Harry Potter-Am I the only one that doesn't give a damn? [Archive]

Mr. Anderson

Jun 18, 2003, 08:21 AM

Originally posted by iGAV
What's even worse, is that someone actually stole a TNT lorry filled with the bloody things... :rolleyes: :p :p

hahahaha! That is so damn funny - you have a link on that one?

Ah, the stupidity of it all....and they're having a midnight sale in most book stores here in the states. Be the first one....blah!

I've even read them, they're entertaining and very creative. Got tons of kids interested in reading. But even though I'll probably eventually read the new one, I'm not going to go wait in line to get one. Silliness......:rolleyes:

D

jethroted

Jun 18, 2003, 08:32 AM

iGav

Jun 18, 2003, 08:33 AM

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
hahahaha! That is so damn funny - you have a link on that one?

Your wish is my....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/2996718.stm

pivo6

Jun 18, 2003, 09:34 AM

My local library was taking orders for this to raise some money. Since i haven't read any of the books yet, and my children are still too small (5 and 3), I don't really care one way or the other.

I can't believe that someone would steal all of those books. It's not like they are the new Powermacs. :D

Mr. Anderson

Jun 18, 2003, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by pivo6

I can't believe that someone would steal all of those books. It's not like they are the new Powermacs. :D

you abvoiusly haven't been following the craze surrounding these books.

Wasn't a slip of paper with 40 some odd words written and signed by Rowling about the newest book auctioned on eBay for a huge sum?

Its totally nuts and people need to adjust their perspective.

D

iGav

Jun 18, 2003, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
Wasn't a slip of paper with 40 some odd words written and signed by Rowling about the newest book auctioned on eBay for a huge sum?

It went for £26k..... :eek: :eek: :eek:

I'm in the wrong business.... :p

evoluzione

Jun 18, 2003, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by iGAV
What's even worse, is that someone actually stole a TNT lorry filled with the bloody things... :rolleyes: :p :p

that's awesome, id have done it, sell em for a squid each, make a killin'

mind you, everytime i see TNT lorry, i think of a big truck filled with dynamite, shame it isn't so, best thing for 'em (the books, not the thieves :p )

Mr. Anderson

Jun 18, 2003, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by iGAV
It went for £26k..... :eek: :eek: :eek:

I'm in the wrong business.... :p

Well, you just have to come up with something that the masses can't live without.....her books and popularity even surprised her at first.

What will be interesting to see is what happens after Harry Potter is finished (book 7) and the movies are all out on dvd.....what will she do?

It'd be tough not to do something, especially for someone who is a creative type. Even with all of her money I'd still be on my computer making something....

D

evil

Jun 18, 2003, 11:08 AM

what is it about these books that the massess crave? it seems like nothing new or exciting -to me- but ...i dont like much. haha

Mr. Anderson

Jun 18, 2003, 11:24 AM

They're well thought out and well written. Good is good, bad is bad and you want the heroes to succeed and triumph and have the evil lose. They're quite entertaining too, very imaginative. Classic storytelling, well presented and fun.

As to why they're so popular? That's harder to explain.

D

medea

Jun 18, 2003, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
hahahaha! That is so damn funny - you have a link on that one?

Ah, the stupidity of it all....and they're having a midnight sale in most book stores here in the states. Be the first one....blah!

I've even read them, they're entertaining and very creative. Got tons of kids interested in reading. But even though I'll probably eventually read the new one, I'm not going to go wait in line to get one. Silliness......:rolleyes:

D
How can you say this is silliness, I would much rather see my child excited over a book rather than the norm of video games cartoons and crappy movies. The Harry Potter series has reiterated literature with children and that can never be a bad thing. And the series is definitely on par with C.S. Lewis britboy, just because you "make" or become popular doesnt automatically negate you into being shi...t.

iGav

Jun 18, 2003, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
Well, you just have to come up with something that the masses can't live without.....

Well that rules out nude photo's of myself then... :eek: :eek: :p

jelloshotsrule

Jun 18, 2003, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by medea
How can you say this is silliness, I would much rather see my child excited over a book rather than the norm of video games cartoons and crappy movies. The Harry Potter series has reiterated literature with children and that can never be a bad thing. And the series is definitely on par with C.S. Lewis britboy, just because you "make" or become popular doesnt automatically negate you into being shi...t.

kids sure... but explain my girlfriend's excitement! pleeeeease! hah

i can't compete with that little wizard.... :( ;)

Mr. Anderson

Jun 18, 2003, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by medea
How can you say this is silliness, I would much rather see my child excited over a book rather than the norm of video games cartoons and crappy movies.

And that is a good thing - but like any media driven event it gets out of hand. That's what I was talking about.

How many other authors have you ever heard of that have had a truck load of their most recent book stolen? :D

I'm all for getting the kids to read more - and once they're finished with Potter, they're going to find other things equally as good or even better.

D

britboy

Jun 18, 2003, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by medea
How can you say this is silliness, I would much rather see my child excited over a book rather than the norm of video games cartoons and crappy movies. The Harry Potter series has reiterated literature with children and that can never be a bad thing. And the series is definitely on par with C.S. Lewis britboy, just because you "make" or become popular doesnt automatically negate you into being shi...t.

Agreed. Getting kids into reading is a big step, and should be encouraged. My objection to the harry potter series though is that it introduces children to sorcery and witchcraft, in such a way that they think it's 'cool'. What's next? Getting them into devil-worship? Surely that's not something that you would actually *want*?

Mr. Anderson

Jun 18, 2003, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by britboy
What's next? Getting them into devil-worship? Surely that's not something that you would actually *want*?

ah, that's a false arguement. When I was in 7th-9th grade I would read anything on sci-fi and fantasy I could get my hands on. I had hundreds of books.

But it never made me think any of that was real....give kids some credit - they can expand they're imaginations a little and have fun. These books aren't evil.

And all the books revolve around the good and bad witches and wizards. Like the dark and light side of the force, or and good vs. evil story. In the end, good triumphs over evil.

