I didn't say series are American, i know it's British. I said series are like American B serie movies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mortis Anarchy
Printable View
I didn't say series are American, i know it's British. I said series are like American B serie movies.Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.;)
Lupin dies, but then that means...............uh oh
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).
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by kilted exile
: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.Quote:
Originally Posted by kilted exile
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:
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.
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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)
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...Quote:
It's our choices that show what we truly are rather than our abilities, Harry.
__________________
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
(bold added by me)Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
So, let’s make this clear. Are you saying that:Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
- 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.
1. I never said first one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aiculík
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.
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.Quote:
# both books for children and pulp literature are literature, they’re just types of literature – different type as e.g. Ulysses, but still literature.
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.Quote:
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.
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.Quote:
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?
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?Quote:
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?
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).Quote:
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.
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.Quote:
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”.
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.Quote:
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pensive
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.;)Quote:
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.
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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...Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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.
Meaningful means it adds something to the story. Which, of course, you know as you write short stories yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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...)Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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.
Well, at least something we can agree on. I love Italian comics, too. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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?
What, do you mean it’s appropriate for me because I’m shallow? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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?
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...)Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
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...