I'm just not interested in them any more. I feel like I've outgrown them, and now it feels a little strange going back to them.

A series of books that both children and adults can appreciate, that I much prefer, is "His Dark Materials". I would choose Northern Lights over Harry Potter any day...

[SleepyWitch]

Although Harry Potter is a nice, quick, entertaining read, I was wondering whether anybody on this forum shares my view that it is incredibly overrated.

Harry Potter is the bestselling book in history, better then great literary classics, suspenseful mystery novels, and in-depth sci-fi and fantasy worlds. WHY? J.K. Rowling's characters are poorly developed, the plots are full of annoying angst, the villains are cliché, and the writing style is childish.


this sooooo needed to be said!
hehe, i think all the arguments in favour of the HP books have alreay been given...
i tend to agree with the idea that any book that will make people read is good... if you keep in mind that it's written for little kids and lots of kids don't read any books at all, that's certainly an improvement... i mean even if it's not a particularly good book, that's better than reading none... what's important in this context isn't so much what the brats can learn in terms of ideas, style etc but their basic literacy... i.e. lots of them have trouble even stringin two letters together... so they need to practice this and they are more likely to practice it reading easy-to-read books that cater to their childish interests....

but yep. I'm extremely disappointed in the sequels... i would of thunk (there's literacy for you :) ) that the style and characters would develop, especially as her original readers grew older, so they would have been able to grasp more complex ideas now etc...
gotta rush, will rant some more later :)

[Medea86]

Why do adults read Harry Potter, and is this a form of infantile escapism?

[PeterL]

Why do adults read Harry Potter, and is this a form of infantile escapism?

Because the Harry Potter books are fairly well written with good, although young characters, and the theme od good versus evil is ageless. Like all fiction there is an element of escapism.

[higley]

Need there be any reason other than entertainment? :) They surely entertain me!

[Pensive]

Why do adults read Harry Potter, and is this a form of infantile escapism?
Why do adults eat sweets? :p

[ClaesGefvenberg]

Why do adults read Harry PotterIn my case: My daughter likes the series, and kept talking about them so I read them too.

and is this a form of infantile escapism?I don't know, really. I'm certainly childish enough ;) ...and also very curious. Besides, I am always short on reading matter, and tend to read just about anything within reach :lol:

/Claes

[Niamh]

I'm a big fan of childrens books. i find that sometimes a lot more thought is put in to them and therefore they can be more enjoyable.
As For Harry Potter... they are what i call ageless books. They are books written with children in mind but have contexts that an adult would understand where a child wouldn't.this means that as you get older you realise things in the books that you didnt notice before because you're now that little bit older and wiser.:D
Also the Harry Potter books come in both adult and children editions. The only difference is the cover so it is actually being sold to everybody no matter what age you are. They are not the only books that are sold this way. Philip Pulmans 'His dark materials' trilogy, and Trudi Canavans 'Black Magicians' triliogy were both also sold in adult and childrens editions. In the bookshops i supervise you would find them in the Sci-Fi/Fantasy section.:)

[Dorian Gray]

The Harry Potter books are the only fantasy books I read. I prefer more serious stuff like Jane Austen, etc. But it's very entertaining and I love the world JK. Rowling has created. Some very colourful characters too. Especially Lucius Malfoy, Lupin and Snape. Sirius is also a favourite of mine. I've even roleplayed on a HP forum for a while. haha. I'm 20 though I hardly think of myself as an adult. I guess, in a way, Harry Potter makes me feel like a kid again.

[Niamh]

I worked the night that Half blood Prince was released and most of the people outside the shop waiting for midnight were adults, and they were all airport staff members. only a few were looking for it for their kids, the rest wanted it for themselves. I was the first person in work to hold a copy of it in my hands. got real excited.:D

[SleepyWitch]

Why do adults read Harry Potter, and is this a form of infantile escapism?
yes it is :) but then, you could say that all reading is a kind of escapism because you escape to a different world. Whether that world is "serious" or "childish" doesn't make that much of a difference :)

Most good childrens books are anything but "happy-clappy", so you can't escape from conflicts or evil by reading them any more than you escape by reading "serious" literature. Many of the problems are the same/ of the same kind but simplified a bit, only the setting is different.

What's your opinion Medea?

[EAP]

Adults read Harry Potter because they realize that the 'infantile escapism' it offers provides better bang for your buck than the unamusing intellectual masturbation inherent in certain other 'literary' works.


The Harry Potter books are the only fantasy books I read. I prefer more serious stuff like Jane Austen, etc.

LOL. Fairytale regency romances vs. coming-of-age fiction incoporating themes like terrorism, loss and puberty (and a fairly realistic and relevent portrayal to boot); perhaps I just take the seriousness of the word serious rather seriously. :crash:

[Shalot]

The books are well-written, the story is enjoyable and the world Rowling has created is just so neat (can't think of the word I want so I am going to have to settle for 'so neat') and I cannot wait until the last one comes out because I want to know who killed Dumbledore.

[Orionsbelt]

Why do adults read Harry Potter, and is this a form of infantile escapism?


I would like you to know that I use a very mature form of escapism that I have been working on for decades and intend to continue as long as I am able. I can only say that I have always preferred desert over the main course. What can I say? Vegetables suck. :lol:

[toni]

It is an addictive read and it is best when read after a really heavy book, for it is entertaining and light:D

[Laindessiel]

J.K. Rowling created a world. A whole new world. A complete new world that you would've thought it absolutely existed since Muggles started living; since Muggles discovered fire (to which the wizarding folks maybe used their wands instead); since there were good and evil.

I'm not sure why anyone would incoherently swear against the book that it would cause such ruckus in their minds as if the Queen of England was sentenced to prison. Harry Potter is just an ordinary boy who wants to live. Plots, ideas, twists, death and fluff - they all come to the book, just like how every other book is. Let's give Harry a chance. He needs us. Lord Voldemort never spared him, anyways. :p

[Wandering_Child]

Oh, this is just saying if we like it? Where are the theory threads...?

I'm an avid Harry Potter reader. But because of the gap between the movies and books I must admit that my interest has somewhat faded, but I still love Harry. And compared to Eragon...that author just stole the best bits and pieces of other stories and threw them together...Eragon=Aragorn, urgals=orcs and so on. I read them, and found myself cracking up at the end of Eldest. Oh, and when he was proclaiming his love to whats-her-bucket, the elf. But this is Harry Potter. I love him.

*toddles off to find theory-discussing threads*

[DHarley]

i have read Harry Potter and Eragon, Eldest and i think that Eragon was a better book and i dont think it copied lord of the rings it may have had similar enimies and his name sounds the same as aragon but it had alot of origionality such as the completely different style and concept of magic.

[Mugwump101]

Overall, it was the book that inspired a sudden burst of reading when I was younger. So, the books are wonderful~! You should continue reading them. How far are you into the series now?

[EAP]

I'd just like to modify a statement I made about two years ago.


Eragon is to Harry Potter what refuse is to biryani.

[Shalot]

The books are well-written, the story is enjoyable and the world Rowling has created is just so neat (can't think of the word I want so I am going to have to settle for 'so neat') and I cannot wait until the last one comes out because I want to know who killed Dumbledore.

I was just re-reading some crap I posted and I came across this. It's funny because I said I wanted to know who killed Dumbledore but I don't think that's what I meant.... I think I meant that I wanted to know what the deal is with Snape and which side he is on....:blush:

Oh well.

[Bookworm Cris]

Good comments, Niamh and Pensive!

I think that, even if the books are "intended" to a young audience, they contain elements deeper than the usual "child-book" has. They´re very dark, dealing with death, good x evil, and its plot is very well built.

To me, there´s a lot of prejudice in some comments and reviews about HP. People who didn´t read the books and say "it´s childish thing", or "it´s pure marketing", or things like that.

It may be the opposite of people who say Ulisses is good literature, even if they couldn´t get to the end of it.

PS: I did, and I think it´s very good. As good as HP, when it comes to the pleasure of reading and good craft.

[lit_lover]

That's exactly what it is. It's all about infantile escapism. Also, the books are written very well. They aren't really targeting children or adolescence.

[SaGe]

I'd imagine the most common reason would be curiosity.

[wvickejr]

I've read all of the Potter series published to date and have ordered Deathly Hallow or delivery this summer. I read them because I see so much of the young people I have been privileged to teach. The characters are very real. I discussed Book 5 at great length with my physical therapist who was really bothered by Harry's antagonistic attitude until I asked her how her 15 year old daughter acted when things didn't go the way she thought they should.

[Bakiryu]

why not? they're fun to read!

[Bakiryu]

if harry or ron dies i will cry!

[Mortis Anarchy]

For me, I got hooked when I was younger. They are great, easy stories that don't require much...its a fun book splurge!!! I think they are great. Sure not the greatest pieces of works, but great regardless. I wouldn't put them up against Shakespeare, Fitzgerald, Homer, Wilde, Voltaire and countless other writers but they are still decent books.

I think Lupin dies.

[Bakiryu]

Lupin! No! When Sirius died I cried for hours!

[Mortis Anarchy]

Just think about it.

Pettigrew=silver hand and grudge with Lupin

Lupin=werewolf, grudge with the Rat...

thats what I think. I love snape though, he is so cynical and dark...hilarious...(plus Alan Rickman, in the movies, is my favorite!)

[hastalavictoria]

harry potter is extremely overrated, but it is interesting.

