i know i have never liked harry potter till i started reading the philosiphers stone and now im hooked yeah ive always liked whitch craft but HP never actually tickled my fancy lol ok im bored
Printable View
i know i have never liked harry potter till i started reading the philosiphers stone and now im hooked yeah ive always liked whitch craft but HP never actually tickled my fancy lol ok im bored
Are you kidding me with this, I read those books and found them dreafuly boring and hoplessly... "Fluffy."
well i do have alot on my mind so i guess thats why i started reading it tis the only book remotely interesting
Some of the best literature I have read. There is nothing wrong with 'fluff'.
Glad the sixth book, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince will be out on 16th July, 2005.
i actually like the series too, and as it becomes darker i've become a bit more into it.
I know a lot of little kids are into it, but is that such a bad thing in spreading literature for something everyone can enjoy
Not at all, and it is this series' something-for-all natural and easygoing, freeflowing laidback style that annoys the hell out of some people who fancy themselves as literature critics.
I love Harry Potter. I'm trying to cram in as much classical fiction before my G.C.S.Es, and sometimes there just so goddamn difficult to get through. So it's nice to have any easy ready that's actually got quite a good plot.
I can't wait for the sixth one!
Aimee which classical works do you have to prepare for your GCSE's?
Well, I ain't obsessed with HP but find them entertaining and a great read when your stuck with in teh airport or on a bus for eight hours... same with the left behind series, don't believe any of it but hey their entertaining... and thats what counts... (I'll never make a good literature critic)
soemtiems we all need fluff but i though the fifth one was not fluffy at all, it was so dark and i could not not not not not believe the ending.... I'm refusing to acdcept it and hoping that its not true and that itll be rectified in the sixth book
Well, my English teacher has given us a list and told us to read at least some of hem on there, and she's going to check our knowledge about the books to make sure We've read them. Apparently it will improve our English techniques if we read a lot of classic literature.Quote:
Originally Posted by EAP
Right now I'm in the middle of Wuthering Heights and next on my list Jane Eyre. Also I'm planning to read some by Dostoyevsky and Austen quite soon.
If anyone has any 'classic' pieces of literature to recommend then I would welcome any suggestions.
Would your teacher consider 'Dracula' by Bram Stoker a classic?
One classic which I have always found easier to plod through then most others is 'Vanity Fare' by William Makepeace Thackery.
Then there are always American classics like Huck Finn, Scarlet Letter, Moby Dick etc.
ive read dracula for my english class when i was in highschool and have seen the movie a thousand times lol
I've read a lot of classic works ,like wife and daughter,the works of Jane Austine,and the Bronte sisters,Dickens.But the most I think worthing reading is " Count XXXX"(I cannot remenber it exactly).The iron will the hero presented with an old professor is so explosive and if we have that one ,everything is possible.
P.S.-----I love HP two,it fantasy and wierd world and can fly just with one broom.can't wait to see the sixth one.
HP is entertaining, though not realy as so inflamed myfans, but the fantastica world is fun and light and easy to read. But hes last couple did not stike my fancy, they seemed to be lacking the same vivdness and fun. I think the author may be tiring and the story getting drug through the mud so to speak with overkill publicity.
It's a little bit better than Eragon but is dragging.
Bit better then Eragon?!?!
Comm'on. Eragon is to Harry Potter what Earth is to Universe.
Hi I'm new and I must say that the Harry Potter series is truely entertaining, we all need to get away from reality on occasion, and that's what these book do
I've read some of the Potter books and they were okay. Eragon on the other hand was much better in my opinion. If you're looking for some fantasy books though I think the series is called Narnia. They're good books, but they're light reading.
The world of Harry Potter is easier to understand cause it explains things from a "real" human boy's point of view from the "real" world. Eragon, on the other hand, is a little bit hard to follow at the beginning, and it simplies several concepts (e.g. mind-reading). I find it hard to believe that Eragon just can do it.
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.
I agree, the series is seriously overhyped. It isnot that great, and towards the end of the series becomes whiney, irritating, plain frustrating and generally stupid.
Personally I think the books are escapist, masochistic, books for those who enjoy self-pity.
HP series is great and specially its characters are very developed and engage me....
A very nice series. It was the first novel I read at late night because I did not want to leave it for a "tomorrow"
It made me love the books although its my not favourite boom right now but I do agree that its a very good novel, indeed.
