Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aiculík
(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.
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.
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:
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.
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?
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:
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?
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.
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:
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.
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.
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:
Originally Posted by
Pensive
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:
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.;)