[Bakiryu]

In the movie there was David Tenant *sights in love*

http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u266/comeandplaywithme/David%20Tennant/David-tennant.jpg

I couldn't stop watching it because of him, even thought it sucked. I hope he comes back!

[Brigitte]

The first few pages of this thread upset me. *groansmumbleswantstoscreamurghhhh* Anyway, I can't wait for 7/21!! (: I'm going to a midnight party and everything. I always start reading the moment I get my hands on the book. ^_^

I'm not as into the movies as the books. I've never watched a HP movie more than once.

[Brigitte]

Why question literature? Why question who reads what? It's like asking, "Why do you read books at all?" I mean... geez. If someone wants to read, what's the problem?

Harry Potter books are extremely modern what with the language being every day common language. Everyone can understand that. Just because a lot of us read classics does not mean the world enjoys having to look up words every couple of sentences to "get it." As years go by language is less formal and much less like that of classic novels.

Escapism? Okay, maybe I'm getting a bit mad, but it doesn't matter why someone wants to read a fantasy book. So... all those adult people that love Star Wars... are they escaping, too? I mean, a lot of people like fantastical worlds (hello, The Matrix - big hit) and out of the ordinary.

Aiiiish. *takes a breath*

[malwethien]

I read Harry Potter because the story is interesting and it's fun to read. Though I have to agree that some of the ideas are not original or cliche, it is still a great ride. Asking why adults read Harry Potter is kinda like asking why some adults still like reading comic books (which I personally do)...

[Mortis Anarchy]

Why question literature? Why question who reads what? It's like asking, "Why do you read books at all?" I mean... geez. If someone wants to read, what's the problem?

Harry Potter books are extremely modern what with the language being every day common language. Everyone can understand that. Just because a lot of us read classics does not mean the world enjoys having to look up words every couple of sentences to "get it." As years go by language is less formal and much less like that of classic novels.

Escapism? Okay, maybe I'm getting a bit mad, but it doesn't matter why someone wants to read a fantasy book. So... all those adult people that love Star Wars... are they escaping, too? I mean, a lot of people like fantastical worlds (hello, The Matrix - big hit) and out of the ordinary.

Aiiiish. *takes a breath*


YES! haha...

everyone says they are overrated...I really don't like that word. Why people stop liking something because it is overrated escapes me. If you don't like them, then okay, I respect that...If you do like them, great, I respect that too!!

This guy in my Drawing and Design class said that he didn't like the following because they were overrated:

1) Van Gogh
2) mechanical pencils(this one cracks me up)
3) iPods
4) Red Hot Chili Peppers and some other bands.

How silly is that?!

[JBI]

Doesn't the word overrated contradict itself? How can something be overrated if the rating states its worth. Thereby, nothing can truely be overrated as whole, since the rating given by the general public expresses their views, thereby accurately displaying a "rating".

On the note, I personally don't like Potter. I just loathe that little dweeb. Such a silly loser-esque character who is designed to portray the flaws in every male child, as if to call out and say to them "I'm a loser too, but I am saving the world, so can you." And "Hey look, though they may be losers as well, I have friends, and at least they are friends."

I guess this isn't my cup of tea, I think I will stick to Jane Austen. Jane Austen at least has a pretty use of vocabulary (I just imagine the story in my mind being read in an English accent, and I can't help but disappear in the beautiful pages).

[Brigitte]

Doesn't the word overrated contradict itself? How can something be overrated if the rating states its worth. Thereby, nothing can truely be overrated as whole, since the rating given by the general public expresses their views, thereby accurately displaying a "rating".

On the note, I personally don't like Potter. I just loathe that little dweeb. Such a silly loser-esque character who is designed to portray the flaws in every male child, as if to call out and say to them "I'm a loser too, but I am saving the world, so can you." And "Hey look, though they may be losers as well, I have friends, and at least they are friends."

I guess this isn't my cup of tea, I think I will stick to Jane Austen. Jane Austen at least has a pretty use of vocabulary (I just imagine the story in my mind being read in an English accent, and I can't help but disappear in the beautiful pages).

Ahahaha... he's not a loser. He's just a normal kid that found out he's famous. Geez. :lol: What makes you think he's a loser? Iono, maybe you define loser in a different way than you do...

And I didn't quite understand you definition of "overrrated" :blush:

[Mortis Anarchy]

The first few pages of this thread upset me. *groansmumbleswantstoscreamurghhhh* Anyway, I can't wait for 7/21!! (: I'm going to a midnight party and everything. I always start reading the moment I get my hands on the book. ^_^

I'm not as into the movies as the books. I've never watched a HP movie more than once.

The movies are good if you just look at them as a movie, not as the book. Once you've seperated them, they are much more enjoyable...maybe I'm just saying that because of Mr. Rickman??!:)

Anywho, I WILL BE IN MEXICO when the book comes out...grr...its cool, I'll have things to take my mind off of it.

[Lag866]

I havent read all the posts so I am sorry if I am repeating. I think when judging the HP books you should take into consideration a few things.First of all There is reading to improve intellect, vocabulary, be introduced to something you may not have been introduced to if you hadnt read about it, and entertainment. HP books are entertainment and therefore do not need to have deep intellectual ideas and words, they only need to be enjoyable. Secondly, when comparing the vocabulary of HP to older novels you need to take into consideration the language of that time, words today that are considered harder and unknown would not have necessarly been so back in say Austen, Woolf, Bronte, etc. time. And finally, there are many adult books written which sell many copies that are written dreadfully, but provide entertainment for many, yet I dont see anyone complaining about those, then again they arent as popular so maybe that's why.

[JBI]

He is a loser because he couldn't make it in the real world. In the real world he is a loser, but once he goes into his escape; his Hogwarts, he is something else. I only read the first one, and saw the movies for others (I have younger siblings) but here is what I managed to dig out.

The Slytherin kids represent the "cool kids" the bullies. They are your tipical I want to be like you kids who the losers both hate and idolize. Harry is a loser because he is disliked by them, though Rowling cheats by giving him more "super powers" to beat them. In the real world he is completely useless, he gets wooped by his cousin, and lives under the stairs. In the fake world he has power, and therefore is no longer a loser, but he still is a geek. I mean honestly, who would, if they had an invisibility cloak, go spying on their teachers.

[applepie]

I actually really enjoy the HP books. One, they grow with the audience. The difficulty and subject matter increases, at least it seems so to me, as the books prgress. Two, it is good verse evil. This theme has been a constant in some of my favorite books like the Lord of the Rings books. I like that everything comes with a price and good doesn't just triumph becase they are good and that is what should happen. As for Potter being a geek, well I don't think he bites the heads off of chickens so we are good on this score:D Actually I was quite the odd kid in school, not famous, but odd still and it is easy to idetify with this boy who has had been given more trials than someone his age should. Finally, the spying on teacher bit... what kid who could go anywhere without being seen wouldn't have done so. I would have given my left arm in school to drop in on my teachers without them knowing.

Sure the Harry Potter series is an escape for the reader, but all good literature is. I don't know anyone who likes to read books with characters that they don't like and can't relate with. Some of what makes a book quality is its ability to touch the reader in some way, even if it is to only amuse, through the pull of the characters. The characters may not speak to everyone, but they speak to someone. You mentioned enjoying Austen, I'm not a fan of hers and I tend to find the books dull and not enjoyable at all but you obviously enjoy them. I love Ayn Rand and H.G. Wells, however. I'm sure it could be argued that none of these authors were great by someone, but to us they are great. Rowling has secured her place by being able to touch scores of people with her characters and the problems they face.

[rob91]

I think the books have a great deal of nostalgic value for adults who are able to read them and think upon school days as a bit more fun, fantastical and important than they really were.

[Brigitte]

He is a loser because he couldn't make it in the real world. In the real world he is a loser, but once he goes into his escape; his Hogwarts, he is something else. I only read the first one, and saw the movies for others (I have younger siblings) but here is what I managed to dig out.

The Slytherin kids represent the "cool kids" the bullies. They are your tipical I want to be like you kids who the losers both hate and idolize. Harry is a loser because he is disliked by them, though Rowling cheats by giving him more "super powers" to beat them. In the real world he is completely useless, he gets wooped by his cousin, and lives under the stairs. In the fake world he has power, and therefore is no longer a loser, but he still is a geek. I mean honestly, who would, if they had an invisibility cloak, go spying on their teachers.

I won't argue with you, but the books are soooo much better than the movies. >_x And... it's not Harry's fault he's going through family difficulties. Personally, the Slytherins aren't cool.. they're bullies and they are never cool.

But I mean, not everyone will like HP... I just don't understand your justifications. Ah well. xD; And with an invisibility cloak, why not spy on teachers? Curiosity is what triggers it... not loser-ish-ness ahahaha.

[Xtian]

Pardon me for just barging in here but: JK ROWLING has had such a huge effect of kids around the world intersted in reading, that Harry Potter has been translated into almost every language in the world.

JK Rowling wrote these stories to entertain her daughter. She wrote them while sitting in coffee house because she couldn't afford to take the bus back home.

I love Harry Potter, in fact I have used him in teaching literature at the university I teach part time at. I believe that stories are so well written that they will become classics long after we are all dead.


This boy will be famous. There won't be a child in our world who doesn't know his name.
Professor McGonagall:Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone

[Aiculík]

Why do adults read Harry Potter, and is this a form of infantile escapism?