D

amnesiac1984

Jun 18, 2003, 02:08 PM

Yeah come on britboy. I thought you were less of a soccer mum than that!!

So what do you think about the masterpiece that is Lord of the Rings, is that evil?

Witchcraft and sourcery don't and never had existed. So even if they did get into to it, what are they gonna do? Summon a demon that doesn't exist and pretend he kills everyone? Surely books about killing and violence and war should be far more concerning?

jelloshotsrule

Jun 18, 2003, 02:11 PM

while i hated the movie, and hate the hype the books get.... c'mon britboy... get your head out of queen mum's arse!

even the catholic church has backed off the whole "evil boosk" thing... and apparently it's on the list of recommended reading for kids by the american bishops...

amnesiac1984

Jun 18, 2003, 02:12 PM

BTW, I can't stand harry potter either

jelloshotsrule

Jun 18, 2003, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by amnesiac1984
BTW, I can't stand harry potter either

pushing for the avatar........ ;)

WinterMute

Jun 18, 2003, 02:22 PM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
c'mon britboy... get your head out of queen mum's arse!

Hey Jello, you need to think up some more Brit based slagging material, the Queen Mums arse is getting a bit worn out;) ;) ;) :D

I read the first two books, and while I agree with Mr. A that they are well written, I found them too childish and derivative, its the media frenzy I cant stand, its not great literature, but anything that gets kids reading is good.

Mr. Anderson

Jun 18, 2003, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by WinterMute
I read the first two books, and while I agree with Mr. A that they are well written, I found them too childish and derivative, its the media frenzy I cant stand, its not great literature, but anything that gets kids reading is good.

Ha, yeah, not exactly literature, but like I said, the stories are good.

I would recommend reading the other 2, they're much more developed and #4 is by far the better of the bunch. She does such a good job of making you want Harry and the rest to 'win' and see all the evil destroyed....

D

WinterMute

Jun 18, 2003, 02:32 PM

Well, I might just read them after all, I've got William Gibsons Pattern Recognition and Ken Mcleods Engines of Light trilogy to get through first.

medea

Jun 18, 2003, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by WinterMute
Hey Jello, you need to think up some more Brit based slagging material, the Queen Mums arse is getting a bit worn out;) ;) ;) :D

I read the first two books, and while I agree with Mr. A that they are well written, I found them too childish and derivative, its the media frenzy I cant stand, its not great literature, but anything that gets kids reading is good.
I would like to honestly know what you consider literature, perhaps you could name the last 5 or so books that you have read and please explain what it is too derivative of? I myself would definitely consider it literature and brillantly written, I am also sure that JK Rowling will become a liteary mainstay in due time.
Childish, why? Because it's basis is good vs. evil? I'd say that the struggle between good vs. evil is classic and should be welcome these days where people, and our children specifically, are becoming less and less sure of the difference, and I don't think the book handles the struggle simplistically in any.
I am in no way uncritical of the book, but I think it is a welcome addition to both childrens literature and literature period.

Mr. Anderson

Jun 18, 2003, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by WinterMute
Well, I might just read them after all, I've got William Gibsons Pattern Recognition and Ken Mcleods Engines of Light trilogy to get through first.

Is the Gibson book his new one?

I saw a hardback in Barnes and Noble a couple weeks ago, but I was going to wait until paperback.

What are the Engines of Light about?

D

scem0

Jun 18, 2003, 03:16 PM

Originally posted by caveman_uk
It's just a book

yeah and the bible is 'just a book' too.

Harry Potter is a great series if you ask me. I also like the direction they are going. People are actually dying. It's not so kidish.

Good job JK Rowling. Keep the good work up.

http://www.my-smileys.de/signs/77430bbce83afc89881430e177cabb9b.png

britboy

Jun 18, 2003, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by amnesiac1984

So what do you think about the masterpiece that is Lord of the Rings, is that evil?

That's different. The Lord of The Rings trilogy is not aimed at children, featuring children. Plus, is doesn't try and suggest that these things (elves, dwarfs, ents, wizards etc...although perhaps dwarfs still exist ;)) are present in our lives, and possible for anyone.

Mr. Anderson

Jun 18, 2003, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by britboy
That's different. The Lord of The Rings trilogy is not aimed at children, featuring children. Plus, is doesn't try and suggest that these things (elves, dwarfs, ents, wizards etc...although perhaps dwarfs still exist ;)) are present in our lives, and possible for anyone.

that's a matter of semantics...you really think that kids are running around believing that there are witches and wizards?

And even so, the witches in Rowling's books aren't worshiping the devil - there's no mention of religion what so ever in them. There is the Xmas holiday - so I think you need to be a little less worried about it.

D

wdlove

Jun 18, 2003, 03:35 PM

I also think that the very positive side to these books is that it's causing children to want to read. Just hope that they will continue to enjoy reading!

medea

Jun 18, 2003, 03:41 PM

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
that's a matter of semantics...you really think that kids are running around believing that there are witches and wizards?

And even so, the witches in Rowling's books aren't worshiping the devil - there's no mention of religion what so ever in them. There is the Xmas holiday - so I think you need to be a little less worried about it.

D
I'd have to agree with Anderson on this one. And if your going by the bible you should realize that there are at least 17 different meanings for the term "witchcraft" but unfortunately people started to belive the terms were all one and the same, and several phrases such as "never suffer a witch to live..." were actually changed from the original meaning, a better choice would be "black magic" or one who uses magic to do harm.

vollspacken

Jun 18, 2003, 03:48 PM

Harry Potter is crap and the nerdy brat drives me nuts!!!

Potter, BE GONE!!!

;) vSpacken

wdlove

Jun 18, 2003, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by vollspacken
Harry Potter is crap and the nerdy brat drives me nuts!!!

Potter, BE GONE!!!

