OK, so I haven't slept since yesterday, but I have now finished the last Harry Potter book.
I'm so sad that Hermione died.
Ooh, should there have been a spoiler warning?
Just kidding, I have not read any of the Harry Potters.
Man, there must be 20 million hardcore fans holed up in their bedrooms with that book today. What a publishing phenomenon, unbelievable.
I wonder if Rowling will ever write again after this.
-----
F.I. said in part:
"...or bad in that they're learning to commodify learning by buying more products full of facile understandings and simplistic language."
Jes answered:
What's wrong with simplistic language? I'm a notoriously slow reader. It usually takes me about a month to read a book, I don't know why. But this doesn't seem to apply to the Harry Potter books. Somehow I'm able to just breeze through them with a clear picture of what's going on in my head. The simplistic language is one of my favorite aspects of the books. It always confuses me why people talk about simplicity like it's a bad thing.
Is it intellectually stimulating or escapism? Who cares? In my mind, it's an amazing story with tons of interesting characters, and an entire universe unto itself. Whether or not anyone agrees with me is their business as far as I'm concerned. Just different perspectives is all.
Jes has a point. I have heard very clever writers saying that it is lot more challenging to write simply and clearly than to make it complex and impressive. Some academic books are basically unreadable.
57 comments:
You don't know how pissed off I was when I read "Hermoine dies" ... as yes, I'm still reading. I like the Harry Potter books. Thankfully I clicked back, just to make sure it wasn't a joke...
Hehe. Sorry, a mean little joke.
I think they need to get over themselves. It's a fad. The writing is horrible, full of cliches. I'm not sure if the Harry Potter phenomenon is good in that middle-schoolers who otherwise would be playing Nintendo are involved in the books; or bad in that they're learning to commodify learning by buying more products full of facile understandings and simplistic language. It certainly doesn't question any of our society's preconceptions, does it?
Well, I'm just a snob. Anything that a lot of people do, is something that worries me. And I do enjoy the movies as sci-fi-fantasy escapism, that much if fun enough. I just wish they were reading ... well, you know ... WELL WRITTEN books instead.
I happen to enjoy it. :) It's light reading, I like the character development and mysticism and just plain silliness. :)
I refused to read it in the beginning because it was just too popular. Once I picked up the books, though, I'm glad I did.
And I'm going to assume I'm not one of hte people who "needs to get over themselves" - pretty derogatory.
harry potter books suck. witchcraft, wizards, blah, blah, blah, although Satan is happy about it, others see through this veil of demonic stories. give me mark twain, irwin shaw, the bible, but spare me the dark world of potter. life is dark enough without these wicked characters promoting the underworld sin.
I'm so sad that... (what must not be said).
There you had me for a moment Eo.
I think Rowling is the most brilliant contemporary writer.
"Wicked characters promoting underworld sin."
That's about the greatest advertising slogan I've ever heard!
I would buy immediately. Only problem: It's not true about the Potter books.
I have never read any of the Harry Potter books, they just don't interest me enough. I've watched the films and have enjoyed them as escapism, fantasy, call it what you will. MGLW is a huge fan, and as I type is reading the last book.
I would like to make a couple of points in defence of the books.
Firstly the books (and films) are doing exactly the opposite of "promoting the underworld of sin" in my opinion. They are sagas about Good triumphing over Evil, hope overcoming despair, savagery and cruelty being defeated by honour and kindness, friendship and love enduring ultimately instead of arrogance and self-centeredness. They are actually rather moral tales. As Dumbledore said in the film of 'HP and the Goblet of Fire': "Soon we must all choose between what is right, and what is easy." Yes, it's set in a fantasy world but then all novels are set in a world of the writers imagining, some are just closer to what we recognise as our everyday reality. The fact that HP is set in a world of wizards and witchcraft is actually immaterial to the message. There's just as much magic, and demonic evil, and morality in Tolkien's work, or the Narnia books (both authors being devout Christians, Tolkien a Roman Catholic and CS Lewis an Anglican).