I read it because they are for children, but not infantile.
The story is original, author uses old cliches from old fairy-tales and twists them in new way, making it much more interesting and funny.
It is realistic - characters are believable and the whole magical world has its own logical rules - which is why even adults are willing to accept it.
It is funny - and the humour is in most cases inteligent.
The language is interesting - though the book is written in such a way to be easily understood by small children, it is clear the author thought about every word she used. Plus, I like how the autor created new words such as muggle or horcrux.

Harry Potter is a good book. And that it was originally written for kids - so what? Every good book can enrich you. It does not matter if it is book for children, or what genre it is.

[Xtian]

How true look at how many other authors have had such an impact: CS LEWIS< TOLKIEN > David Eddings> FranK Baum

There is just so much in Harry Potter that reaches adults themes are universal no matter what the genre.

Through literature we can learn so many things no matter what the topics.

I can teach you how to bewitch the mind and ensnare the senses. I can tell you how to bottle fame, brew glory, and even put a stopper in death.
Servious Snape

[Mortis Anarchy]

Uhm well I'm a young adult and love the books. My mom is in her mid 40's and she loves the books, my brother is two years younger than me and he hates them...there was this guy that lived across the cul-de-sac in his late 50's and was OBSESSED with Harry Potter. Its not escapism if you enjoy something that was created for a younger audience.

[grace86]

I personally believe we never really "grow up." It might be escapism, but who cares? Most people read all kinds of literature, classics or otherwise, to escape their world.

Kids have more creativity and imagination than probably just about every adult. The fact that an adult can return to something so fantastic and out of this world is normal, fun, and I guess a reach for remembering to feed your inner child once in a while.

I love the series. I don't personally understand them being overrated, since the demand is so high and the translations are so many. Fantasy, or children's fantasy, aren't genres that meet the tastes of everyone...I can understand that too.

Cliche ideas and a bit of a rerun on fairytale topics, well guys, remember it is a story for children! It isn't supposed to be hard.

[Mortis Anarchy]

I personally believe we never really "grow up." It might be escapism, but who cares? Most people read all kinds of literature, classics or otherwise, to escape their world.

Kids have more creativity and imagination than probably just about every adult. The fact that an adult can return to something so fantastic and out of this world is normal, fun, and I guess a reach for remembering to feed your inner child once in a while.

I love the series. I don't personally understand them being overrated, since the demand is so high and the translations are so many. Fantasy, or children's fantasy, aren't genres that meet the tastes of everyone...I can understand that too.

Cliche ideas and a bit of a rerun on fairytale topics, well guys, remember it is a story for children! It isn't supposed to be hard.


BINGO!!! Who cares what people choose to read...it doesn't make them immature or whatever. Every person is different.

[Xtian]

Some people have to go out of their way to hate something merely because it is popular. In most cases I would say most things that are popular are drivel, Britney Spears, Techno, Hip_Hop, Stephen King, Disney, etc. However not all popular forms of art are drivel. Harry Potter is one of them. The impact of these works has been tremendous, even the movies are well made and entertaining. I am so looking forward to the new film opening next week.

I think Rowiling will go down in history as one of our times greatest storytellers. After all look at her income she is now one of the richest women in the world. Richer than Oprah.

Like so many before her she created a world that is accessible to everyone no matter what the age. Today she is one of the most read authors in the world.

[Brigitte]

Uhm well I'm a young adult and love the books. My mom is in her mid 40's and she loves the books, my brother is two years younger than me and he hates them...there was this guy that lived across the cul-de-sac in his late 50's and was OBSESSED with Harry Potter. Its not escapism if you enjoy something that was created for a younger audience.

*hi-five* Who asked this question in the first place? *mumbles*

EDIT: Someone with 7 posts.... :flare:

[Mortis Anarchy]

Some people have to go out of their way to hate something merely because it is popular. In most cases I would say most things that are popular are drivel, Britney Spears, Techno, Hip_Hop, Stephen King, Disney, etc. However not all popular forms of art are drivel. Harry Potter is one of them. The impact of these works has been tremendous, even the movies are well made and entertaining. I am so looking forward to the new film opening next week.

I think Rowiling will go down in history as one of our times greatest storytellers. After all look at her income she is now one of the richest women in the world. Richer than Oprah.

Like so many before her she created a world that is accessible to everyone no matter what the age. Today she is one of the most read authors in the world.

Exactly. Especially since these books have inspired new decent authors and have inspired more kids to read and to branch out to their creative sides. Even adults!!! Grr...every book is liked/loved/cherished by someone out there.

[Xtian]

Its funny how most people who have red HP are for his being banned. It amazes me how those who believe themselves intellectually gifted could feeel themselves so superior that they can make is guided judgements on something they no nothing about. Throughout history there has been many people who just because they believe something to be less than or challenaging to their own beliiefs for example: Adolf Hitler, Tipper Gore, Joseph McCarthy and many more here is an article I found on the supject

(PR Newswire, September 25, 2000)

HARRY POTTER PUT ON BANNED BOOK LIST
Top 10 Includes 'Huck Finn,' 'Mice and Men' & 'Catcher in the Rye'
CHICAGO, Sept. 25 /PRNewswire/ -- Some of America's finest literary efforts lead the 100 most frequently challenged books for Banned Books Week. And the Harry Potter series wasn't far behind.
The list is published by the American Library Association's Office for Intellectual Freedom as part of Banned Books Week (September 23-30), which annually celebrates the freedom to read.
Topping the list is Scary Stories (Series) by Alvin Schwartz, accused of "being too scary" and "unsuited to age group," followed by "Daddy's Roommate" by Michael Willhoite, accused of "promoting homosexuality as a normal lifestyle." The rest of the 10 most frequently challenged books of the decade, in order, were: "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" by Maya Angelou (3), "The Chocolate War" by Robert Cormier, "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" by Mark Twain, "Of Mice and Men" by John Steinbeck, "Forever" by Judy Blume, "Bridge to Terabithia" by Katherine Paterson, "Heather Has Two Mommies" by Leslea Newman, and "The Catcher in the Rye" by J.D. Salinger (10).
Other well-known books on the list include: "The Giver" by Lois Lowry (11), "It's Perfectly Normal" by Robie Harris (13), Goosebumps (Series) by R.L. Stine (15), "The Color Purple" by Alice Walker (17), "Sex" by Madonna (18), "A Wrinkle in Time" by Madeleine L'Engle (23), "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee (40), Harry Potter (Series) by J.K. Rowling (48), "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley (54) and "Bless Me, Ultima" by Rudolfo A. Anaya (78).
The top 100 list was compiled from 5,718 challenges to library materials reported to or recorded by the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom from 1990-1999. A "challenge" is defined as a formal, written complaint filed with a library or school about a book's content or appropriateness. Seventy-one percent of the challenges in the '90s decade were to materials in schools or school libraries; another 26 percent were to materials in public libraries. Nearly 60 percent of challenges were brought by parents, 16 percent by library patrons and 10 percent by administrators.
In 1995, the number of reported challenges reached a high of 762 challenges, but by 1999 had declined to 472.
This decline is likely due to an increased focus away from books to the Internet -- the newest medium in the library -- according to Judith Krug, the office's director. Despite this decline, Krug says, "Nobody should be complacent in thinking that books are safe from censorship attempts. Research shows that reported challenges represent only 20 to 25 percent of all challenges made. The fact that every challenge is an attempt to make ideas inaccessible to their intended audience is of even greater concern than the numbers."
The most often cited reason for requesting that a book be removed from the library or curriculum is that the book is "sexually explicit" (1,446 challenges). Other reasons for challenges included "offensive language" (1,262 challenges), "unsuited to age group" (1,167 challenges), "occult theme or promoting the occult or Satanism" (773 challenges), "violent" (630 challenges), homosexual theme or "promoting homosexuality" (497 challenges), "promoting a religious viewpoint" (397 challenges), "nudity" (297 challenges), "racism" (245 challenges), "sex education" (217 challenges) and "anti-family" (193 challenges).
The entire list of the top 100 challenged books of the last decade can be found at www.ala.org/bbooks/top100bannedbooks.html . The most challenged books of 1999 can be found at www.ala.org/bbooks/1999bannedbooks.html .
Observed since 1981, Banned Books Week is sponsored by the ALA, American Booksellers Association, American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, Association of American Publishers, American Society of Journalists and Authors, and National Association of College Stores. It is also endorsed by the Library of Congress Center for the Book.
"Banned Books Week is about choice and respecting the rights of others to choose for themselves and their families what they wish to read," says Chris Finan, president of the American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression. "Book banning and challenging has a domino effect. If we stand by quietly and let the first book come off the shelf, we run the risk they all will come tumbling down."
Judy Platt, director of the Association of American Publishers' Freedom to Read program, concurs. "Banned Books Week reminds Americans not to take our freedom to read for granted. It's one of the most precious freedoms we have in a democratic society."
This year's Banned Books Weeks theme is "Fish in the River of Knowledge." Libraries and bookstores across the country will provide displays around this theme and readings of banned or challenged books as part of the week-long celebration. Contact your library or bookstore for more information.

[Ace]

Ok, so, I was just thinking of something. I don't remember what it was, but it lead to this:

Harry Potter's story is a COMEDY.

Yes, that is right, the story is to end well.

How do I know, you may ask? I'll tell you.

Comedies used to be defined by a simple characteristic: A WEDDING at the end of the story.