;) vSpacken

I think that Harry Potter is a great role model for children. He was able to overcome a very difficult childhood.

jelloshotsrule

Jun 18, 2003, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by WinterMute
Hey Jello, you need to think up some more Brit based slagging material, the Queen Mums arse is getting a bit worn out;) ;) ;) :D

ahh, that's just because you weren't around when the joke started... it's pseudo-old school. ;)

it really only applies to britboy himself though.

britboy

Jun 18, 2003, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
ahh, that's just because you weren't around when the joke started... it's pseudo-old school. ;)

it really only applies to britboy himself though.

Yeah. There can be only one......queen mum's boy......or something like that ;)

britboy

Jun 18, 2003, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by medea
I'd have to agree with Anderson on this one. And if your going by the bible you should realize that there are at least 17 different meanings for the term "witchcraft" but unfortunately people started to belive the terms were all one and the same, and several phrases such as "never suffer a witch to live..." were actually changed from the original meaning, a better choice would be "black magic" or one who uses magic to do harm.

Agreed. "Black magic" would be a more apt term. Other than that, I stand by my feelings. It isn't anything to do with religion, but rather just the way I feel.

vollspacken

Jun 18, 2003, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by wdlove
I think that Harry Potter is a great role model for children. He was able to overcome a very difficult childhood.

I don't want my children to model themselves after Potter... wait, I don't have children... hmm, I don't even have a girlfriend anymore... ;)

what about this:
Bill Gates + Harry Potter = Barry Gatter??? a nerdy guy riding a broomstick and turning friendly macs into evil wintel boxes with his wicked magic wand...

wdlove

Jun 18, 2003, 06:44 PM

I think that Harry Potter would battle against Bill Gates to overcome his monoply on the computer scene. Harry Potter would be a Mac Fan! :cool:

vollspacken

Jun 18, 2003, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by wdlove
I think that Harry Potter would battle against Bill Gates to overcome his monoply on the computer scene. Harry Potter would be a Mac Fan! :cool:

but what mac would he use then? I think a modded LC... maybe a IIci... ;)

tazo

Jun 18, 2003, 07:16 PM

i really dont care for Harry Potter, but to say that harry potter leads to satanic cult following, witchcraft, is asinine. Sounds like something spewed from the ultraconservativees. Remember people, there are republicans, conservatives, and ultraconservatives!

WinterMute

Jun 18, 2003, 09:01 PM

Originally posted by medea
I would like to honestly know what you consider literature, perhaps you could name the last 5 or so books that you have read and please explain what it is too derivative of? (snip)
I am in no way uncritical of the book, but I think it is a welcome addition to both childrens literature and literature period.

OK, lets see, LOTR - Tolkien, a beautiful leather bound copy my mum gave me last year only just finished it, hadnt read LORT for a few years, this was the 9th or 10th time.

Widow for one year - John Irvine

Look to windward - Iain M Banks

Stalingrad - (I forget)

Distraction - Bruce Sterling

Last 5 books.

As to what I consider literature, I'm cerainly no snob, I really look for character development, complexity and motivations, as well as real and creative relationships, a solid and well developed plot that can hide it's twists without labouring the point and well written, believable dialog. Thats for starters...

Characterisations have to speak to me directly, wether good or bad, I love a villian as much as the good guy, in fact the best characters are both good and bad, Cheradenine Zakalwe from Banks's "Use of Weapons" is a personal favourite.

I would argue that Rowling calls heavily on Blytons Famous Five and Secret Seven novels, has more than a passing nod to CS Lewis's Narnia Chronicals, and owes a debt to Stephen King and Peter Struab in both plot development and child character portrayal. I found very little to exite or interest me in the Potter books, they aren't bad, and I'll give them to my daughter when she's a good enough reader to appreciate them, but this hysterical media baying is too much for the substance of these novels.

If they get better as Mr. A suggests, I might give them a go, but it'll need a slow, rainey day:)

applemacdude

Jun 18, 2003, 09:09 PM

Uh...It's not Harry Potter, It's Harry Pothead ... The books are great though, it's better than Pokemon or Yu-gi-oh or any of that crap....Books give children a better imagination and it makes 'em think strait too

WinterMute

Jun 18, 2003, 09:14 PM

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
Is the Gibson book his new one?

I saw a hardback in Barnes and Noble a couple weeks ago, but I was going to wait until paperback.

What are the Engines of Light about?

D

Yes, Gibson's latest, a signed copy no less, no idea how good it is, I'll let you know.

Engines of light is based on the premise of a second human sphere of history in another galaxy, seeded by an alien race from people throughout history (abductees basically) and left to their own devices.

Add a shock visit from a group of political dissidents from our sphere who are given a light-speed engine design (hence titie) by a shadowy benefactor, and an impending invasion by an ancient and deadly foe, and you have a story about politics, space navigation, immortality and people caught in situations too big for them to understand. Plusva neat line in rounding upvand explaining all of the UFO crap...

So far, a good read, not as gripping as his Star Faction novels, but good anyway.

scem0

Jun 18, 2003, 10:23 PM

I think wdlove brought up some good points.

They make kids want to read. I know a lot of my friends hate reading because they have had traditional school books shoved down their throat, which are not generally well liked by most kids.

Harry Potter helps show them that books can be good.

HP gives kids a role-model. Harry Potter strives to bring peace into his world, and to banish evil. Isn't that a good lesson to teach children?

I'm not saying kids should try to perform wizardry or anything. And I don't think that kids will try to do something like that after reading Harry Potter. Parents who don't allow kids to read Harry Potter think they are keeping their kids from something that will skew their kid's view on the world (ie make them think there are witches and wizards, worship the devil, etc). but what they are really doing is stifling their imaginations.

http://www.my-smileys.de/signs/cdcb35acd7902df97d2eb5e6c320263b.png

Doctor Q

Jun 21, 2003, 06:04 PM

The Fedex truck just pulled up with our household's brand new copy of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Almost 100 years ago, there was similar excitement when the annual Oz book came out. L. Frank Baum wrote 14 of them before other authors took over the series. I think there will only be 7 Harry Potter books. Since there have been only 2 Harry Potter movies so far, I guess there will be 5 more of them.