My second point is something my (68 year old, also devoutly Christian) Mother-in-Law passed on to me. When the second book came out she went down to her local library to borrow a copy, having read the first one and liked it enormously - she reads them when she "needs cheering up". She was told there was a three week waiting list for it. The Librarian also informed her that they'd had a queue of eight year old or so boys around the block, waiting to get their hands on a copy. This picture was repeated at book stores around the country. The Librarian finished by saying that they were intensely grateful to J K Rowling, as getting eight year old boys to read was the most difficult task they had. Anything that reached that age group was fine by them. Rowling tells a good story, making the reader want to turn the page and see what happens next. Yes, there are grammatical errors and the style isn't particularly adult, but then it isn't meant to be! If people enjoy it and it gets them reading other, shall we say more challenging material, more power to her elbow I say.
"harry potter books suck. witchcraft, wizards, blah, blah, blah, although Satan is happy about it, others see through this veil of demonic stories. give me mark twain, irwin shaw, the bible, but spare me the dark world of potter. life is dark enough without these wicked characters promoting the underworld sin."
OK, so which Mark Twain, Irwin Shaw, or Bible are you reading that lacks a sense of darkness, demonic stories, or wickedness? Haven't read much of that ol' Bible, have ya mister thumper? Twain's whole view of the world didn't really make itself clear did it? Not dark, Mark Twain! No demons, the Bible! Wow ...
I too fell for the spoiler. Grrr. i thougth I'd find this a a Potter free site, but no, you have to join in.
I read the first three Potter books, and gave up. not because the story was bad, or not Satanic for my needs. it was awfully translated into American. Now I have my hands on them in my native tongue, and I am much happier.
After seeing Order of the Phoenix today we were discussing how it paralleled both 1984 and the rise of the 3rd Reich. And also contemplating whether it made sense even though 3/4 of the book had to be sacrificed to fit in a 2 hr movie.
I find the HP world to be imanginatively peopled. It's hard to not stumble into cliches when so much has already been done, and there is not much left to be done.
I don't read them to question man and his ways, that is why I have Jim Crace, Kazantski, HG Wells, CS Lewis (Out of the Silent Planet) and others in my book shelf. JK Rowlings sits on my fun shelf, next to my escapist fiction, Alan Garner, CS Lewis (Narnia), Leslie Charters etc.
They do their job, entertaining mystery novels, just rollicking great fun. (but I ain't standin' in line for Deathly Hallows, I'll get it for Christmas.)
Oh, Final Identity. The writing in Harry Potter is far better than in "Goosebumps" which is the other set of books my 9yr old is ploughing through. I agree, I want my kids reading well written stuff and I prefer them reading to playing computer games.
There most be something wrong with my reading ability, every time I try to read Poe to them, they just glaze over.
Hark! quoth the raven!
----
"Now I have my hands on them in my native tongue, and I am much happier."
What's your native tongue?
English, particularly Cheshire, with a hint of Scouse (Liverpudlian) and Manc (Mancunian) for good measure.
Me mam were from near Lutterworth, and me dad were from Scotty Road, Liverpool. Born and raised in Chester, on the English side of the border, so if someone wrote "Aros fach Nawr", I'd know to slow down I spent 4 years in Manchester Polythechnic doing a 3 year degree, and finally could understand Coronation Street.
I even have friends in Bolton and Whalley Bridge to this day, and have fond memories of the baths in Bolton with their wave machine and Lucy, but that's an old story.
The Harry Potter books were written in English and translated into American. But that's an old rant of mine.
A friend here berates me for writing in American when I can speak the queen's English better then my neighbors.
I dunno, it's all the same to me.
Alex, if you come near Bolton, let's do lunch.
I get back to Blighty about once every 5 years. Last time, last Oct, was London, Anglesey, Chester, Leeds, Whalley Bridge, Sherwood Forest and RAF Godawful visiting friends and relatives. It was my longest trip in years, I was there 7 nights!
I'll try and fit you in for my 2011 visit ;-)
EO,
My last comment sounds flippant and dismissive. It'd be very interesting to meet you in person, and enjoy a pie and a pint, or some other typical Brit lunch.
My last trip to the UK I was meant to hook up with another board leader who I'd known for 10 years. Ironically, she's from Aus, and lived around the N Manchester area for a bit before moving, like so many friends and relatives, to Notts.
