Harry Potter

Welcome to the forum, andy!

Just look at the poll above and you will see that a vast majority likes the HP books - and they're not all teenagers. These books can even charm adults, "throw them in a different world", as you say. I get the impression that most of the critics that find fault with HP are LOTR fans (or some other fantasy books).

And as for the 7th volume being the last - who knows? Event Conan Doyle had to write another Sherlock Holmes story although he had even gone so far as to kill him!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gadget Girl

It's better than Dumbledore and Grindelwald.

---

Actually i thought that they were a nice couple. (oddly enough! Amazing how that came to be true! Its discreetly hinted at in the book.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

you know wy harry potter best..............well people don't want to boring people's peoms going bla bla bla people want exiting edventures and coll magic now isn't that better than bla bla bla boring bla bla zzzzzzz the maker probly bored himself to sleep writing poems i woul rather jump off a cliff than listen to bla bla bla boring boring bla bla bla.

I'm sorry to disagree with those who hate HP because it's commercial but in my job in a primary school I see children glued to these books, children that would normally be playing computer games or watching tv, I do think there is to much detail in JKRs writing she doesn't leave much to the imagination but she has got a great many children reading again..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yummymummy

I'm sorry to disagree with those who hate HP because it's commercial but in my job in a primary school I see children glued to these books, children that would normally be playing computer games or watching tv, I do think there is to much detail in JKRs writing she doesn't leave much to the imagination but she has got a great many children reading again..

---

It's true that she doesn't leave much for the imagination, but I am not sure that is needed though. Because of how she describes everything (people, areas, events) you can feel like you're already there, and you don't need to imagine, when you already feel the place.

Just a theory. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thelastmelon

It's true that she doesn't leave much for the imagination, but I am not sure that is needed though. Because of how she describes everything (people, areas, events) you can feel like you're already there, and you don't need to imagine, when you already feel the place.

Just a theory. :)

---

I completely agree with you. It makes it more real in the mind of the reader.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niamh

Actually i thought that they were a nice couple. (oddly enough! Amazing how that came to be true! Its discreetly hinted at in the book.)

---

actuall i like the pair hari and dumbledor yay i can see it now dumbledor keeping secretes telling hagrid than harid slowly telling harry through the whole thing perfect hey basicly harid gets secretes and telles em to harry and harry tells his freins and dumbledor does not know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andypants1792

i am a 15 year old reader of all the HP books, and i am saddened by the fact that there wont be any more.

---

Don't be. The Harry Potter mania is still there! Rowling will publish HP encyclopedia to support the things that she didn't mention in all seven books like the background of Dean Thomas, the kid at the train station (7th book), McGonagall, etc.

In third grade I kind of liked the first book. Not enough to read the others though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gadget Girl

Don't be. The Harry Potter mania is still there!

---

Whoah, that's for sure. It won't go away. No worries. That's the benefit of liking very popular things.

Anyways, I read up to the fourth book enjoyably over a span of...a year or two, when I was nine or ten, but I became intensely bored when my mom wanted me to read the fifth one to her. I find that it's the same plot over and over again and that irritated me.

So no, I dont like it, but I do enjoy seeing millions of rabid fans in line to get their books or to get into a Harry Potter party or get their books signed by Rowling herself.

I agree with you .I also very much interested in reading Harry potter.

Let see: I owe all seven Harry Porter books. I read them all, every single one of them. I also enjoyed them all very much. If I ever had kids, I would surely encourage them to read HP. Why? Literature starts somewhere. When I was a kid, my parents coursed me to read fairy tales, then Le Petit Prince, then Sans Famille, then Little Women, then Gone With the Winds, then Anna Karenina, then Shakespeare, etc; basically I was lucky to have parents who were very concerned about my knowledge of literature. It is ok to enjoy HP, for kids to enjoy HP. But it is NOT a classic, in my personal opinion.