Did anyone here go to a bookstore last night at midnight to be the first on their block to get a copy? I heard that people went in costume and a lot of kids got to stay up way past their bedtimes!

wdlove

Jun 21, 2003, 09:04 PM

Originally posted by scem0
I think wdlove brought up some good points.

They make kids want to read. I know a lot of my friends hate reading because they have had traditional school books shoved down their throat, which are not generally well liked by most kids.

Harry Potter helps show them that books can be good.

HP gives kids a role-model. Harry Potter strives to bring peace into his world, and to banish evil. Isn't that a good lesson to teach children?

I'm not saying kids should try to perform wizardry or anything. And I don't think that kids will try to do something like that after reading Harry Potter. Parents who don't allow kids to read Harry Potter think they are keeping their kids from something that will skew their kid's view on the world (ie make them think there are witches and wizards, worship the devil, etc). but what they are really doing is stifling their imaginations.

http://www.my-smileys.de/signs/cdcb35acd7902df97d2eb5e6c320263b.png

Very well said scem0. I think that a parent should read Harry Potter the a younger child. It would be a great time for the parent to impart their views on the child. A discussion of the book with a child of any age, caould onle be a positive experience!

iJon

Jun 21, 2003, 09:26 PM

i dont read harry potter, just because i dont like to read. but i am glad harry potter exists because i have learned harry potter is probably responsible for many young kids for reading.

iJon

shadowfax

Jun 21, 2003, 10:21 PM

scarlet, i must admit i don't give a damn either.

maybe if harry was a potsmoker among the srcerers stoned or something. that would be interesting.

Stelliform

Jun 21, 2003, 10:55 PM

All I know is that my wife (who reads on average 3 books a week) devours the Harry Potter Books. She is currently on page 156 of the new one. I bet she will be done tomorrow afternoon.

The Harry Potter Series is great. I mean the book is 870 pages! And you have kids who don't normally want to read taking that on!

Do any of you guys remember the Goosebumps craze of 5 or more years ago? The debate was very similar to the Harry Potter debate. :)

medea

Jun 21, 2003, 11:44 PM

Originally posted by Stelliform

Do any of you guys remember the Goosebumps craze of 5 or more years ago? The debate was very similar to the Harry Potter debate. :)
I would not compare Harry Potter to Goosebumps, those books are pure crap, but I'll agree that at least they got kids interested in reading.

Stelliform

Jun 22, 2003, 12:01 AM

Originally posted by medea
I would not compare Harry Potter to Goosebumps, those books are pure crap, but I'll agree that at least they got kids interested in reading.

Well I haven't read either, but the same arguments were made against both.

By the way, my wife is now on page 252. When I asked her if this book was as good as the others so far, all I got was a uh huh, and she flipped the page. :)

iindigo

Jun 22, 2003, 12:14 AM

My opinion on Harry Pooter:

scem0

Jun 22, 2003, 03:52 AM

They are VERY entertaining. Since the 3rd one I read the book the day I get it. I read the goblet of fire in one night (yes it took hours and hours - I was up till 8) and I read it before most other Americans because I bought it in England before it was out in the states :). They are very good, exciting, and well written.

Now, I am VERY annoyed by Harry Potter calenders, christmas decorations, and the like. Those are annoying. But the books are quite the opposite.

http://www.my-smileys.de/signs/cdcb35acd7902df97d2eb5e6c320263b.png

Nermal

Jun 22, 2003, 04:05 AM

Originally posted by vollspacken
what about this:
Bill Gates + Harry Potter = Barry Gatter??? a nerdy guy riding a broomstick and turning friendly macs into evil wintel boxes with his wicked magic wand...

Well how's this (http://www.joyoftech.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/001_300/259.html)? :)

groovebuster

Jun 22, 2003, 04:53 AM

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
I've even read them, they're entertaining and very creative. Got tons of kids interested in reading. But even though I'll probably eventually read the new one, I'm not going to go wait in line to get one. Silliness......:rolleyes:

Exactly my opinon. Even though I don't think Rowling is a very good author, she just accidently created a character people like. The books are fun to read (but the story is dragging once in a while), but far from world literature. I just stopped at a local book store here in Berlin yesterday and checked if they have the english copy (the german version comes in November) and they did, so I picked one up. Waiting in line for a book of that kind? NEVER EVER!!! :D Those people are crazy! ;)

So it's good that I am living in Germany I guess. No line ups for the english copies! ;)

groovebuster

vollspacken

Jun 22, 2003, 07:22 AM

Originally posted by Nermal
Well how's this (http://www.joyoftech.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/001_300/259.html)? :)

mawharharhar...

"rated ruthless"

:D :D :D

kiwi_the_iwik

Jun 22, 2003, 08:56 AM

Sorry guys - I love 'em.

They're a great read for young and old.

I was a bit sceptical when the HP books first came out on the world stage, but now I've read the first 4 (and am now reading the 5th - can't put the sucker down...), I think they can only be a good thing for children of all ages to get off their computers, and their beanbags in front of the TV and actually READ something.

Minds should be creative - and reading accelerates the creativity process. It's almost as if I've dusted out the cobwebs of imagination when I started reading J.K.Rowling's books - she's an author with a great descriptive talent, which is fairly uncommon in this day-and-age. Do yourself a favour and try reading the first book in the series - you'll be entertained.

I'm 33 with a 3 year old son, and in a respectable line of work - definitely NOT the demographic for these books. Yet, I was entertained...

;)

Roger1

Jun 22, 2003, 08:59 AM

Both my oldest son and I really enjoy the Harry Potter series. Christmas 2001 he received the first Harry Potter book, and after a struggle managed to work his way throught it (he was 7 at the time) This past Christmas he received the rest of the series, and I read them all in about 3 days. He recently finished the fourth book, and has the fifth on reservation at the library.

It has definately made a difference in my sons opinion of reading. He used to always want us to read to him, "because the book was too hard" even when it was age appropriate. I pointed out to him that he can't fully experience the book unless he reads it himself. Yes I helped him with big words (still do) but because he sits down and reads these big books, his reading comprehension is around the 5th-6th grad level (he will be in 4th grade this fall).