Don't give up on that lunch yet, but it may be some time.
Cheers
Alex
Sure, my patience is infinite.
OK I just found out that Rowling gave a lot of money to the national library system in Scotland (she wrote significant portions of some of the books there) so I like her a bit more now.
As far as my critical disdain for her artistry goes (heh ...), I wonder if the cliche terms and the rather predictable structures are deliberate, pandering to the masses; or just "the way it came out" when she got down to brass tacks and started writing away.
I often wonder, if I were to try to write a major novel, whether it would come out "deep" or "shallow." I can't imagine how one would have actual control over that sort of manifestation of your vision. You're busy thinking about whether or not Harry should show up just before or just after the banquet, and whether or not Ron's owl gets caught in the fan, and BOOM, you're shallow or you're deep! Almost as though it's not in your control.
Of course, it IS within the author's control, but how? Where? When do you know to stop and get non-cliche? Aside from catching the obvious cliches of expression ("He surprised himself by ..." and " they took some time to put their feet up" seem to be Rowling's favorites), what about over-simplicity in thinking? The girl is the study-bug, the boy with lots of siblings is the lower-class honest kid, the rich boy is the annoying trouble-maker who can get away with anything just because he's got a famous name ...
How do you "control" it as the artist? Or do you let go of all control and just "let it come out"?
Again, beats me. I can only write totally on "inkstink".
It's not true about the Potter books.
It is true regardless of your misguided thought.
Haven't read much of that ol' Bible, have ya mister thumper?
No thumping going on here smartass, just a book I enjoy reading. Stop creating trouble here.
Yes, I was pissed when I read that Hermione dies. What a cruel, cruel joke, Eolake.
Final Identity, you need to get over yourself - big time. I think they can take that stick out of your ass on an outpatient basis these days.
Eolake, I wonder if it might be an idea to make it so that people must have an account in order to post here. It would be a pain for me because I am obviously one of the ones who don't have an account, but it would be worth it to be spared having religious people - well-meaning, maybe, but misguided - constantly telling us we're going to hell (for whatever the reason of the day is). They hide behind anonymity.
Just so we're clear, that was a joke, final identity. Reading it now it maybe doesn't seem that way, but that was the intent.
Seriously, though, I think that most fans are aware that she's not exactly destined to go down in history as one of the greatest prose stylists of all time, but for me the books are pure escapism, and I can deal with her inadequacies as a writer because she does tell a good, entertaining story. That's all I'm looking for (with these books that is).
I did attempt to resist reading them at the start, but then I thought that for once I'd like to be in one of these popular sensations, so I took the plunge (I think around the time that Goblet of Fire was due to come out).
In my opinion, despite what many fans say, she is not in the same league as C.S. Lewis, Roald Dahl, or the (unfortunately lesser known) Susan Cooper. But, still, quite entertaining. (Maybe you don't think much of them, either, I don't know.)
"in on one" I meant to say. Anyway, I've used up my quota for today, so I'll sign off for now.
Wow, friendly people over here ...
"...or bad in that they're learning to commodify learning by buying more products full of facile understandings and simplistic language."
What's wrong with simplistic language? I'm a notoriously slow reader. It usually takes me about a month to read a book, I don't know why. But this doesn't seem to apply to the Harry Potter books. Somehow I'm able to just breeze through them with a clear picture of what's going on in my head. The simplistic language is one of my favorite aspects of the books. It always confuses me why people talk about simplicity like it's a bad thing.
Is it intellectually stimulating or escapism? Who cares? In my mind, it's an amazing story with tons of interesting characters, and an entire universe unto itself. Whether or not anyone agrees with me is their business as far as I'm concerned. Just different perspectives is all.
"...or bad in that they're learning to commodify learning by buying more products full of facile understandings and simplistic language."
Wow. That's pretty wordy. I mean, really, whatever happened to brevity being the soul of wit? What garbage.
If the language is simplistic, I think it is an essential reflection of who she is writing about. These are regular school kids. It should read like Grange Hill with Spells.
I can remember at high school we would banter and spar words, but really in our exchanges the most creative we got was to paraphrase and expand around the works of Douglas Adams and Monty Python.