I think a classic needs to be thought provoking. It needs to be a representation of the art of language. It needs to ask questions and makes us think about humanity and the universe. The battle of evil and good is a fact, not questions like "What is man?" "What is the relationship between human beings and deity?" "Is our nature evil or innocent?" etc. All the while a classic also needs to have a compelling story. One example is tragedies. When you read tragedies, you know that people are going to die. It is predictable, but still you want to read on. That is a good tragedy! You read it for more than just a good story. You read it to learn about bigger things, to discover bigger questions, and to find bigger answers.

It bothers me greatly that in a recent poll, HP stood at the most re-reading book in UK. I think the difficult classics are the ones that should be re-read many times, not HP. I think I might read it again someday in one of those moments where I'm the mood for something entertaining and light, but I have no desire to re-read it now. I also think the amount of money that J.R got from HP is appalling. But that is beside the point!

I also own all of the Harry Potter books andIo love them. Not all books that you read need to be considered great literature by others. Sometimes it is wonderful to read a book that takes you out of your life and into another world, and that is my aim with reading and what ever does that for you is a great book and for me great literature.

How did you find this final Harry Potter?

Personally I thought it was okay, but my friends thought it was too normal, which means- wasn't enough to their expectations, even boring.

What do you guys think? About the flot and the reverse, all of the characters?

I absolutely agree with your friends....(to normal..)
After all these troubles and "death", Harry at last became the happy family person. Usual "the american dream" has come true..Has not amazed...
If you wish to read really interesting stories about Harry Potter and all characters see http://www.fanfiction.net/book/Harry_Potter/
and enjoy...:cool:

I have to agree the last HP book did not live up to all the hype but i wonder if any book could have. I still love the series though and would recommend to anyone. For me Order of the phoenix was the best book.

No, Half-Blood Prince was the best one.

I like Harry Potter, the first four were brilliant because there was a lot of mystery created, and we slowly get to know more about Harry's past and family background.

The fifth, sixth and seventh are now all to reveal the mystery and slowly join the pieces of the puzzle.

The good thing about HP is that JK Rowling has made it feel so real - she has names for everything in the magical world which makes it more believable

I have been reading Harry Potter for a very long time, I loved buying the books when they were really cheap because no-one was really in to them when they first came out.
I waited years for the last one, but was very disapointed, as I would have liked there to be a little more content in the book, as it was rather slim compared to number five. The end of the book came as no suprise really, however I found it hard to supress a laugh when I read that Harry had had children. :)
I actually cried when Dumbledore died, however I was very happy that he was remembered through out the rest of the book. Snap did not suprise me either, I knew he had not converted, I see that one coming, but the end, him and Lilly! OMG! ^.^ I never would have thought it, never!
Well over all every book make me read all night long, and in the early morning, I really could not put them down, some parts disapointed me, but it is like that with every book really, there are parts you like and parts you do not. Harry Potter was amazing, and will always be in my heart.

Somehow I find it dragging and nice!!! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zionforsale

I think a classic needs to be thought provoking. It needs to be a representation of the art of language. It needs to ask questions and makes us think about humanity and the universe. The battle of evil and good is a fact, not questions like "What is man?" "What is the relationship between human beings and deity?" "Is our nature evil or innocent?" etc. All the while a classic also needs to have a compelling story. One example is tragedies. When you read tragedies, you know that people are going to die. It is predictable, but still you want to read on. That is a good tragedy! You read it for more than just a good story. You read it to learn about bigger things, to discover bigger questions, and to find bigger answers.

---

I really don't understand why so many people were disappointed with the seventh book. I found it excellent and lived up to your description here Zion. When I got to the end of the HBP, I thought Rowling was really turning Voldemort into her version of Hitler. I really wanted to see that come out in the DH. To my delight, that's exactly what happened. I saw the Holocaust in the final book.

Maybe it's because of my experience teaching at a high school where racism and biggotry was an issue that I had to deal with in the classroom almost every day. But I loved the fact that she was able to address the evils of biggotry in such a compelling and inoffensive way. Granted, any good author could have done the same, but her popularity make it that much better!