Doctor Q

Jun 22, 2003, 10:37 AM

Originally posted by medea
I would not compare Harry Potter to Goosebumps, those books are pure crap, but I'll agree that at least they got kids interested in reading. Sounds like you could describe The Adventures of Captain Underpants (http://www.cnn.com/2000/books/news/07/11/captain.underpants/) series the same way. They don't have many scholarly credentials, but 6- to 10-year-olds are wild about reading them.

Then there's Oh, Yuck!: The Encyclopedia of Everything Nasty (http://www.aaabooksearch.com/ISBN/0761107711). Kids will even read nonfiction if you give them something they find engrossing. Pun intended.

rainman::|:|

Jun 22, 2003, 11:19 AM

if you don't care about it...

why did you create a thread about it?

and guys, quit bashing Rowling-- she really doesn't give a damn about how much money she's making-- it was never intended to make money in the first place, and she has always been reluctant to do the movies. Her life right now does not consist of "milking the cash cow" but rather protecting her daughter from the media...

that said, i'm no HP freak, i'll probably watch the movies in the theater if the mood strikes me... have not read the books... and some of the hype is annoying. But is that any reason to attack a successful mother? If she found a way to become financially secure while sharing her art with the world, who are you to judge her.

:rolleyes:

pnw

medea

Jun 22, 2003, 11:33 AM

Originally posted by paulwhannel
if you don't care about it...

why did you create a thread about it?

and guys, quit bashing Rowling-- she really doesn't give a damn about how much money she's making-- it was never intended to make money in the first place, and she has always been reluctant to do the movies. Her life right now does not consist of "milking the cash cow" but rather protecting her daughter from the media...

that said, i'm no HP freak, i'll probably watch the movies in the theater if the mood strikes me... have not read the books... and some of the hype is annoying. But is that any reason to attack a successful mother? If she found a way to become financially secure while sharing her art with the world, who are you to judge her.

:rolleyes:

pnw

well said.

Doctor Q

Jun 22, 2003, 12:29 PM

Observer #1: What's wrong with all these kids and parents? They obsess about the release of the next Harry Potter book and movie, speculating on every minute detail, wait in long lines to see/buy it, and spend all their time talking about it with each other when they could be doing something more productive, like using their computer.

Observer #2: What's wrong with all these MacRumors members? They obsess about the release of the next Mac OS and processor, speculating on every minute detail, wait in long lines to see/buy it, and spend all their time talking about it with each other when they could be doing something more productive, like reading a book.

voicegy

Jun 22, 2003, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
Wasn't a slip of paper with 40 some odd words written and signed by Rowling about the newest book auctioned on eBay for a huge sum?

Its totally nuts and people need to adjust their perspective.

D

Oh, jeez, I couldn't help but immediately compare the Potter craze to, uh, well...most of us in here who hang on every rumor and word uttered about a computer company. Of course, OUR reasons and actions are totally justified....;)

(BTW, I couldn't care less about Potter either, but that's just my taste...and opinion)

jelloshotsrule

Jun 22, 2003, 01:19 PM

well. like i said, i haven't read the books, don't plan to. i saw the first movie. wasn't impressed at all.

that said..... i stood in line at midnight to buy the book for my girlfriend, who may not have been able to get a copy for a few days otherwise.

it's just me being the man. eh sluggy? ;)

jefhatfield

Jun 22, 2003, 01:30 PM

i have never read the books and i don't plan to

i did see the first movie and i liked it better than lord of the rings though most people i know liked lord of the rings better, but i found even though the movie lord of the rings was very well done, it took itself too seriously

but lord of the rings will sell a lot like the star wars movies did

star wars has kept things fresh because they keep it fun and this is why the harry potter movie was so great on many levels (it's fun, a little serious because harry and co. have something to accomplish and a moral to the story, it's made for children but not so much that it is like the teletubbies)

Roger1

Jun 22, 2003, 01:59 PM

Doctor Q:

Observer #1: What's wrong with all these kids and parents? They obsess about the release of the next Harry Potter book and movie, speculating on every minute detail, wait in long lines to see/buy it, and spend all their time talking about it with each other when they could be doing something more productive, like using their computer.

Observer #2: What's wrong with all these MacRumors members? They obsess about the release of the next Mac OS and processor, speculating on every minute detail, wait in long lines to see/buy it, and spend all their time talking about it with each other when they could be doing something more productive, like reading a book.

Well, I can't wait for HP 5 to come out in ebook, so I can get my computer fix and my Harry Potter fix at the same time, so nya, nya, nya :D :p ;)

scem0

Jun 22, 2003, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
well. like i said, i haven't read the books, don't plan to. i saw the first movie. wasn't impressed at all.

that said..... i stood in line at midnight to buy the book for my girlfriend, who may not have been able to get a copy for a few days otherwise.

it's just me being the man. eh sluggy? ;)

the movies are stupid and childish. The books are entertaining.

Read the first book. It is short, 1 day is plenty of time to read it. And when you finish I wouldn't be suprised if you went and read the second book in the same day, and by the end of the week have finished the series.

That's how I would be.

http://www.my-smileys.de/signs/cdcb35acd7902df97d2eb5e6c320263b.png

WinterMute

Jun 22, 2003, 04:33 PM

I think the main problem here is that HP books are not getting kids to read anything other than Harry bloody Potter, there's absolutely no evidence of increased book sales from other authors, well except the bloke who wrote Subtle Knife, Amber Spyglass etc.

This from a publishing industry bod on a BBC literary forum show.

shadowfax

Jun 22, 2003, 04:34 PM

Originally posted by scem0
That's how I would be. that right there is reason enough to think jello probably wouldn't go in for it at all ;)

jelloshotsrule

Jun 22, 2003, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by scem0

That's how I would be.

