Printable View
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.
Yes well put peter.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by rachel
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.
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by starrwriter
First of all, a previous post said the average age of a "Potter" reader was between 9 and 12, not 8.Quote:
Originally Posted by Apotropaic
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterL
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? :)
O sorry, I missed the age limit by 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by starrwriter
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Apotropaic
I am in entire agreement, couldn't have said it better myself!Quote:
Originally Posted by LightShade
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by LightShade
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.
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.
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
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!).Quote:
Originally Posted by 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:
--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.Quote:
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.
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.
There! That's what I'm talking about! Judge her fairly, please!Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterL
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.