I saw Harry Potter as movies , unles the last one , and I liked it !


but I didn`t read any book ,, I`ll this summer ,, as soon as I finish my exams .. Oh My God ..!

I loved the seventh book so much: it's definately my favourite. I thought I'd not like it so much because I just love the world of Hogwarts - I've been an HP fan since I was 8, so it's kind of a second home to me!

But I agree, I was really impressed with the way that Ms Rowling dealt with way bigger themes in the seventh - she created a terrifying world. And because children (and adults, though it would probably have more of an impact on children because they would know less about the horrors of humanity) are so engaged in the HP world, they'll take the messages on board so much more effectively.

I like the way that she's taken our world and shown us what it's like , using magic to exaggerate some of the things that we can't see clearly in our own muggle world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gadget Girl

No, Half-Blood Prince was the best one.

---

Agreed, had me hooked to the end that book.
I love the books - hate the films.

I have been reading the books since I was in 3rd grade and have loads of times since. I am basically as HP maniac. Alan Rickman adds a nice touch to the films but other than that they are just a big joke. All just silly entertainment! And that's okay!

I voted yes, though I've only read the first 3 books. For what they are (children's books) they're excellent, they tick every box and I'm all in favour of anything than encourages children to read... and as an adult if you want a bit of mindless entertainment they tick that box too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DapperDrake

I voted yes, though I've only read the first 3 books. For what they are (children's books) they're excellent, they tick every box and I'm all in favour of anything than encourages children to read... and as an adult if you want a bit of mindless entertainment they tick that box too.

---

I agree, I haven't read the last two books (too much else to read - might as well wait for the movies!) but it seems so few children read these days at least this has got them interested and excited about reading... I grew up on Roald Dahl and although children obviously can still read him now, it was different looking forward to his latest book coming out (I remember being very excited about The BFG!)... Harry Potter has clearly had a similar effect...

I honestly dont like the harry potter books. Ive read all 7 but its one of those storys where you get to the end and think "what the hell was the point of that?" I just dont think there is anything of value to get from the books. There is no deep meaning, no symbols, and no real value to be gained from it, other than the oh so unused "good conqures evil in the end." it is mediocer (or however you spell it) writing at best. Although it is entertaining. But on the same note, so are shiny objects and things that make noise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevinthediltz

I honestly dont like the harry potter books. Ive read all 7 but its one of those storys where you get to the end and think "what the hell was the point of that?" I just dont think there is anything of value to get from the books. There is no deep meaning, no symbols, and no real value to be gained from it, other than the oh so unused "good conqures evil in the end." it is mediocer (or however you spell it) writing at best. Although it is entertaining. But on the same note, so are shiny objects and things that make noise.

---

It's interesting that you don't like them but you still managed to read all seven! I'm not sure if you should be looking for deep meaning or symbolism in childrens books, but the value is what we have said - that it gets younger children excited about reading

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starrwriter

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

---

Just reading some of the earlier replies. Hilarious how people (adults) seem to be offended by Harry Potter and J.K Rowling. It is a childrens book. You would hardly expect a 10-year-old to be reading Tolstoy. There are some seriously haughty attitudes on here! Literary snobbery does make me chuckle. Right, back to Chaucer. :thumbs_up

I am 15, started reading harry potter at 7 and Istill love the books. I think you can have ''mature tastes in literature'' and still enjoy the books. I mean I love Wodehouse, Kafka, Balzac, Saki and O Henry but that does not mean I dont thumb my nose at HP. They have tons of entertainment and 'masala' with the occasional profound moment.

Harry Potter is like an endless fountain of fantasy.Since I read book one,I always loved them,I grew up with them and I've been anxious for them.And the last three books are definitely very adolescentesque...