[imhtt://www.my-smileys.de/signs/cdcb35acd7902df97d2eb5e6c320263b.png[/img]

you'd also be the sort to have an annoying sign on every single post you make.... so i guess to each their own.

i much prefer the chronicles of narnia, which soon i will get around to re-reading.

shadowfax

Jun 22, 2003, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
i much prefer the chronicles of narnia, which soon i will get around to re-reading. THAT was some fabulous reading, very rich in symbolism and meaning and yet very entertaining, for children and adults alike.

have you read the lord of the rings as well? Lewis and Tolkien were the best of friends, and their writing has a lot of similarities (though tolkien paid a lot more attention to detail)

jelloshotsrule

Jun 22, 2003, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by Shadowfax
THAT was some fabulous reading, very rich in symbolism and meaning and yet very entertaining, for children and adults alike.

have you read the lord of the rings as well? Lewis and Tolkien were the best of friends, and their writing has a lot of similarities (though tolkien paid a lot more attention to detail)

i read the c.s. lewis series in like 7th/8th grade... i just now got a copy of the whole set in a big ass hardcover book... with an awesome cover. has a great painting of aslan on it.

i read the hobbit, fellowship, and part of two towers in 6th grade... haven't read any of it since. however, i listened to the fellowship on cd, and saw the movies of course... i might listen ot the return of the king on cd, prior to the movie.

it's that attention to detail that makes him great, but also scares off bad/slow readers like me... ;)

shadowfax

Jun 22, 2003, 05:37 PM

hey, no shame in slow reading. i tend to take about an hour for 20-25 pages with novels and such, so i am pretty slow myself. but i like to think of it as giving you a chance to slow down, process, and enjoy it more than the fast readers :)

Rower_CPU

Jun 22, 2003, 05:39 PM

Narnia books are great. Did anyone see the shows on PBS?

jelloshotsrule

Jun 22, 2003, 05:39 PM

no, i'm a fast reader, i just never actually read... and when i do, i read like 10 books at a time... latest book i finished was fast food nation.. i'm now working on 2 john irving books, one book about christianity in "the simpsons"... and have started "the odyssey", "the brothers karamazov" and many others without finishing. ;)

EDIT: never saw the shows.

also, on my slate of books to read is another cs lewis... "a grief observed". it's a short one though. so we'll see.

shadowfax

Jun 22, 2003, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Narnia books are great. Did anyone see the shows on PBS? yeah, i saw at least some of them. i liked them, thought they were pretty well done. narnia is much easier to do low budget than LOTR, that's for sure.

AhmedFaisal

Jun 22, 2003, 06:10 PM

... as an avid fan of fantasy novels and magic novels I actually went and read the first book in the bookstore. After about 150 pages I put the book back, not liking it one bit. My take is a famous quote:

"When the sun of culture is low already, even dwarfs have long shadows"

I don't find it genuine at all, personally, most of the stuff she writes about has already been there, written by authors with more talent then hers. The only thing I give her is that she recompiled it in a way that is easy to read for the dyslexic generation fo PC-Junkie Kids that populates the world nowadays, although she doesn't use words like l33t yet so there is still hope.

I rather stick with more challenging literature like Otherland or good old Tolkien.
Cheers,

Ahmed

shadowfax

Jun 22, 2003, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by AhmedFaisal
The only thing I give her is that she recompiled it in a way that is easy to read for the dyslexic generation fo PC-Junkie Kids that populates the world nowadays, although she doesn't use words like l33t yet so there is still hope. did you do that on purpose? that is freaking hilarious man! good post all around. i heartily agree.

Doctor Q

Jun 23, 2003, 01:27 AM

Heard on the news:

Sales of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix made Saturday the biggest day in the history of e-commerce.

I guess the Apple iTunes Music Store didn't push quite as many units.

amnesiac1984

Jun 23, 2003, 12:34 PM

I think somebody mentioned the film being better than LOTR a page back.

Well, after all the hype about using child actors and such I thought it was attrocious. Before the film was released all we got was how well these kids had done as actors. I thought their acting was appalling. I mean yeah there are kids, but there were bits where it looked like the director had let the kids play the part how they wanted to without any guidance. So many times during the film I thought I would have made them act it again if I'd been directing, they needed some simple pointers and they could have been Okay. Hamiany (sp? whatever) was good tho and she seems to have a natural talent for acting but harry and ron were appaling. I've seen better acting at nativity plays in kindergarden!

AS for the "oh their just kids" argument, what about the kid from sixth sense, he was much younger was he not? And I thought he was very good at a much harder part to play.

AS for the books, never read em, don't intend to, although I'm fan of Narnia Tolkein and Raymond E Feists "The Magician" Triology.

Giaguara

Jun 30, 2003, 11:57 PM

i dont give a damn about harry potter.

kiwi_the_iwik

Jul 1, 2003, 06:10 AM

I read the fifth one last week - loved it.

It was like coming home to an old friend...

Now, I can't wait for the 6th in the series.

;)

groovebuster

Jul 1, 2003, 06:40 AM

Originally posted by amnesiac1984
Hamiany (sp? whatever) was good tho and she seems to have a natural talent for acting but harry and ron were appaling. I've seen better acting at nativity plays in kindergarden!

Yup! The dude that is playing Harry is acting so bad, I couldn't believe it. Especially his "suprised" look is so fake (forced big eyes and half open mouth) that probably my 2 y.o. daughter would have done it better than he did! ;) :D Reminds me so much of Macaulay Culkin in "Home alone" with his handicapped repertoire of emotional expressions... I really wonder why untalented kids like them get roles in multi million dollar productions since the streets are full with kids who can do better...? :rolleyes:

But Ron isn't that bad... and you are right, Hermione is played quite well by that little girl. And the adults of course are acting very well in the HP movies. My personal favourite are Snapes and Lucius Malfoy. Jason Isaacs is a really good actor, especially when playing mean characters! ;)

groovebuster

groovebuster

Jul 1, 2003, 06:59 AM

Originally posted by kiwi_the_iwik
I read the fifth one last week - loved it.