What you have to remember is that Harry Potter turned a generation that would rather sit in front of a TV for hours on end to play video games into a generation that has read 6 novels (some extemely long) and are waiting paitiently for the seventh. Harry turned a large part of the population that would otherwise never have read a book into avid readers. For that, we must salute him.
Maybe the plot isn't the best sometimes. Rowling's writing isn't the best out there, but it has done wonders for literacy.
I personally dislike the Harry Potter books- but I know so many adults and children who read these novels that would never normally pick up a magazine, let alone a 100 page book. I have to give the author support for this- Harry Potter or Charles Dickens- It's all about reading something, and perhaps Harry Potter will lead to reading more.
Ahhh...Quote:
Originally Posted by byucougs
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.
The Harry Potter books are not great literature, but J. K. Rowling is a good writer, who created good round characters, plots that follow logical patterns (if you accept the premises), and used universal themes. They are aimed at an audience from about 9 to 18, and for literature aimed at that audience the Harry Potter books are great. I don't know what books have popular with that audience in the recent past, but most such things from past times were much shallower and the characters were not as well developed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor
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.
Well i do not consider the books to be literature in its true essence, i'll give the writer some credit because she created a good formula, or she got really lucky. But still it's not that good at all, and very unoriginal. It is a children's book when you come down ,ll, and i guess thats why it has become immensly popular. since the larger number of readers are children. But sadly, i would prefer it if people read something more in the lines of Neil Gaiman, but then again thats not for children.
(look up his "Books of Magic" for a surprise) The Harry Potter series are good books, but that all they are; once the younger generation gets older i hope they'll realize that. But then again you never know.(oh and http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092115/
for another surprise, scroll down to cast list)
You know, I have noticed that a lot of people read Harry Potter because their friends do. I think liking Harry Potter is more of "cool" thing than actually something that people enjoy. A lot of kids I know own the books because they got made fun of for not, but they don't actually read them. They just go see the movies. More adults seem to like Harry Potter than children, I think it just got blown way out of proportion. I refuse to get bought into it, I did read the first book, but I borrowed it. I just think that it has got too big for its breeches and there are a lot better things to read. A lot of the sales, too, could be because parents think that every child would love to read it because there friends child has it, so they buy them for them. That's what I think a lot of Harry Potter is, a popularity ploy.
yes (subjective opinion)Quote:
The typical argument in favor of Harry Potter: "Anything that make people read is good."
Depends on what your watching. I have never read Harry Potter so I will not comment on it. I do however think TV can be beneficial. I liked to watch the Discovery, Learning, and History channel before they all got on the kick of every show has to involve an automobile of some type. I also loved Mr. Wizard and got up every school day at 6:30 am to watch it then go back to sleep before school started at 9:30 am.Quote:
But is reading Harry Potter really any better then watching TV?
I don't know about the first two since i've never read Ms. Rowling's books. I do however think that they can improve a kid's intelligence. I think that the first Harry Potter book was about the sorcerer's stone which is something like the philosopher's stone? If true read on if not just go to the next question. When I was around four or five my mom bought a 7 book encyclopedia set from a salesman with each book being a different color. In this set were 2 I especially liked, the purple which was the history of America and the green which was basically a science book from Archimedes and Pythagoras theorem to why your brain and senses are kind of like a computer and equipment (videocamera are your eyes, microphones are your ears). My favorite story in the green book was a story about alchemists an the hunt for the philosopher's stone. I made my mom read it to me every night and soon I was reading it to her. At eight after reading how chemistry is modern day alchemy I decide to get Asimov's inside the atom out of the school library. That book and the green science book has spurred me to learn everything I can in any science related field. That is how books like the Harry Potter series could improve a kid's intelligence.Quote:
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.
No they probably will not read Great Expectations next but maybe farther down the road they will not be intimidated by such a novelQuote:
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 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."Quote:
Originally Posted by papayahed
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)
I don't mean to be rude, but this comes across as being really quite intellectually snobbish!Quote:
Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor
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!
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"Quote:
Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor
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?
Have you seen the sales numbers? People are buying the books.Quote:
Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor
well, duh! Why would she do it for free?Quote:
However I respect Harry Potter for what it is, a well done ploy to make money, not a well written novel.
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:
;)
No need to be so rude, I was just expressing my views as I let you.Quote:
Originally Posted by papayahed
Lol, I like you!Quote:
Originally Posted by Levenbreech Vor
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?