Well, what just HAPPENS to be HAPPENING in the seventh book? Anyone? Please, just say it, anyone?

BILL AND FLEUR'S WEDDING!


This makes the Harry Potter series a comedy. That does not necessarily mean Harry will survive in any way (Look as Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, for instance: ends with a wedding, a comedy, Romeo and Juliet die) but it does mean that the story will end "well".

Honestly, THIS is Rowling's style. A subtle little clue as to how the story will wrap up without the details. She obviously loves literature, and what better way than to allude to how previous works were written?

I think that this idea could be big, but more importantly, I think it's right!

[tudwell]

Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy. I don't think ending with a wedding automatically qualifies something as a comedy.

[kandaurov]

I don't follow the series anymore for some time now, but I do know this: she will opt neither for a tragedy nor for a comedy. The book must appeal to very different tastes, to greeks and trojans, so I'd bet that the ending won't have a clear-cut one. Some will die, and some will be happy, leaving you with a bitter-sweet aftertaste and a colossal 'after-read void' :)

[Niamh]

I don't follow the series anymore for some time now, but I do know this: she will opt neither for a tragedy nor for a comedy. The book must appeal to very different tastes, to greeks and trojans, so I'd bet that the ending won't have a clear-cut one. Some will die, and some will be happy, leaving you with a bitter-sweet aftertaste and a colossal 'after-read void' :)

I agree!

[Turk]

I don't understand what kind of elders can read Harry Potter. It's simply children book, a fairy story.

[Charles Darnay]

I don't understand what kind of elders can read Harry Potter. It's simply children book, a fairy story.


Fantasy may be geered towards children but I believe it can still be enjoyable to adults too. Maybe not Harry Potter, but not becasue it's fantasy, but it's become "teen soap opera" dressed in fantasy.

As for the original point: there is more to "a wedding" to clasify a comedy in the traditional sense. Speaking in the purly Greco-Roman sense: "A tragedy is when things start of well and then descend" whereas a comedy is reveresed. "things tstart off muddled, then ascend." Shakespeare took that concept and broadened it to create new definitions of comedy/tragedy, but nowadays, though theoretically everything can be either a comedy or tragedy (or tragicomedy: such as Waiting for Godot), the lines are very blurred.

I don't know if Harry Potter will end well or not, but it will end cliche. There are a few different cliches she could choose from: Harry and Voldermort both die - possible. Voldermort becomes good and they all live happily ever after - highly unlikely. Harry kills Voldermort and Ron marries Hermione - possible. And so forth.....

[Whifflingpin]

"I don't understand what kind of elders can read Harry Potter. It's simply children book, a fairy story."

My kind of elder can read Harry Potter, that's for sure.
Open minded, intelligent, with a sense of humour and a liking for a good tale well told.

A good children's book is a good book.

[Mortis Anarchy]

I don't understand what kind of elders can read Harry Potter. It's simply children book, a fairy story.

There is nothing wrong with adults/older people reading fairy tales/kids books...My taste in books ranges from kids books (Harry Potter, Narnia, Tithe, etc.) to the greatest classics!! I read the Iliad in the sixth grade, but what lead up to me getting into the classics were books by Brain Jacques and J.K. Rowling and C.S. Lewis!

And yeah, I'm pretty sure I didn't laugh in Romeo and Juliet.

But she has already stated that two people are going to die...that doesn't mean only two people but still. I think its going to be an overall mix so as not to spoil it for everyone...even though I think Lupin dies...:(

[Mortis Anarchy]

"I don't understand what kind of elders can read Harry Potter. It's simply children book, a fairy story."

My kind of elder can read Harry Potter, that's for sure.
Open minded, intelligent, with a sense of humour and a liking for a good tale well told.

A good children's book is a good book.

Bravo.;) :thumbs_up

[Turk]

Fantasy may be geered towards children but I believe it can still be enjoyable to adults too. Maybe not Harry Potter, but not becasue it's fantasy, but it's become "teen soap opera" dressed in fantasy.


I didn't talk for LOTR, i was talking for Harry Potter.


My kind of elder can read Harry Potter, that's for sure.
Open minded, intelligent, with a sense of humour and a liking for a good tale well told.

A good children's book is a good book.

So reading Harry Potter at the age of 40 makes you intelligent, open minded and have sense of humor ha? :) Ok.

I can't understand why this much old people reads Harry Potter? I mean this is ridicilous.

[Annamariah]

I can't understand why this much old people reads Harry Potter? I mean this is ridicilous.
I don't think it's ridiculous at all. Harry Potter books ARE good books, so why wouldn't people read them? Even my grandparents, whose house contains more books (mostly classics and other books that are considered "good literature") than a small public library, have read Harry Potter books and liked them very much.

[manolia]

I don't believe it is a comedy series..for me the Harry Potter books are a cocktail of stolen ideas from other much better and accomplished fantasy writers..but that's just me :D

[Pensive]

I can't understand why this much old people reads Harry Potter? I mean this is ridicilous.

Because they enjoy it. :D

[Turk]

I mean it's even clear what will happen at the end. Just like an American B series movie. Good guys will win, America will save the world and everything will be so good. If i want fun i prefer to read King. At least he's surely better than Rowling and stories he told are really capturing.

[Charles Darnay]

I didn't talk for LOTR, i was talking for Harry Potter.



I never mentioned LOTR, I was speaking about fantasy in general.

[applepie]

So reading Harry Potter at the age of 40 makes you intelligent, open minded and have sense of humor ha? :) Ok.

I can't understand why this much old people reads Harry Potter? I mean this is ridicilous.

The point isn't that reading Harry Potter makes you intelligent, it merely doesn't detract from your intelligence. Just because I've read all of the books and an eagerly awaiting the final book to see if the story ends the way I think it will doesn't take away from the fact that I'm about to graduate college with a 3.65 GPA, it also doesn't take away from the fact that I also enjoy many classics and watching movies with a deep meaning. It does mean that I am open to reading a variety of books and that I don't always take life too seriously. It is possible to find a book enjoyable and think that it is good because of the entertainment it offers.

[Pensive]

I mean it's even clear what will happen at the end. Just like an American B series movie. Good guys will win, America will save the world and everything will be so good. If i want fun i prefer to read King. At least he's surely better than Rowling and stories he told are really capturing.

I don't see why adults can't be optimistic. :) And by the way, American policies haven't got much to do with Harry Potter series and it's not only in American movies/books: good prevailing the evil. Many countries' literature has it even more.

[Niamh]

Turk have you even read one of the Harry Potter Books?

[Turk]

No. I watched movie. And that was really enough. In every single second something happens. Harry loses his magical stick, a second later Harry finds it, a second later evil witch appears and attack Harry, Harry find a magical door, Harry goes to magical door and escape from witch, Harry realizes magical escape was a trick of superstrong evil witch, Harry finds himself in a magical dungeon, a second later Harry meets two prisoners a forest fairy and a talking chair, Harry becomes friend with them and starts to try to find a way out... Blabla... Of course i made that story to give an example of Harry Potter style. If you fill some sentences between these incidents you can write a Harry Potter story too. Anyway you don't need any philosophy, cultural level or a message to give.

[Mortis Anarchy]

I mean it's even clear what will happen at the end. Just like an American B series movie. Good guys will win, America will save the world and everything will be so good. If i want fun i prefer to read King. At least he's surely better than Rowling and stories he told are really capturing.

They aren't even American...

Some books may not seem entertaining to others, but to plenty of generations, J.K. Rowling has instilled a love of books and reading in thousands of kids...even adults. Her books do not make anyone any less intelligent or even more. But I think reading in general is a very good thing. Why would anyone slam a book that has encouraged thousands of people that reading is good! Who cares what people read as long as they DO read.

[Mortis Anarchy]

No. I watched movie. And that was really enough. In every single second something happens. Harry loses his magical stick, a second later Harry finds it, a second later evil witch appears and attack Harry, Harry find a magical door, Harry goes to magical door and escape from witch, Harry realizes magical escape was a trick of superstrong evil witch, Harry finds himself in a magical dungeon, a second later Harry meets two prisoners a forest fairy and a talking chair, Harry becomes friend with them and starts to try to find a way out... Blabla... Of course i made that story to give an example of Harry Potter style. If you fill some sentences between these incidents you can write a Harry Potter story too. Anyway you don't need any philosophy, cultural level or a message to give.

The movies were ridiculous. Most of the time I find that the books are so much better than any movie. You have to try it before you dis it...thats what I always say.

[smartgirl]

i agree with u Mortis Anarchy I think that the movies were worse than the books. At first I dissed the harry potter books, but that's because i hadn't read them yet. I now have read all of the books (waiting for the last one), and i believe that Rowling is the best thing i've read.

[Turk]

They aren't even American...

Some books may not seem entertaining to others, but to plenty of generations, J.K. Rowling has instilled a love of books and reading in thousands of kids...even adults. Her books do not make anyone any less intelligent or even more. But I think reading in general is a very good thing. Why would anyone slam a book that has encouraged thousands of people that reading is good! Who cares what people read as long as they DO read.

What aren't american?

Ok stop there, i didn't say reading is bad, or it is bad to read Harry Potter. It's good for kids whatever they read (except pornography:D) but my question was basically "why adults reads it?". And don't forget this is supposed to be a forum which members are interested in literature, and must have a better taste of literature more than people who just read pulp fiction.

[Mortis Anarchy]

What aren't american?