I think her craft lies in the rich tapestry of the story and the colourful characters, even if they are described in a vanilla language. (Though vanilla itself is a subtle complexity itself).
"Eolake, I wonder if it might be an idea to make it so that people must have an account in order to post here."
I've been thinking the same thing. Or back up the "use a name" rule by deleting any comment left by an anonymous. Most of them aren't worth reading as it is.
After the brouhaha the last time I attempted a modicum of moderation?
I really don't understand why there was such a fuss the last time you tried to do something, but note that a different method may yield a different result. Before you took the approach of approving every comment before it could be posted. This time all you would be doing is adding a requirement: you need a name to post.
This is not the slightest bit unreasonable. Many forums don't censor their posters but they still require you to register an account. This could be a happy medium if it works. Your long time commentators won't feel like they're in danger of being censored and the personal insults should be reduced (if not eliminated) when actual effort is needed to post them.
Eolake said...
"Sure, my patience is infinite."
Mine is not. Minions, bring me the boy, NOW!!!!!
And leave me in peace, I need to read the book and see how I'll win.
I'd better win. If I die, that Rowling muggle is going to hear from me afterwards!
Oh, I didn't mean that her language was PURE AND SIMPLE in the good sense. I meant, she's actually quite hard to read, Ms. Rowling, because her language is full of pomposities and cliches which are the sound of someone trying to be impressive. I fully recognize the difficulty of writing plain, direct, honest prose. I don't think Rowling does this at all. Don't put me on record as the guy who sides with unnecessary complexity.
And by the way, don't you find much of the structure and plot rather predictable? I can't find the story (utterly independent of the language) interesting because it rolls out in my mind long before she gets around to pedantically explaining it to me.
I'm not someone who objects to "escapism" or "fantasy." I'm way into The Lord of the Rings, for example (and there are some serious pomposities there, too!) and I enjoy a good summer read -- ya know, a detective novel, maybe Dashiell Hammet or Ellery Queen ilk.
I'm not too down on Rowling. My question wasn't so much, "Will she stand the test of critical acclaim? Is she a highly refined artiste?" That's a silly question, to me. Rather, I was asking about the PHENOMENON. Will these so-difficult-to-reach eight-year-old boys go on to read other books later in their lives, or will the Potter phenomenon evaporate because of the commodification? They'll only ever be interested in books that have movies to go along with them, for example? Or books with attendant video games? If that happens, then we haven't managed to capture their imaginations with reading, at all, now have we? They still need the "magic" of passive unimaginative consumption, rather than mental activity.
In fact, all this was pretty clear in my initial posts in this thread. But somehow we got sidetracked into "Final-Id thinks highfalutin complexity is better than an honest good read," something I neither said nor implied. The low-brows have derailed the conversation. Again. With a simple, "Well, *I* like it and that OUGHT to be enough to make it worth *MY* while."
It's not. If you liked *MURDER* would you try to defend it so idiotically? Defense of a concept requires reason and support.
Lol, easy dude, we're all friends here. To answer your questions, no, I didn't find them predictable. I mean yeah, I knew certain things because some of my friends had been fans for years before I finally got into it(one of them kept asking if Sirius was dead yet while I was reading the fifth book), but the only thing I've really predicted was who the Half-Blood Prince was. And that was more of a lucky guess than anything else.
As to whether it'll lead kids to read anything else, eh, doesn't really matter much to me. They'll do whatever it is they end up doing, and hopefully have enjoyed their lives a little more for Harry Potter's existance. I know I have. Again, this is all my personal opinion, and I'm not trying to convert anyone to it. Different perspectives.
Pottermania certainly seems to be an explosive phenomenon. The only other thing recently to see mass crowds showing up(except gaming systems and cell phones) was the Star Wars movies. Since I saw the last three in opening week in almost empty theaters, and HP 5 was on three screens overlapping show times when I saw it, but only 30 people were in the with us, I am beginning to suspect that Pottermania is a product of the press. Unless all the true Potter fans were reading Deathly Hallows and not watching OotP.
There are things which have stood the test of time. Batman must have been going about 70 years, Superman 75. Similarly the Saint as well. Bond first hit the book stands when Liz cam to the thrown. Jeeves and Wooster is 90+ years, and Thomas the Tank Engine is over 50.