My grandson (now 21 and reading Physics and Maths at Imperial College, London) put me on to Harry Potter at the ripe old age of eleven, after he had read the first book and couldn't wait for the second to come out. I thought I'd read it to see what all the fuss was about and have read all of them. Yes, they are children's books, so I suppose there is still a bit of child in me. I love a cracking good story - the stories move on apace, the characters are believable and even as an adult, I can learn something about courage, perseverance, the support of friends, sharing strengths, facing fear, self-reliance, humour, the uses of learning and application, dealing with loss and sorrow. The books aren't deep - they're not meant to be, they're aimed at young readers. I'm sorry for the readers who can no longer take pleasure in a good tale well told, no matter what their age - the loss is theirs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hank Stamper

I agree, I haven't read the last two books (too much else to read - might as well wait for the movies!) but it seems so few children read these days at least this has got them interested and excited about reading... I grew up on Roald Dahl and although children obviously can still read him now, it was different looking forward to his latest book coming out (I remember being very excited about The BFG!)... Harry Potter has clearly had a similar effect...

---

i flew through the last two books---soooooo many unanswered questions, mysteries and tensions to be solved...

I used to think that the HP books were fine, innocuous at worst. A bit odd that so many adults were reading these children's books, but hey, what's the harm of a good potboiler?

Reading Harold Bloom's comments on HP made me think again. He kinda has a point. There's room for doubt that the these books are going to make kids future Tolstoy readers. More likely they'll graduate to read Stephen King. Is reading such a good thing in itself, that it really doesn't matter what one reads? Bloom also makes the point that Rowling is not a good writer. She's not particularly imaginative-- and here Bloom excels at rooting out the source material that she mines in assembling Harry Potter's world. He also faults her style as flat and repetitive.

There is a discouraging trend in the whole HP franchise. The lemming-like frantic stampede at the local superstore, the marketing hype, the me-too trendiness. I like to think of the world of books as being about independent thinking and a variety of different voices. The movie business is all about blockbusters... look at the result. Do we really want the publishing world to follow suit?

Given that the Harry Potter books are neither particularly original nor terribly well-written, what is to account for their phenomenal success other than marketing hitched to herd mentality?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by curlyqlink

I like to think of the world of books as being about independent thinking

---

which is why you base your views of Harry Potter on what Harold Bloom says. Great independent thinking that. ;)

The reason Harry Potter has been so successful is because they appeal to children - Rowling's writing might not be up there with Austen or any of the Dead White Male's Literary Canon, but she is writing for CHILDREN not literary critics. If people wrote solely to impress literary critics then there would be nothing but tedious and pretentious guff on the shelves

Will these children end up reading Tolstoy? Maybe not. But that doesn't mean they won't read anything else of 'value'. Taste is subjective anyway. So what if they start reading Stephen King? It won't stop you enjoying Tolstoy will it? :thumbs_up

The reason Potter has been so successful has nothing to do with children. Children don't buy books, because children don't have money. Parents by books, meaning parents read reviews, meaning word of mouth affects the parents choice to buy the books. In other words, Harry Potter is advertised, therefore it becomes cool, therefore parents buy it for their kids, who, after reading the first novel, and having no real reading experience beyond a picture-book/mass-produced mediocre paperback level, seek the next volume in the series, meanwhile enjoying a high-budgeted film adding to more advertisement. I don't know any 8 year olds with 50 bucks and the permission to line up at 12:00 down the block from a bookstore on a Saturday night.

If one had never heard of Shakespeare, how do you think a seeing of West-Side Story would go? If no one knows what good is, how can they know what bad is (I'm tossing in a little Tao Te Ching for good measure here). The absence of experience always ends with the requirement of guidance, I.E. a teacher must teach a student who doesn't know. Thereby the market is acting as the teacher, and the reader is the student. If no one is refuting the market, then he it is taken as law. If the market tells the ignorant this is a great find, what do the readers know?

All I know is, every review you see in the paper for any book passed book 1 is a load of rubbish. All the bad reviews stopped after the 3rd book at best, it being idiotic to keep going if you didn't like the first. That being said, it is no surprise that you get almost all positive reviews for the second volume onward, and those reviews tell nothing but that the reviewer likes the book. It creates another advertisement bias.