Ok stop there, i didn't say reading is bad, or it is bad to read Harry Potter. It's good for kids whatever they read (except pornography:D) but my question was basically "why adults reads it?". And don't forget this is supposed to be a forum which members are interested in literature, and must have a better taste of literature more than people who just read pulp fiction.

Harry Potter...no one is American in the movie/book etc.

Why does age have to matter when reading a book that makes people happy!? Maybe its just a good way to relax just by reading a book that is a bit of an easy read! I wasn't implying that you said reading was bad, all I mean't was that these stories have increased reading in young adults, kids and adults. And everyone's taste in books differs...I respect the fact that you don't like the books...and I'll ignore the fact that you haven't read them and yet still dis them.

[smartgirl]

"I mean it's even clear what will happen at the end. Just like an American B series movie. Good guys will win, America will save the world and everything will be so good. If i want fun i prefer to read King. At least he's surely better than Rowling and stories he told are really capturing."

u said that Rowlings series was american. He says that the aren't. they're british.

And I believe that adults read it, because it's refreshing. It brings fantasy to a whole new level.

[Turk]

Harry Potter...no one is American in the movie/book etc.

I didn't say series are American, i know it's British. I said series are like American B serie movies.

[Mortis Anarchy]

I'm done arguing...too tired for that.:yawnb:

But my mind is set that Lupin dies...just thought I'd through that out there.;)

[smartgirl]

Lupin dies, but then that means...............uh oh

[Scheherazade]

Turk hasn't read One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest but knows all about it because he has watched the movie!

Turk hasn't read any Harry Potter books but knows all about it because he has watched the movie(s)!

I think someone needs to spend more time reading and less time watching movies! :p :D


I still read Dr Seuss books with pleasure... And only last week read Dahl's Fantastic Mr Fox and do not think that it is a waste of time to read children's books. On the contrary, I feel better for it (at least I can express a justifiable opinion).

[Turk]

Oh an overaged child making comments based on changing someone's comments. I said as summar on Cuckoo's thread "i haven't read the book yet but will read soon, but in movie it was looking different than (Kilted's) opinion". And here, there's no reason for me to read Harry Potter, i passed my childhood long ago, prefer to read books for adults and i told what do i told some opinions above, if you have counter-arguments then bring it, otherwise don't change meanings of my posts.

[kilted exile]

Bah, people complain too much and there is far too much intellectual snobbery regarding books in general. People complain if people dont read, then if they do read complain about what they are reading. The vast majority of the worlds population do not read for intellectual stimulation. We read for enjoyment, it is a personal activity and other people's opinions regarding the merit of what we read is completely unimportant.

**dont worry I have not joined Tal is using "we" for myself, this is of course in the global sense**

[Mortis Anarchy]

Bah, people complain too much and there is far too much intellectual snobbery regarding books in general. People complain if people dont read, then if they do read complain about what they are reading. The vast majority of the worlds population do not read for intellectual stimulation. We read for enjoyment, it is a personal activity and other people's opinions regarding the merit of what we read is completely unimportant.

**dont worry I have not joined Tal is using "we" for myself, this is of course in the global sense**

Here here.

[Turk]

Bah, people complain too much and there is far too much intellectual snobbery regarding books in general. People complain if people dont read, then if they do read complain about what they are reading. The vast majority of the worlds population do not read for intellectual stimulation. We read for enjoyment, it is a personal activity and other people's opinions regarding the merit of what we read is completely unimportant.

**dont worry I have not joined Tal is using "we" for myself, this is of course in the global sense**

:thumbs_up I respect people who honestly say why he reads a book. If just enjoy, it's ok, but thing i don't like is just because you read and like something that doesn't mean it's literature. I respect author too, cuz i know she struggled a lot; but again, that doesn't mean she produces art.

About intellectual snobbery, yeah i expected someone to say this; but mine is not about snobbery and again i am telling Harry Potter may be a good book for children and make em like reading, i said i don't understand why adult people reads it like fanatics for me it's a children book at all, also i clearly say some of intellectual cult books (such as Ulysses) are not as good as some intellectual snobs exaggeration too.

And last thing; i always say it's better to read nothing than reading a silly book. There was very good quote by Mark Twain but first i should find Stlukesguild's profile to see his sign.:D:lol:

[Whifflingpin]

Originally Posted by Turk
"So reading Harry Potter at the age of 40 makes you intelligent, open minded and have sense of humor ha? Ok. "

Dear child, I was way past 40 when Harry Potter burst into the world, and I was already intelligent etc etc.
An open minded person does not reject books just because they may be aimed primarily at children.
An intelligent person recognizes that an author writing for children may have the freedom to develop themes and ideas in ways different from, but no less valid than, the ways used by authors writing for adults.
An older person may read those books enjoyed by young people in order to come to a better understanding of young people.
An adult with a sense of humour might enjoy aspects of a book for children that would pass over the heads of those children.

You say you passed your childhood long ago - I pity you for that and I am glad that I still enjoy an element of childishness that, perhaps, stops me from taking my adult experience too seriously.

[Ace]

Okay, ummm.... Turk, you haven't read the books.

Do you just happen to KNOW how many literary/philosophical/mythological references can be found in this book? Do you know how much in this book a child/young teen WOULDN'T understand?

Have you read Alice's Adventures in Wonderland? That is a child's book, and now it can be considered political satire.

As for the word comedy: I saw someone write that they didn't laugh during Romeo and Juliet. Not that type of comedy, comedy in the classical sense. You know, the good thought overcomes the evil regardless of the main characters survival.

[Pensive]

No. I watched movie. And that was really enough. In every single second something happens. Harry loses his magical stick, a second later Harry finds it, a second later evil witch appears and attack Harry, Harry find a magical door, Harry goes to magical door and escape from witch, Harry realizes magical escape was a trick of superstrong evil witch, Harry finds himself in a magical dungeon, a second later Harry meets two prisoners a forest fairy and a talking chair, Harry becomes friend with them and starts to try to find a way out... Blabla... Of course i made that story to give an example of Harry Potter style. If you fill some sentences between these incidents you can write a Harry Potter story too. Anyway you don't need any philosophy, cultural level or a message to give.

Personally, my opinion about Harry Potter movies is that they are ten times worse than the series which is really really good. And anyway, one doesn't have to form his opinion about a book on on having watched its movie so firmly. You know there are even scenes which are cut from the movie.


And last thing; i always say it's better to read nothing than reading a silly book. There was very good quote by Mark Twain but first i should find Stlukesguild's profile to see his sign.

Really, I would be okay for me if adults are there reading Enid Blyton's works. If they are reading the story-books which are not oh-so-philosophical. Wouldn't even say Harry Potter is oh-so-philosophical but it surely deals with many of the themes which I think are very important. The emotions shown in it are quite different from those in most of the fairy tales I have read.

It deals with death, how to cope with it. Friendship. And many other things, in a really good way. I would quote something from it, it's one of the best I have ever read. (And I read what they call adult books more than children books)


It's our choices that show what we truly are rather than our abilities, Harry.

The humour in Harry Potter series is also light, and good. I don't think calling it silly based on the opinion of its movie is wise...


__________________

[Niamh]

There is a lot in the books that arent in the movies. A LOT! the books are much better, but i dont think one should judge a book when one has not read it. Hardly any book made into a movie is true to the actual material it is adapted from.

[Aiculík]

I don't understand what kind of elders can read Harry Potter. It's simply children book, a fairy story.


I can't understand why this much old people reads Harry Potter? I mean this is ridicilous.


:thumbs_up I respect people who honestly say why he reads a book. If just enjoy, it's ok, but thing i don't like is just because you read and like something that doesn't mean it's literature. I respect author too, cuz i know she struggled a lot; but again, that doesn't mean she produces art.

About intellectual snobbery, yeah i expected someone to say this; but mine is not about snobbery and again i am telling Harry Potter may be a good book for children and make em like reading, i said i don't understand why adult people reads it like fanatics for me it's a children book at all, also i clearly say some of intellectual cult books (such as Ulysses) are not as good as some intellectual snobs exaggeration too.

(bold added by me)


Ok stop there, i didn't say reading is bad, or it is bad to read Harry Potter. It's good for kids whatever they read (except pornography:D) but my question was basically "why adults reads it?". And don't forget this is supposed to be a forum which members are interested in literature, and must have a better taste of literature more than people who just read pulp fiction.

So, let’s make this clear. Are you saying that:


books for children are on the same level as pulp fiction, meaning they’re not literature at all,
it does not matter what children read (except porno) because all books for children are low quality anyway, not at all art or literature
adult people should therefore read only books, where there is philosophy and message, because only such books are literature.

Did I get it right?

Problem is, that:

both books for children and pulp literature are literature, they’re just types of literature – different type as e.g. Ulysses, but still literature.


it does matter very much what children read (do you have children? Because I can’t imagine any parent saying it’s good for kids to read anything except porno). Books for children may be, and are, of very different quality. Even fairy tale can be art.

Just look at your example of what happens in Harry Potter – you were unable to put together few sentences that would be meaningful, interesting and funny. If you think anyone can writhe Harry Potter, OK, why don’t you try it – why don’t you post to the writing section at least a short story which would be on HP motives, equally funny as original, but of course, much more artistic – for someone so great in literature it should be a piece of cake, right? ;)


how do you know, when you start to read the book, if it has philosophy and message? You can only find out philosophy and message after you read the book, not before. How can you be sure there’s no “philosophy” or “message” in Harry Potter if you've never read it? True, it may be in a form appropriate for younger readers, but that does not mean there’s not any at all.