I can see no reason why Potter will not become the next father to son hand me down. It's just potter blasted from a first novel with a big idea behind it to a multimedia business overnight, whereas the others started as books or comics and took a slower evolution via radio, print and film.
Like it or not Potter is here to stay, and is not a fad. It has captured the popular imagination, and become pervasive in our society. A Beatles of the literaryu world.
Maybe I should get the first book so I can join the fray about the writing.
But one thing I do remember: the books were a huge hit even before the first film arrived. So the films are not the reason people read the books.
I bought the first book two years ago and still haven't read it. Wanted to see what all the fuss was about. Turns out I wasn't half as interested as I thought I was.
Peaceful Blade said...
I really don't understand why there was such a fuss the last time you tried to do something
Because even Eolake admitted that he DELETED AN OPINION he did not like and HE CONFESSED it. It's called CENSORSHIP, remember?
And this "dick" person attacked another blogger simply because the person said they liked reading the bible. How is that telling people they are going to hell?
Geesh, does two plus two still equal four?
"It's called CENSORSHIP, remember?"
The term "censorship" is only meaningful when the law and oppression is involved. When moderating comments on your own blog, it is the right of the blog owner to do whatever he wants. If you have a blog, you can keep or delete whatever comments you like or don't like. It's your right, it's my right, it's anybody's right.
Peaceful Blade said...
I've been thinking the same thing. Or back up the "use a name" rule by deleting any comment left by an anonymous. Most of them aren't worth reading as it is.
We feel the same way about some of your confusing and wordy novel responses.
If you have a blog, you can keep or delete whatever comments you like or don't like. It's your right, it's my right, it's anybody's right.
so you would rather have everybody agree with you regardless. yeah, that makes everything really cozy doesn't it Mr Stobblehouse.
A: I almost never delete any comments.
Second: I leave in lots and lots of comments I don't agree with.
And 3: Even if I *did* only keep comments with I agree with, it would be my right as the blog owner. If you have a blog, you can do the same thing.
If you often have problems with your comments being removed from other people's blogs around the Net, I do suggest you make your own blog so you can shout your opinions from the rooftops.
final identity, you are the master of pomposity. I don't know if it's quite fair to accuse others of this. And judging by your comments on this blog, you're not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.
P.S. I don't read the Potter books, so this isn't a gut reaction to your criticism. But you live in a glass house.
"We feel the same way about some of your confusing and wordy novel responses."
Haha! You used a name! You, sir or madame, whichever you may be (For I am too prudent to check myself. Far too many bruises from the last time I did) deserve a cookie! ^_^
You'd have a point if I were unnecessarily wordy. As it stands the concepts we're often discussing require the utmost thoroughness and care for the discussion to be worth a damn. Your criticisms could be put to better use elsewhere, friend. ;)
"final identity, you are the master of pomposity. I don't know if it's quite fair to accuse others of this. And judging by your comments on this blog, you're not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer."
Where exactly is the argument in this? Anything AT ALL that's directed at the question rather than at the person?
... ad hominem strikes again ...
It's based not just on your comments in this topic, but on all your comments on this blog that I've read. You do tend toward the pompous, the pretentious, and the pseudo-intellectual.
"But one thing I do remember: the books were a huge hit even before the first film arrived. So the films are not the reason people read the books."
Exactly. And ya know, I can't help but notice that it never really got any negative reviews until after it became popular.
I'm guessing most of the negativity comes from the stereotypes or cliches or whatever people call them, but it seems to me that even a lot of these get turned on their head in the later books. The spoiled bully becomes a scared boy that bit off way more than he could chew. The clumbsy, loser kid suddenly becomes one of the most badass characters in the story. The almighty wizard that can do no wrong gets some nasty skeletons pulled out of his closet. And Snape switches back and forth from possible, maybe good-guy to possible, might be bad-guy like 40 times in the story.
In any case, it seems kinda like nit-picking to me. Even if what the author's doing there is wrong(and personally, I don't think it is), it seems like a really minor flaw compared to everything the books do right. Lol, I meant this comment to be like one paragraph, I don't know how it turned into a rant.
"Ron's owl gets caught in the fan"???