On that subject, what other book has had that much exposure? Toys, action figures, video games, coloring books, wide translations, posters, movies, news coverage, a feature on every news paper, and every news station for a week prior to release, what other book? none that I can think of. But, unlike Viagra, the ultimate best-seller product, the book exhausts its usefulness quickly.

I am not talking good or bad here, I am simply pointing out that opinions are biased beyond a doubt, since they are coming from ignorant people. The amount a book sells tells nothing about its quality, it being a fact that MacDonalds sells more burgers than any real restaurant.

The problem, I think, Bloom, amongst other critics has with the books, is the insistence fans of the book have at placing it as a beacon of culture, causing a fabled increase in child readership. I have seen statistics showing that reading rates amongst kids have actually gone down, as projected, since the publication of the first Potter book, and therefore feel confident in saying that Potter leads kids only to read Potter.


Now to the critical criticism:

If for instance, one feels confident in saying that Potter is one of the top 1000 books ever written in any genre, in any language, then the Potter books can be deemed excellent. I have my doubts about such claims, of course. If one can say it is in the top 5000 books ever written, then perhaps one can argue it is a good book. Anything more than that seems to indicate that reading this book is causing one to miss out on reading a better book, since there are only so many hours in ones lifetime where they can read.

I would like to argue that None of the Potter books (or all of them if you accept them as one massive book) fit in the top 5000 written in the history of literature. I feel confident to say, that when one reads Potter, they are missing out on reading a better book (the size of the children's canon is quite large, and, has to be cut even further by readers in order to fill in the time while the age is still in focus). More importantly however, more than half of Potter's readers, according to statistics I have seen, are not children, and most of the original readers are already in their late teens. We therefore can compare this book to the long-list canon of books (Bloom's list has around 2000 works, but that is only the west, and limited by language. The full canon is much longer, when one factors in all of the Eastern tradition). Does the book hold up?

The answer is of course, to me at least, no. It is perhaps an enjoyable read, but is it more important than lets say Alice in Wonderland? should we judge it on itself or on what came before? There are 7 books, spanning around 4000 pages give or take (I am mentally calculating here) meaning in the time it takes a reader to read this, they could have read about 40 books of poetry, or 10 other important novels, or even all the major works of any major author. To read Potter, in my mind, is to not read something else. I, a self confessed bibliophile, find it difficult to decide which books get read, and which don't for myself, for fear of wasting an hour or two of my reading time. This is, lets say at 50 pages an hour, 80 or so hours of reading of other works disappearing, so no, I am not a fan of the Potter, I am a fan of Faulkner. I am a fan of Lewis Carrol, of Edward Lear, of Rudyard Kipling, but I am not a fan of mediocrity, which this clearly, according to me, is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

The reason Potter has been so successful has nothing to do with children. Children don't buy books, because children don't have money. Parents by books, meaning parents read reviews, meaning word of mouth affects the parents choice to buy the books. In other words, Harry Potter is advertised, therefore it becomes cool, therefore parents buy it for their kids, who, after reading the first novel, and having no real reading experience beyond a picture-book/mass-produced mediocre paperback level, seek the next volume in the series, meanwhile enjoying a high-budgeted film adding to more advertisement. I don't know any 8 year olds with 50 bucks and the permission to line up at 12:00 down the block from a bookstore on a Saturday night.

---

all i can say is hell yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

The reason Potter has been so successful has nothing to do with children. Children don't buy books, because children don't have money. Parents by books, meaning parents read reviews, meaning word of mouth affects the parents choice to buy the books. In other words, Harry Potter is advertised, therefore it becomes cool, therefore parents buy it for their kids, who, after reading the first novel, and having no real reading experience beyond a picture-book/mass-produced mediocre paperback level, seek the next volume in the series, meanwhile enjoying a high-budgeted film adding to more advertisement. I don't know any 8 year olds with 50 bucks and the permission to line up at 12:00 down the block from a bookstore on a Saturday night.