I often read children literature and even pulp fiction and comics, and I’m not ashamed for it. And I can't see why I should be. Just because someone else does not consider them appropriate for people “interested in literature”, or with “good taste of literature”? Sorry, but I simply don’t care one bit about what other people think about my “taste of literature”. I have my own criteria for beauty and art and I’m not obliged to apologize for it. I’m not going to change my taste of literature just because some people have silly prejudice of what is literature and what is not. All I can do is feeling sorry for them. Harry Potter isn’t in my Top 10, but I still think it's worth reading. Of course, it’s not as intellectual as e.g. Eco’s novels, but that was never Rowling’s goal anyway and I don't expect it to be.

Maybe for you it’s enough to read only intellectual, highly artistic books with serious philosophy. But I am complex and complicated person, you know. I have many different needs – and Harry Potter covers different needs as “serious” books, as The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana, Of Love and Other Demons, or The Scaffold... and somehow, I can’t see what ridiculous with that.

Oh, and one more thing... I like Harry Potter, I’ve read all six books, but I don’t think I’m a fanatic. Quite contrary, I’m free – free to read whatever I choose, to like it or to despise it. It may even happen that I won’t like the seventh book. But I’ll only know that after I’ve read it.

[Turk]

(bold added by me)
So, let’s make this clear. Are you saying that:


books for children are on the same level as pulp fiction, meaning they’re not literature at all,
it does not matter what children read (except porno) because all books for children are low quality anyway, not at all art or literature
adult people should therefore read only books, where there is philosophy and message, because only such books are literature.



1. I never said first one.
2. I never said that one too because there's very good children books which are far better for developing child's character.
3. I didn't say that one too, just few months ago i was reading some children's literature and especially Rene Guillot books were really good, showing an aspect of man in a dramaticaly well structured book. Not a story which is full of ridiculous events in every page of book, just written for sake of action. One thing i am saying is; you may read Harry Potter books too, but except Kilted none of you honestly said i'm reading it for fun; even some of them related Harry Potter with being intelligent and open minded. I've read pulp fiction books but i've never claimed them to be good just because i read.


# both books for children and pulp literature are literature, they’re just types of literature – different type as e.g. Ulysses, but still literature.

From this point of view every written stuff should be considered literature. I had same problem about when i questioned "why Churchill got Nobel Prize?" too. Unfortunately Oxford University is proud of telling English is the richest language of the world (which is lie btw) but it doesn't have a word to signify "artistic literature", because of this you have to classify every written thing in same class. It's out of subject but really stupid; because of this sometimes i have to use words like "real literature" to tell something about Dostoevsky's works, because otherwise i would have to classify Dostoevsky and Rowling with same word. Which is unfair.


Just look at your example of what happens in Harry Potter – you were unable to put together few sentences that would be meaningful, interesting and funny.

Of course it has to be fun and incidents in novel should be interesting and meaningful (well, in this point i should say can you tell me one single thing that couldn't be meaningful in a Harry Potter book? If a chair starts to talk and say "i am Frank Sinatra's reincarnation" you have to say it's meangful too, and sure a dancing and talking chair would be interesting, if everything is possible in that book how can one single thing might be ordinary and meaningles?), everything have to be meaningful and interestingin a way, in fact %99 of every written book have these specialities, but that doesn't make them equally good.


If you think anyone can writhe Harry Potter, OK, why don’t you try it – why don’t you post to the writing section at least a short story which would be on HP motives, equally funny as original, but of course, much more artistic – for someone so great in literature it should be a piece of cake, right?

I write short stories, but my English is not good enough to translate them. Though they don't have HP motives, they can't be equally fun when they are different (a horror movie is fun a comedy movie is fun too, but they can't be equal), but surely more artistic. Though i would like to point, if i'd write a short story in English right now, after this discuss, you wouldn't like it just because i wrote no matter how good it is.


how do you know, when you start to read the book, if it has philosophy and message? You can only find out philosophy and message after you read the book, not before. How can you be sure there’s no “philosophy” or “message” in Harry Potter if you've never read it?

Do i have to read every single book in the world to know if they have a philosophy and message? When you read the snapshot of a book it's simply telling plot of book, and it's very easy for a good reader to find out if it worths reading. Though, i will let you informate me what was Harry Potter's message? Can you tell me deep philosophy behind HP, for example starting of series, first book. What was that about? What was it's message and philosophy?


I often read children literature and even pulp fiction and comics, and I’m not ashamed for it. And I can't see why I should be.

I sometimes read them too, nobody telling you to be ashamed too, but i am not exaggerating a book just because i read (btw many comics i've read were much better and interesting than HP such as Martin Mystere and other Italian comics).


Just because someone else does not consider them appropriate for people “interested in literature”, or with “good taste of literature”? Sorry, but I simply don’t care one bit about what other people think about my “taste of literature”.

Nobody said it's inappropriate for people, in fact i think it's really appropraite for you. Also no need to be sorry; but there's conflict in your argument; if you don't care about my thoughts then you shouldn't respond too. No offence, just to show it to you.


Maybe for you it’s enough to read only intellectual, highly artistic books with serious philosophy. But I am complex and complicated person, you know. I have many different needs – and Harry Potter covers different needs as “serious” books, as The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana, Of Love and Other Demons, or The Scaffold... and somehow, I can’t see what ridiculous with that.

Complex and complicated people needs much simple things than normal people. In fact people with many different needs are just shallow people in my opinion. Hz.Jesus didn't need anything but food and clothes, Hz.Muhammed is same too, same for Buddha too. My humble advice for you to watch TV's and magazines less, and protect your brain. Consuming more doesn't makes you better.


Personally, my opinion about Harry Potter movies is that they are ten times worse than the series which is really really good. And anyway, one doesn't have to form his opinion about a book on on having watched its movie so firmly. You know there are even scenes which are cut from the movie.


There is a lot in the books that arent in the movies. A LOT! the books are much better, but i dont think one should judge a book when one has not read it. Hardly any book made into a movie is true to the actual material it is adapted from.

When making movies, director cuts most unnecessary parts of books, for example in LOTR movie there wasn't Tom Bombadil because it was really unrelated to main flow of story, and the movie was as good as novel's itself and even probably better than novel, but it's because LOTR was a good novel. Movie adaptations are generally as good as novel's itself. Sometimes even better than novel. Even though HP movies was full of unnecessary scenes, if director would be a little harsh like me the movie would long around 10 mins. :lol: But then it wouldn't make money and commercial success too, of course.;)

[Aiculík]

1. I never said first one.
2. I never said that one too because there's very good children books which are far better for developing child's character.
But that was almost exact quotation of what you said, with exact quotations right on the top of my message. That’s why I put those quotes there. :) But OK, I misunderstood (guess I'm too simple - what can you expect from Harry Potter fan :) )– that’s why I asked. So could you explain what you did mean? I mean, could you explain those qoutes I put in my first post?


3. I didn't say that one too, just few months ago i was reading some children's literature and especially Rene Guillot books were really good, showing an aspect of man in a dramaticaly well structured book. Not a story which is full of ridiculous events in every page of book, just written for sake of action. One thing i am saying is; you may read Harry Potter books too, but except Kilted none of you honestly said i'm reading it for fun; even some of them related Harry Potter with being intelligent and open minded. I've read pulp fiction books but i've never claimed them to be good just because i read.

But I sounded so. And anyway, I, for example, don't read Harry Potter just for fun. I read it, because I really like it: I like how the story is told, I like the language, humour...
The reason why people related Harry Potter with being intellignent and open-minded was that the way you put it it sounded like only unitellinent, uneducated adult people with very bad taste for literature read Harry Potter. Maybe that's not what you meant, but that's what it sounded to me.
And anyway, I relate Harry Potter with intelligence and open mind as well - both are needed to overcome prejudices and pride of one's "great taste". There are many people who say Harry Potter is rubbish without ever reading a page - because it's below them to read rubbish...
Why do you read books that you think aren’t good?
Shallow as I am, at least I’m no hypocrite. If, for some reason, I come to conclusion that certain book is not good, I don’t read it.


From this point of view every written stuff should be considered literature. I had same problem about when i questioned "why Churchill got Nobel Prize?" too. Unfortunately Oxford University is proud of telling English is the richest language of the world (which is lie btw) but it doesn't have a word to signify "artistic literature", because of this you have to classify every written thing in same class. It's out of subject but really stupid; because of this sometimes i have to use words like "real literature" to tell something about Dostoevsky's works, because otherwise i would have to classify Dostoevsky and Rowling with same word. Which is unfair.
Yes, in broad meaning, every written stuff is literature... in past, even scientific works were considered literature, written in verse... So to say "artistic literature" is not enough, that is just narrower sense of literature - belles-lettres (literature regarded for its aesthetic value rather than its didactic or informative content). Which means Harry Potter is "artistic literature" as well.

But what is "real literature"? Please, tell me, is there some literary court that decided that Dostoevsky is real literature and Rowling is not? Or are there some objective criteria that could be used for every book in the world, and on which all people who are considered to be experts, to have good literary taste would agree? I don't think so.
No offence, but I really can't stand this snobbish nonsense about "real literature". We can say, that some books have higher quality than other books, but even those bad books are literature. And even those bad books can be admired by someone. I, for example, can't stand romantic stories for women - I read few and found out they are all the same, that they're not original, realistic, funny... in my opinion, they have very low quality. But that doesn't give me right to start telling my friends who love them that they should not read it because it's not literature. I can say, if they ask, that I think other books are much better, but I don't have right to bellitle them, to say they're fanatics, or that anyone above 10 shouldn't read it.