Oy! Now you've gone and let go a real spoiler!
Poor Ron. I was such a fan (oops! sorry for the word) of cute little Pigwidgeon.
Eolake said...
I can only write totally on "inkstink".
Ah, come on! I'm sure your writing's not THAT smelly!
Or you could try another brand of pens?...
through the flame said...
"No thumping going on here smartass, just a book I enjoy reading."
Wow, a case of Ace Ventura syndrome. If even a guy's ASS is smart, imagine what he can to with his head! ;-)
Actually, I sometimes enjoy thumbing through the Bible myself. Can be rather informative.
"I think they can take that stick out of your ass on an outpatient basis these days."
Yes, it's just amazing the miraculous feats that primitive Muggle Medicine can achieve these days. Arthur Weasley told me the other day they close wounds by actually sewing them like fabric... and it works! Incredible.
"it might be an idea to make it so that people must have an account in order to post here."
Isn't it possible to just deactivate the "anonymous" option? I mean, I have an account, but I like to add cool titles next to my name on occasions.
I agree with you, Joe Dick: I read Harry Potter as pure, uncomplicated enjoyment as well. The prose is not extraordinary, but these books are "well written" as far as storytelling goes. Very well written, in fact. So who cares if the language is not sophisticated or deeply educational? Actuall, since English isn't my first language, it is educational for me. Every few pages, I have to open a dictionary. Just learned what "gormless" means in chapter 8. Oops! Um... "spoiler warning"? ;-)
Amusing: I too got curious when GoF came out. Picked book 1, read the back cover, had a sample of the beginning, and decided to give it a try. The rest is history.
Which is why schoolboys worldwide are taught at school about how Pascal read the Harry Potter series. ;-P
For those who are hesitating to read the series, I can give you some non-spoiler impressions about the 7th book so far:
- Early on, Chapter 5 proves that even with simple writing and rather ordinary descriptions, Rowling can build and maintain an excellent nerve-racking suspense. The chapter's ambiguous name doesn't help you guess, it just titillates.
- Similarly, the author said a good while ago that two main characters are to die. It was clever, because believe me, you can't be sure you know who they are... or who they're not! Is X really dead? Is Y to be considered a main character? Is Z (a.k.a. Pigwidgeon) aware that Muggle electrical appliances are dangerous? Did Rowling include Ickle Voldiekins in that figure? The total body count is already far over two. Maybe closer to twenty, if you count the stand-ins and stuntmen and the indians' horses...
- Finally, at the end of book 6 I had a theory about who R.A.B. was. And I was right! (proudly kvelling) But I'm not telling!!! You figure out the clues yourselves if you're true fans. Or you jump to page [BLEEP!] and check it really was [BLEEEEEEEEEP!] as I said on www.[BLEEP-BLEEP!].org.
(Hint: R.A.B. doesn't stand for Harry, Albus & Bilbo. Besides, Albus went into hiding after that infringement lawsuit from Gandalf, while Voldemort settled out of court with Saruman.)
Jes said...
"What's wrong with simplistic language?"
Well, seeing that my 3 y/o nephew is beginning to read, I'm sure writing kiddie books destined to him in simple language and with very simple stories is an Unforgivable crime. One that gets you immediately sent to Azkaban for life! Just like performing a Hakuna Matata. ;-)
"Isn't it possible to just deactivate the "anonymous" option?"
Would be handy, but no, the only options are Everybody, or Registered Users.
Just to be clear, ... oh never mind. :) I'm not anti-Harry_potter. I'm just pro-other-stuff. I hope to see the wave of reading continue, but it has hyet to be seen whether the transfer is likely.
Among the people I know who have read this series, the movie was what started it. I only read the first book because I had seen the first movie and liked it. Even then I didn't see it at the theatres, only on video. Some people I know have only seen the movies and will not read the books - but then they are not readers anyway and don't really read anything else - except the sports page.
People do seem to have a tendency to crap all over things that are popular just because they are popular. Everyone - or a lot of people - like to think of themselves as someone who doesn't follow the crowd, as someone who is unique. People aren't, unfortunately, or at least it's likely there have been very few in history who have been.