---

Right so parents are forcing their children to read Harry Potter?

I'm not denying Harry Potter has been shrewdly marketed, but the series is successful precisely because the book appeals to children. If it didn't appeal to children - i.e. they didn't enjoy reading Harry Potter - then it wouldn't be successful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

The reason Potter has been so successful has nothing to do with children. Children don't buy books, because children don't have money. Parents by books, meaning parents read reviews, meaning word of mouth affects the parents choice to buy the books. In other words, Harry Potter is advertised, therefore it becomes cool, therefore parents buy it for their kids, who, after reading the first novel, and having no real reading experience beyond a picture-book/mass-produced mediocre paperback level, seek the next volume in the series, meanwhile enjoying a high-budgeted film adding to more advertisement. I don't know any 8 year olds with 50 bucks and the permission to line up at 12:00 down the block from a bookstore on a Saturday night.

---

While I take your point about 8 year olds not having $50 (did the books really cost that much? I bought mine in hardback for £8.50, about $17), I think you may not be altogether correct. The early HP phenomenum spread in the UK through word of mouth - it was the children themselves who passed on the message. Rowling's original target audience were the children who were of an age with Harry himself, the eleven, twelve year olds and these children do have pocket money, or at least many of them do, and some of them are already in the book buying mode. I don't think my grandson was alone in using his pocket money on books - he asked his mother if it was possible to order a book; she replied that it was and on learning that he wanted to order book two of the HP series, suggested that he waited until it came out in paperback when it would be cheaper. No, was his reply, he wanted to read it as soon as possible and didn't want to wait; he then went on to point out that his mother had always said he could spend his pocket money on whatever he wanted and she could hardly object to his wanting a book. (That boy will go far!)

I agree that the later hype was fuelled by the publicists but the first few books were sold as books - the films didn't start to appear until later. Also don't underestimate the pest power of children who want to be part of a trend. I would have been a bit doubtful about putting the books in front of younger children, especially the later books which are very dark. Interestingly, the Philip Pullman books were also a word of mouth success among children themselves but never caught on in the same way partly I suspect because they are much darker and more difficult to read and the readership stayed with older children - even the film has not created a similar surge of interest in the books. I would never have recommended them to younger children, especially the last title, The Amber Spyglass, which I would have found deeply disturbing as a child.

As for the Lit Crit reaction to the books, I can't help remembering Dorothy Parker's assessment of The House At Pooh Corner - she produced a response that she hoped would show how sophisticated she was -'Tonstant Weader threw up' - and was ridiculed from all sides, as people pointed out the books were written for children not New York literati.

With regard to children catching the reading habit young, I can only say as a former teacher of children to the age of eleven, the younger they start finding pleasure in books, the more likely they are to carry on reading. I knew I had 'caught' them when I heard them laugh at something they were reading for themselves. As for whether they go on to read anything of quality, I suspect that depends entirely on the teaching they receive subsequently on how to judge books, or any other experience for that matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

........no, I am not a fan of the Potter, I am a fan of Faulkner. I am a fan of Lewis Carrol, of Edward Lear, of Rudyard Kipling, but I am not a fan of mediocrity, which this clearly, according to me, is.

---

Hhmm - so are we to deduce from this that you have not read HP, JBI?


That you are criticising books you have not actually read?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBI

I am not talking good or bad here, I am simply pointing out that opinions are biased beyond a doubt, since they are coming from ignorant people.

---

who are you calling ignorant? you have an opinion, which you have kindly spouted here, and you are biased beyond a doubt AGAINST Harry Potter, so does that make you ignorant too?

I agree that Harry Potter is never going to be in any literary canon (nor should it) and I agree that for an adult, to read Harry Potter is to not read something else... however, the criticism of Harry Potter by literary critics is the same - to borrow your analogy - as a restaurant critic going into McDonalds and complaining because the cheeseburgers are not made from foie gras and caviar. They are massively missing the point.