Of course it has to be fun and incidents in novel should be interesting and meaningful (well, in this point i should say can you tell me one single thing that couldn't be meaningful in a Harry Potter book? If a chair starts to talk and say "i am Frank Sinatra's reincarnation" you have to say it's meangful too, and sure a dancing and talking chair would be interesting, if everything is possible in that book how can one single thing might be ordinary and meaningles?), everything have to be meaningful and interestingin a way, in fact %99 of every written book have these specialities, but that doesn't make them equally good.
Meaningful means it adds something to the story. Which, of course, you know as you write short stories yourself.


I write short stories, but my English is not good enough to translate them. Though they don't have HP motives, they can't be equally fun when they are different (a horror movie is fun a comedy movie is fun too, but they can't be equal), but surely more artistic. Though i would like to point, if i'd write a short story in English right now, after this discuss, you wouldn't like it just because i wrote no matter how good it is.
I dare say I’m mature enough not to behave like that. As I said, I like to decide whether I like book by myself, after I read it. I don’t care who’s the author, or what critics say. (BTW I don’t think your English is that bad...)


Do i have to read every single book in the world to know if they have a philosophy and message? When you read the snapshot of a book it's simply telling plot of book, and it's very easy for a good reader to find out if it worths reading. Though, i will let you informate me what was Harry Potter's message? Can you tell me deep philosophy behind HP, for example starting of series, first book. What was that about? What was it's message and philosophy?
No, you don’t have to read every single book. I also won’t read any other romantic story... well, not in the nearest future. But then, I’ll never forget how I didn’t want to read Lady Chaterley’s Lover, because I was told by someone who was regarded “specialist with good taste” that its just another romantic story, boring and shallow. Until once I decided to give it a chance. And now it’s one of my favourite.
Book one was about how real love is more powerful than even the strongest evil, that people who really love you are with you even after their death... maybe it’s nothing new for you, but remember this is book for children. Philosophy and message must be on their level.


I sometimes read them too, nobody telling you to be ashamed too, but i am not exaggerating a book just because i read (btw many comics i've read were much better and interesting than HP such as Martin Mystere and other Italian comics).
Well, at least something we can agree on. I love Italian comics, too. :)
But tell me – why do you read Martin Mystere? It’s not meant for adults, either. Do you know if you said loudly in Slovakia that you are adult and love comics, most people would think you’re infantile freak? Normal adults read serious literature (where even romantic stories are considered “serious” literature, compared to the comics). See what I mean?


Nobody said it's inappropriate for people, in fact i think it's really appropraite for you.
What, do you mean it’s appropriate for me because I’m shallow? ;)
Well then why do you insist that adults shouldn’t read Harry Potter? Reading Martin Mystere is appropriate for adults and Harry Potter is not? Why? Because you think Martin Mystere is good and Harry Potter is not?


Complex and complicated people needs much simple things than normal people. In fact people with many different needs are just shallow people in my opinion. Hz.Jesus didn't need anything but food and clothes, Hz.Muhammed is same too, same for Buddha too. My humble advice for you to watch TV's and magazines less, and protect your brain. Consuming more doesn't makes you better.
Well thank you very much for such nice compliments. :) I can assure you that my brain is OK, thank you – well protected, as I almost never watch TV. :) And by the way, I did not talk about material needs... (and unfortunatelly, I'm just on my way to holiness, not quite as far as Lord Jesus is yet...)
So what makes me shallow? That I like Harry Potter? That I don’t have prejudices? That I always try to make my own opinion on book – or anything else, as it goes – not caring what snobs have to say about it? Please enlighen me, O deep one. :)
'Cause otherwise I might begin feel proud for being shallow, you know.

Phew... I think I've never written post this long...

[Pensive]

No offence, but I really can't stand this snobbish nonsense about "real literature".
I second you. It's really annoying when you get to hear Harry Potter series does not come in literature. I can't see why!


]When making movies, director cuts most unnecessary parts of books, for example in LOTR movie there wasn't Tom Bombadil because it was really unrelated to main flow of story, and the movie was as good as novel's itself and even probably better than novel, but it's because LOTR was a good novel. Movie adaptations are generally as good as novel's itself. Sometimes even better than novel. Even though HP movies was full of unnecessary scenes, if director would be a little harsh like me the movie would long around 10 mins. But then it wouldn't make money and commercial success too, of course

If movies can be sometimes better than the novel, then why can't they be worse? :p

Sorry for being a little bit off-topic, but couldn't resist quoting this:


Hz.Jesus didn't need anything but food and clothes, Hz.Muhammed is same too,
They did! According to the majority of the Muslims, Hazrat Muhammad needed to complete his religion! :D

[NickAdams]

Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy. I don't think ending with a wedding automatically qualifies something as a comedy.

Romeo and Juliet doesn't end with a wedding.

[JuLe]

Even my English teacher reads Harry Potter!

[NickAdams]

Even my English teacher reads Harry Potter!

There's no accounting for taste.:yawnb: Cheap shot. Sorry.

I liked Harry Potter better when it was called Star Wars.

[grace86]

A book and author that has this much influence and that makes today's children so happy and excited to read cannot possibly be that overrated. Enlarge the pictures on the right and tell me that what Rowling is doing isn't a good thing!

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/midnightmagic/mmv1.asp?kids=y&r=1&ATL_lid=rJ6LddpEUX&ATL_userid=rJ6LddpEUX&ATL_sid=Yv4vKa1GYl&ATL_membershipid=5110083401&ATL_sourceid=E000000496

Those kids are so darling! I really commend her for creating such a wonderful experience in reading for them.

[kilted exile]

Just clarifying a couple of things: I do not read Harry Potter, personally I dont enjoy them. I was referring in general to reading practices. People focus too much on lofty ideals of meaning and philosophical enjoyment and lose sight of enjoyment and letting people spend their leisure time doing what they like. People reading Harry Potter is not going to bring about the downfall of the world, there are more important subjects to get worked up about.

[barbara0207]

Cute! :D
I think it's a true miracle how she got a whole generation interested in books again.

[Xtian]

It is not our business to invent stories ourselves but only to be clear as to the main outlines to be followed by the poets in making their stories and the limits beyond which they must not be allowed to go.
-Plato, The Republic, ca. 385 B.C.

I totally agree, it is a miracle what JK Rowling was able to accomplish in such a few short years. Only ignorant fools whould critize the books that would would so much good. Even the Christian Right ( I am sorry to readers who might fall into that category) want to ban the books. My mom teaches school at a Catholic school and one of the student's nanny wrote a letter to the school accusing my mom of promoting witchcraft and magick. The school told my mom that Harry Potter could not be taught or read by any class in the school. NOw, how stupid was that?

The complaintant wasn't even a parent, she is a Jehova's Witness and was appalled that my mom would dare to read such an evil book. I was outraged.

Most of my adult life has been spent fighting for social justice around the country and world, my favorite cause is the freedom of speech for all. By banning this book the school promoted students to buy the book in droves, The lesson being if you ban something it will be more popular:
Examples:

Angelou, Maya. I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings

Auel, Jean. The Valley of Horses

Baldwin, James. Another Country

______. Tell Me How Long the Train's Been Gone

Bradbury, Ray. The Martian Chronicles

Brown, Dee. Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee

Clark, Walter Van Tilburg. Ox-Bow Incident

Conrad, Joseph. The Nigger of the Narcissus

Fast, Howard. Citizen Tom Paine

Faulkner, William. As I Lay Dying

Frank, Anne. The Diary of a Young Girl

Garcia-Marquez, Gabriel. One Hundred Years of Solitude

Gardner, John. Grendel

Golding, William. Lord of the Flies

Hansberry, Lorraine. Raisin in the Sun

Hughes, Langston. The Best Short Stories by Negro Writers

Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World

Ibsen, Henrik. A Doll's House

Kesey, Ken. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

Knowles, John. A Separate Peace

Lee, Harper. To Kill a Mockingbird

Loewen, James W., and Charles Sallis, eds.Mississippi: Conflict and Change

Malamud, Bernard. The Fixer

Malory, Sir Thomas. Le Morte D'Arthur

Manchester, William. Death of a President

Miller, Arthur. The Crucible. Death of a Salesman

Mitchell, Margaret. Gone with the Wind

Orwell, George. 1984

Rowling JK, Harry Potter series

Rushdie, Salman. The Satanic Verses

Sartre, Jean-Paul. Existentialism and Human Emotions

Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath

Suzuki, D. T. Zen Buddhism: Selected Writings

Terkel, Studs. Working

Walker, Alice. The Color Purple

Wallace, Terry. Bloods: An Oral History of the Vietnam War by Black Veterans

Williams, Tennessee. The Glass Menagerie

Wright, Richard. Black Boy. Native Son

CLASSIC targets

Aristophanes. Lysistrata

Bacon, Sir Francis. The Advancement of Learning

The Bible: Martin Luther's Translation; Revised Standard Version; The Living Bible

Chaucer, Geoffrey. Canterbury Tales

Eliot, George. Adam Bede

Franklin, Benjamin. The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin

Hawthorne, Nathaniel. The Scarlet Letter

Homer. The Odyssey

Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince

Moli&#232;re. Tartuffe

Shakespeare, William. Macbeth. The Merchant of Venice. Richard II. Romeo and Juliet

Swift, Jonathan. Gulliver's Travels

Voltaire, Fran&#231;ois M. Candide


FAVORITE TARGETS

Salinger, J. D. The Catcher in the Rye

Steinbeck, John. Of Mice and Men

Twain, Mark [Samuel Clemens]. The Advenures of Huckleberry Finn

Vonnegut, Kurt. Slaughterhouse Five



YOUNG READERS' TARGETS

Baum, L. Frank. The Wizard of Oz

Blume, Judy. Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret

Carroll, Lewis. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland

Cinderella

Dramer, Dan. Monsters

L'Engle, Madeleine. A Wrinkle in Time

Little Red Riding Hood

Rowling JK, Harry Potter

Rumpelstiltskin

Sendak, Maurice. In the Night Kitchen

The Three Billy Goats Gruff

JK is in very good company I think. Most of these books have become top sellers and most are taught in High Schools and universities.