I admit I resisted reading them at first because they were so popular. Final Identity has a point when he talks about being able to foresee plot developments easily. Sometimes it seems like Rowling thinks her readers are idiots that way, revealing something after 100 pages that we saw coming on page 2. Remember that they're supposed to be children's books - not that children are idiots either, but you know what I mean.
In the end, what matters to each of us is what we think of them ourselves. Critics - professional or amateur - sometimes seem like they think they're doing a public service by warning people away from something they think is bad.
I've enjoyed the series, and to me that's all that really matters.
Final Identity said...
"Will these so-difficult-to-reach eight-year-old boys go on to read other books later in their lives, or will the Potter phenomenon evaporate because of the commodification?"
In France, they've taken a taste in reading, and now turn to the well-written classics. Like Treasure Island, f'rinstance. This can't be a bad thing, surely?
"They'll only ever be interested in books that have movies to go along with them, for example? Or books with attendant video games?"
It would be a wrong reason, sure. But there's nothing wrong with videogames themselves. In less than 10 years, I expect, they'll finally be as respected as cinema, comics or manga, which were also accused of every imaginable youth-corrupting influence in the past. Like books, they can be mediocre, even pure garbage (nazi propaganda, for example), or absolute masterpieces. Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Okami, Final Fantasy... A videogame can also be a great way to live a vicarious adventure, or even the atmosphere of a historical period with some luck (Medal Of Honor, anyone?).
"If you liked *MURDER* would you try to defend it so idiotically?"
Actually, murder amateurs defend it far worse. They stick noble labels on it to make it a "duty". Be it patriotic or divine. Right, "brother Osama"?
"(one of them kept asking if Sirius was dead yet while I was reading the fifth book)"
People like this make the death penalty a legitimate punishment. "Did Harry Potter defeat Voldemort yet" in the 7th book I'm halfway through? Well, I'm pretty confident he'll win, but I don't *KNOW* that yet, it's just my own intuition. I enjoy livig the story with Harry, even though his own doubts seem quite excessive to my twice as aged mind. But he's only ruddy 17, let's give him a break. :-)
Oh, speaking of spoilers: the last word of the story IS NOT "scar". This word isn't anywhere in the last sentence. Right, now you know how the story ends, don't you? ;-)
"but the only thing I've really predicted was who the Half-Blood Prince was. And that was more of a lucky guess than anything else."
Luck had nothing to do with my identifying of R.A.B. after I finished Book#6. These initials don't exactly fit many characters, do they? I just used my pretty little head. Didn't even get a scar. ;-)
I agree with you, Jes: kids should be encouraged to read, but as a pleasure, not as some kind of homework, ever. I myself have read mountains (literally? perhaps) of books, but I just can't focus on a mandatory studying book. You can't force reading any more than culture, intelligence or kindness. Or love.
"Thomas the Tank Engine is over 50."
I suspect Bob the Builder is much younger than his naive looks suggest, though. The cell phones and apparently computer-made animation (in a very classic style, I admit) tipped me off.
"Like it or not Potter is here to stay, and is not a fad."
I believe likewise. Too much classic quality to fade away. Like LOTR, it's a carefully constructed fantasy universe. For instance, did you know that you can't conjure up food? You can only summon some from a known location, or eventually MULTIPLY it. "Food is the first of the five Principal Exceptions to Gamp's Law of Elemental Transfiguration." And I think money is another one, which is why wizards need banks. (Ah, yes, there, I've found official confirmation for money.)
Oh, incidentally: I've been told that Harry didn't simply use a Time-Turner from the nearby Ministry room to save Sirius because they were all destroyed during the incidents of that night. Somebody assured me that there are officially no more of those devices available. Me, I thought Harry already knew that he hadn't seen himself saving Sirius, and therefore knew he wad bound to fail. Or he was just blinded by grief, the same way he forgot about the magic mirror.
[Eolake:] "But one thing I do remember: the books were a huge hit even before the first film arrived. So the films are not the reason people read the books."
