Harry Potter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papayahed

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.

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)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor

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.

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

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor

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.

Quote:

---

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...

[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:
;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papayahed

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor

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.

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).

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor

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

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