It was like coming home to an old friend...

Now, I can't wait for the 6th in the series.

;)

I finished the book last weekend and I think it was way too long. 760 pages for a story that could have been told in 300 pages. The first 150 pages are interesting and the last 150 pages, the middle is drrraaaagggiiinng and full of unnecessary stuff not important at all. And like always Rowling gets lost in details and then after a while she just remembers that she totally forgot to go on with other side plots she didn't mention for a very long time and brings them up again. Best example is Harry's little romance with that girl named Cho. The stuff that was going in between them is what happens maybe in a month, but not over a whole year. The whole thing is not authentic. I don't see a problem in Harry having a little affair that lasts for 6 weeks and then it's over, but like that? Especially since they meet like every day on several occasions?

And that's it with most things Rowling is telling in the book. They feel as if they were made fitting into a school year no matter what to stay with the "form factor" of the book...

Again I have to say that Harry Potter and his world of magic are a brilliant idea and are fun. But Rowling still is a lousy writer and the fact that her books become longer and longer doesn't really help...

groovebuster

Sun Baked

Jul 1, 2003, 07:43 AM

The overmarketing of hot franchises is getting to be a problem, too much of a good thing and these things start looking like big purple dinosaurs.

Everybody is in it for a quick buck, instead of trying to build a long lasting dynasty.

Even PBS who canned Bob Villa for accepting commercial contracts is in the commercial marketing game now, this is high evident in the Reading Rainbow vs. Seasame Street competition for dollars.

Reading Rainbow is looking like it's going to die, because the corporations funding these cannot link books to fuzzy attractive characters they can get licensing deals for. :(

Aeolius

Jul 1, 2003, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by britboy
What's next? Getting them into devil-worship?

nope... Dungeons & Dragons :D

Mr. Anderson

Jul 1, 2003, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by Sun Baked
The overmarketing of hot franchises is getting to be a problem, too much of a good thing and these things start looking like big purple dinosaurs.

Well, the money is the big issue in a lot of these things. I think Rowling is a little different though. She didn't start out thinking she'd be richer than the Queen ;)

The book was fun - and even though, like agreenster mentioned, the middle was a little long, I really enjoyed it. I don't think people should make a big deal about whether its good or not - if kids like it and start reading more that's fantastic.

And no one's forcing you to read it, so if you really don't like it, fine. But if you're distaste for the whole franchise/marketing junket is the problem, well, you're out of luck there. Its here to stay - I can't foresee there being a time when big business doesn't get involved in something this profitable.

D

agreenster

Jul 1, 2003, 11:24 AM

This is about how much I care about Harry Potter... (http://www.pixar.com/theater/trailers/inc/trailer2_320.html)

Pete_Hoover

Jul 1, 2003, 11:32 AM

Originally posted by caveman_uk
The Harry Potter hype is all over the media over here. Personally I don't give a toss. It's just a book. I don't care which of the main characters is killed off in this book. Somehow I guess it won't be Harry as JK Rowling is still a bit short of cash....not.

Please say I'm not the only one :(

I'm 14, and to tell you the truth, I could care less about Harry Pooper, I mean pooter, edit: Potter. In fact, I am getting pretty annoyed with all of the Yugioh too. I don't find playing with monster cards to be entertaining. Watching a kid wizard at the movies, or reading about him is boring. Every TV station,"The new Harry Potter Book is coming to stores tomorrow and people are already lining up to get it", or "Harry Potter has 1,000,000 preorders on Amazon.com, which is more than twice as much as the previous book." People, I don't care. Sorry to be rude to people who like the whole kid wizard, card playing thing, but I don't.

Das

Jul 1, 2003, 12:09 PM

I find the series to be literary trash devoid of originality. Making kids read it in school under the guise that it makes reading fun is even a larger tragedy. What's next, Mad magazine? Ah well, just like Goosebumps before it, I'm sure it will find it's way to the discount bins in a while, then twenty years later they'll make a retro comeback movie. Pikawho?

ouketii

Jul 1, 2003, 01:03 PM

man i cant stand harry potter, and now that j.k.r. is making him go through puberty, the series can't get any worse. whoops spoke too soon

Foxer

Jul 1, 2003, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Narnia books are great. Did anyone see the shows on PBS?

I just read today that some filmaker had bought the rights to all the Narnia books and plans to make a series of films. I actually think he plans on doing it in New Zeland.

Where have I heard of a similar undertaking?

I hope it happens, I always liked the Narnia books, even though I haven't read them in years and years.

As to Harry Potter - I couldn't care less. My wife loves them and has re-read them all (aside from the new one, of course) a couple times. The movies are, at best, adequate. The adult actors they get tend to be really good and make the movies worth whatever value they have.

And Hermione, she's very cool.:cool:

Mr. Anderson

Jul 1, 2003, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by Foxer
I just read today that some filmaker had bought the rights to all the Narnia books and plans to make a series of films. I actually think he plans on doing it in New Zeland.

http://www.narnia.com/movie/news/movienews_020731.htm

That's actually going to be very cool - they're great stories and they've been done before - but using modern special effects they'll really be slick.

D

Sum_Gai

Jul 1, 2003, 05:04 PM

Product placement is starting to get a little out of hand... :rolleyes:

EDIT: For those of you who can't read the small print:

"Spell-casting Dysfunction (ScD) is a real and serious problem to wizards of all ages and varieties. Whether you're a Gryffindor, a Hufflepuff, a Ravenclaw, or a Slytherin, no wizard is completely immune.

That's why we at Pfizer, a division of Hogwarts Spells and Potions, LLC, have concocted a special counterspell, Wizagra, from octopus powder, mandrake root, snake fangs, and dried nettles that will surely make your wand stiff and strong for your next battle against evil sorcerers and their monsters.

Wizagra: Putting the zip back in your magic wand."

EDIT #2: Pic got deleted, scroll down to see it.