Brilliantly reflected, my dear Watson! The books established their own intrinsic merit. In fact, the main interest of the movies is in being "the adaptation of the books", visually. I'm still grumpy that the 4th movie's beginning showed nothing of the spectacular Quidditch World Cup final! :-P
To further back my comment on Rowling's non-spoiler ("not one, but two main characters die"), I've already lost count on how many victims fall to Voldie so far. Guy's been really busy, and corpses are piling up most everywhere. But up to Chapter [BLEEP!], Hermione's still alive. So far. It's more than can be said about [BLEEP!], [BLEEP!], [BLEEP!], [BLEEP!], and a whole bunch of hapless [BLEEEEEEEP!].
Whoops! Sorry, was that another BLEEPing spoiler? I'm worse than Hagrid sometimes... Oi shouldn't've said that!
censorship sucks said...
"How is that telling people they are going to hell?"
I seem to recal numerous occasions where bible-brandishers explicitly and textually wrote that others were going to Hell for not sharing their exact exacerbated beliefs. It seams that being a moderate believer while still using one's common sense is officially considered worthy of eternal damnation to some.
Which makes me wonder why, being already given the maximum sentence, I shouldn't go kidnap, abuse and murder children, since my punishment can become no worse? Perhaps because I try to use that organ located between my ears.
And while at it, to be really evil, I think I'll smoke pot once, read Sade, have unmarried sex with a consenting adult of the opposite gender, and vote for the Democrats! Oh yes, and speak the Seven Words every time I feel in a bad mood.
"so you would rather have everybody agree with you regardless. yeah, that makes everything really cozy doesn't it Mr Stobblehouse."
DON'T-SAY-THAT-NAME!!! It's "You-know-who", or "He-who-must-not-be-named", and his black-hearted followers may call him "the Dark Blog Moderator". But if you speak his actual name, he'll find you and wipe all realism from your mind with a forbidden Hakuna Matata Unforgivable curse.
You're taking dangerous chances in these times of universal terror, buddy. From now on, I'll deny ever meeting you.
Eolake said...
"If you often have problems with your comments being removed from other people's blogs around the Net, I do suggest you make your own blog so you can shout your opinions from the rooftops."
Uh... sorry, but http://shoutingmyopinionsfromtherooftops.blogspot.com/ is already taken. Try something else.
Anonymous said...
"final identity, you are the master of pomposity."
While you, Anonymous, are the undisputed master of stealthy subtlety. Say, why don't you post pics of your medals on http://shoutingmyopinionsfromtherooftops.blogspot.com/?
Final Identity said...
"... ad hominem strikes again ... "
Well, even master wizard Albus Dumbledore couldn't find a fully efficient parade against THAT Unforgivable hex. Have you tried an Apu Mahasavemapetioon or a Habeas Corpus? They're rather good for DADA (Defense Against Dark Arts).
Ad Hominem can be quite painful, but it causes no lasting harm. Except maybe to the IQ of the caster (the castigater?).
Anonymous said...
"You do tend toward the pompous, the pretentious, and the pseudo-intellectual."
Well, Mother Teresa did spend her life tending toward the lepers. So, St Final, when's your canonization ceremony? I hope I'm invited!
(Don't mind me, I'll just stand in front of the canon.)
"And Snape switches back and forth from possible, maybe good-guy to possible, might be bad-guy like 40 times in the story."
Wow, you've counted them? Which story of the seven books was that? ;-)
"Dear Herwyny, how do I love yoo, let me count the ways." -- (Viktor Krum, jock attempting to write poetry.)
Not Hermione, my friends: it is Harry Potter who dies. And Lord Voldemort. In fact, everybody dies in the end. And Hogwarts is completely destroyed.
But all Muggles end up safe and sound. It was all part of the diabolical plan of the Muggle Prime Minister, who recycled his Iraq tactics, and through a clever leak in classified technology provided an atomic bomb to the Dark Lord. "This is the ultimate weapon, it can destroy anything", he said. And Voldemort, who can always tell when somebody's lying to him, naturally believed it and... "activated the weapon" at the start of the final battle.
The Axis of Evil, those plotting unintegrated people living in our midst, a.k.a. "wizards", are finally eradicated. The Muggle world is safe for good.
"Mission accomplished!"
Oh, ruddy brilliant plan, that. Now who's going to help us find treatments for the MUGGLE vampires and werewolves? Help me, Mummy!
Post a Comment