[Stieg]

I haven't read any Harry Potter books but they have fallen under attack mainly by the Christian Right most notably.

Yet... yet, Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit is openly being discussed amongst Christian reading groups.

They should not raise issues where there are no issues, when a special interest group fingers a figure or piece of literature and falls under heavy fire that only popularizes the subject with greater sensationalism.

Kudos to Rowling for thinking outside the box.

Just my two cents worth!

EDIT: For argumentive purposes, if God exists, I feel the last concern in the world is my choice of literary reads. Come on shed those Dark Age fears and stretch, take a deep breathe and enjoy a writer's imagination. These *irrational* reactions frighten me personally. Don't manufacture a *Devil* where there isn't one... that can have serious repercussions. God is love NOT FEAR remember. I've read the bible too. ;)

Nothing wrong with being a "bad-boy or bad-girl" lit reader and still follow religion folks. I'd adorn them (the books) with pride. Quotations for inference. This message probably belongs in another forum oh well.

[grace86]

I don't really think that the majority of people against the books are Christian Right. I am not sure it matters what religion you apply yourself to to be against it. Some people here who criticize it do so out of non-religious purposes.

As a Christian myself, I think the books are awesome to read myself and have recommended them to many other people Christian or not, child or adult.

I too have wondered myself on the Hobbit and LOTR, and C.S. Lewis. I've thought about the supposed qualifications are supposed to be regarding Christianity and fantasy. I've enjoyed those novels too.

What you read is read because you enjoy it. Otherwise you wouldn't read it.

Stieg I'm not trying to seem offended with your point, just adding to it.

This probably doesn't belong here on this thread, Logos edit it if you need to...I was just trying to clarify, not trying to be offensive. :D

[Annamariah]

"Don't judge a book by its cover" should be "Don't judge a book by its movie". :p

I've seen the two first Harry Potter movies, and I didn't like them. The books are great, though.

I don't think it's right to say that Harry Potter series are children's books. True, the first ones are, but as Harry grows, the reader is supposed to grow with them. The themes are coming more mature as Harry gets older. I wouldn't call Order of the Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince children's books, maybe books for young readers or something like that.

[Stieg]

Well, that is a matter of personal tastes that cause people to be critical of the HP books, not everyone loves them or even likes them.

But I was further elaborating on the absurdity of publically denouncing the books that mediahounds just loved exploiting. That's all

[Gorilla King]

Let's not generalize about Christians. I consider myself a fundamentalist Christian (in the true meaning of the word, such as Lewis and Tolkien were) and I certainly have no objections to the books. I'm very pleased to see people reading again.

[formality hater]

The books appeal to young and old alike but yet again, the tastes vary.

[grace86]

But I was further elaborating on the absurdity of publically denouncing the books that mediahounds just loved exploiting. That's all

Yes I agree with you on that. ;)

[Mortis Anarchy]

Not gonna lie, this thread is pretty intense!!

Firstly, I would like to say, that I have many needs when it comes to books/literature whatever, so I guess I must be shallow. I can't say I feel bad for enjoying different things...and I do like shopping for clothes and checking out guys, and dancing and laughing and coffee...whatever. Thats not the point.

The point is if you like Harry Potter then good, I'm right there with you...if you don't then thats prerogative...but I have to agree, Don't judge a book by its cover, genre, MOVIE, etc. Especially if you haven't even tried...as for philosophy/intellecual bits...granted its not nearly as 'smart' as plenty of others, but if you research characters and other things in the book, there is plenty of stuff that is fascinating...a lot of it leads back to Gree/Roman myths.

They are fun books and I respect those that don't enjoy Harry Potter (but have a decent arguement other than the movie was terrible) just as much as those that do enjoy Harry Potter.

[Video Drone]

Harry Potter was the most gripping book I have ever read. It may not be passing messages or carrying philosophic thoughts in every sentence, but there is no other book for me that is so entertaining and lively. I also found the book pretty original. Perhaps I simply skipped a different fantasy series out there with similar ideas, I don't know. I wanted to extend the book all the time. Back when it was still book 4 the last book, I kept remembering that phrase "What will come will come, and we will have to meet it when it does". And it went darker since then. This book seems to have a "soul". Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that it is new and "in production", you can't just finish it all at once. Is there any other recent book of this sort around?

Speaking of comedy...? Oh, I really don't know where you are going there. Sirius dying in book number 5 was very, very sad, if you ask me. And wedding never symbolized happiness for me.

Movies - I didn't like any of them. They are too action-packed. They cut all the details out. When I like a book, I'm really attached to details.

[applepie]

Movies - I didn't like any of them. They are too action-packed. They cut all the details out. When I like a book, I'm really attached to details.

I thought the movies were alright, but I prefer the books. You miss so much because they can't fit it in and still make the time cut. I'm looking foward to seeing the fifth movie to see if they can really capture the same feeling and affect as the book. They do passably well with the movies, but they have to cut something and they do pretty well with keeping the most important events. You miss out on all of the parts that really build the characters and your apathy for them. There is much more intensity in the books, and the characters seem more real to the reader.

[Mortis Anarchy]

I thought the movies were alright, but I prefer the books. You miss so much because they can't fit it in and still make the time cut. I'm looking foward to seeing the fifth movie to see if they can really capture the same feeling and affect as the book. They do passably well with the movies, but they have to cut something and they do pretty well with keeping the most important events. You miss out on all of the parts that really build the characters and your apathy for them. There is much more intensity in the books, and the characters seem more real to the reader.

Okay, the thing about the movies is: If you look at them as just movies, then they aren't bad. Sure they cut out a lot of stuff, but hey, what do you expect! The books of course are going to be so much better.

[applepie]

Okay, the thing about the movies is: If you look at them as just movies, then they aren't bad. Sure they cut out a lot of stuff, but hey, what do you expect! The books of course are going to be so much better.

I do look at them as just movies. It is like I have two separate categories in my head for Harry Potter books and movies. My expectations for each are very different, and I don't really expect the movies to be up to my standards for the books. They also have rating constraints on the movies, I think they are trying to stay PG 13 and some of the stuff in the later books may make this quite difficult. I guess the difference for me is that I like to watch the movies a couple of times, but I own the books and love to read them time and again. They're enjoyable, but to different extents.

[Video Drone]

I like when movies after books are different from the book. When they try to follow the book, they fail and make it half-baked.

[Woland]

There's no accounting for taste.:yawnb: Cheap shot. Sorry.

I liked Harry Potter better when it was called Star Wars.

Stories based on the Ur myth (the hero's journey) will always enchant kids and a lot of adults as well.

[Mortis Anarchy]

I don't really think that the majority of people against the books are Christian Right. I am not sure it matters what religion you apply yourself to to be against it. Some people here who criticize it do so out of non-religious purposes.

As a Christian myself, I think the books are awesome to read myself and have recommended them to many other people Christian or not, child or adult.

I too have wondered myself on the Hobbit and LOTR, and C.S. Lewis. I've thought about the supposed qualifications are supposed to be regarding Christianity and fantasy. I've enjoyed those novels too.

What you read is read because you enjoy it. Otherwise you wouldn't read it.

Stieg I'm not trying to seem offended with your point, just adding to it.

This probably doesn't belong here on this thread, Logos edit it if you need to...I was just trying to clarify, not trying to be offensive. :D

I agree...everyone has their own opinions, oh well. I think the books are very good (I'm Catholic)...every interesting and easy and fun. Who cares about age when you like the book!

[Mortis Anarchy]

I do look at them as just movies. It is like I have two separate categories in my head for Harry Potter books and movies. My expectations for each are very different, and I don't really expect the movies to be up to my standards for the books. They also have rating constraints on the movies, I think they are trying to stay PG 13 and some of the stuff in the later books may make this quite difficult. I guess the difference for me is that I like to watch the movies a couple of times, but I own the books and love to read them time and again. They're enjoyable, but to different extents.

Oh, I didn't mean any offense or anything...I was agreeing with you....I enjoy the movies!! Not ones I can see every day, but hey!

[applepie]

Oh, I didn't mean any offense or anything...I was agreeing with you....I enjoy the movies!! Not ones I can see every day, but hey!

:):):) No offense was taken. I hope I didn't give that impression. If there is one bad thing about online forums it is that you can't see the face of the person talking and so often things that I say don't come out as I mean them. :D