Sum_Gai

Jul 1, 2003, 05:26 PM

Replying because pic got deleted. I hate Windows.

jbomber

Jul 1, 2003, 06:09 PM

medea

Jul 1, 2003, 08:03 PM

Originally posted by jbomber
I can honestly say I don't give a damn either.....

I don't understand what all the hype is about. And for all you people who want to 'show me the light', I'm quite confortable in the dark, thankyouverymuch.
well ignorance is bliss and all that.....
oh and "literary trash?" You should stop there and go back to playing video games.....

tazo

Jul 1, 2003, 08:13 PM

o.0 hiss hiss.

I think harry potter sucks because it has no real plot.

medea

Jul 1, 2003, 08:54 PM

Originally posted by tazo
o.0 hiss hiss.

I think harry potter sucks because it has no real plot.
umm, if you can't figure out the plot to a book like harry potter then you should defintely stop reading.....sounds harsh but seriously there are 4 year olds that get the plot.....

WinterMute

Jul 1, 2003, 09:00 PM

Yeah, plotting is a strong point in the series, characterisation and originality are the big problems, that and bloody overkill.

Still don't like them, even after a concerted effort from my sister and 11 year old neice to prove how wrong I was:D

Doctor Q

Jul 1, 2003, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by tazo
I think harry potter sucks because it has no real plot. I've read all 14 of the Oz books written by L. Frank Baum. Some have good plots but some are just stories of Dorothy and her friends wandering from place to place encountering odd people and creatures. Even without great plots, they were enjoyable books because the reader could imagine the people and places being described, all of which were original and interesting. All 14 Oz books had the same basic style and reflected the philosphy of their author: that most people are good hearted and can live together peacefully, and not to put too much faith in technology or formal education. Not to mention that females can be heroes and great leaders.

The Oz books were generally hated by librarians in their time, and only recognized as classics many decades later. I wonder how the Harry Potter books will look in the rear view mirror of history?

jbomber

Jul 1, 2003, 11:33 PM

quit getting all defensive because some of us don't like the book/character/series...

it's not like you wrote it. :D

on that note, tho i REALLY like the author's story. Welfare mom turned multi-millionaire because she decided that she had to do something about her situation so sat down to write her story. Now THAT's interesting.

tazo

Jul 2, 2003, 12:36 AM

Originally posted by medea
umm, if you can't figure out the plot to a book like harry potter then you should defintely stop reading.....sounds harsh but seriously there are 4 year olds that get the plot.....

Did I say I couldn't figure out the plot? :rolleyes: I said there is no real plot. I mean one thats actually interesting.

I've read all 14 of the Oz books written by L. Frank Baum. Some have good plots but some are just stories of Dorothy and her friends wandering from place to place encountering odd people and creatures. Even without great plots, they were enjoyable books because the reader could imagine the people and places being described, all of which were original and interesting. All 14 Oz books had the same basic style and reflected the philosphy of their author: that most people are good hearted and can live together peacefully, and not to put too much faith in technology or formal education. Not to mention that females can be heroes and great leaders.

The Oz books were generally hated by librarians in their time, and only recognized as classics many decades later. I wonder how the Harry Potter books will look in the rear view mirror of history?

Oz was never banned from a library though no?

job

Jul 2, 2003, 12:42 AM

Originally posted by tazo
Did I say I couldn't figure out the plot? :rolleyes: I said there is no real plot. I mean one thats actually interesting.

consider her target audience for a moment. the books are supposed to appeal across a wide range of people, not just the select few that can recall what spell does what or how fast an elf can run. the series, imo is not trying to compete with narnia or lotr, and nor should it be thought as doing so.

i enjoyed the third and fifth books and find them quite good when i just want to sit down and read something relaxing. if i want brain food or an in-depth plot and character development, i'll read lotr.

tazo

Jul 2, 2003, 12:44 AM

job

Jul 2, 2003, 12:54 AM

Originally posted by tazo
Ironically the target audience of the book was supposed to be late teenagers, like 16 up to early adults. And now look...

but does it really matter if it changed?

it certainly motivated my younger brother to read more. besides, like i said, not every person who reads harry potter is a fantasy nut who can rattle off random facts and stats from lotr or dungeons and dragons, et al. they are a simple and fun read. is that so wrong?

groovebuster

Jul 2, 2003, 01:01 AM

Originally posted by job
consider her target audience for a moment. the books are supposed to appeal across a wide range of people, not just the select few that can recall what spell does what or how fast an elf can run. the series, imo is not trying to compete with narnia or lotr, and nor should it be thought as doing so.

The target audience is one thing, writing an interesting story in general something totally different. I don't see why the plot and narration of a kids book should be worse than that of a book targeted at adults? Rowling doesn't have a clue about writing books and developing stories and characters. She proves it with every book again. If you ever want to read books that are really excellent (even though a little bit older already), read one of the famous "Five" books, or the "adventures" or "mystery" series from Enid Blyton. Those are classics!

And btw, LOTR is very often called as a reference here... I don't think that LOTR is that outstanding, there are a lot of books in that genre that are way better than LOTR. It was just the first one with such a success.

groovebuster

shadowfax

Jul 2, 2003, 01:04 AM

Originally posted by tazo
Did I say I couldn't figure out the plot? :rolleyes: I said there is no real plot. I mean one thats actually interesting. how you expected us to extrapolate "good" from "real" is far beyond me, and that's not because i am stupid. a plot is a plot, and whether you like it or not, whether it interests you, if there is a plot to a book, it is real. a book with no real plot is one that jump around everywhere, doesn't have a point, that just rambles on. i highly doubt that is the substance of these Harry Potter books. also, i wouldn't bother to leave yourself as the main critic of what teenagers like. i was just out chessing with a girl who's extraordinarily well-read, from Shakespeare to Marquez to Dickens and back, and she eats those harry potter books like nothing in afternoons and loves them. she's definitely one of the smartest people [my age] i know, especially as far as literature goes. and i don't think she'd read a book with "no real plot," whichever way you meant that.

job

Jul 2, 2003, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by groovebuster
Rowling doesn't have a clue about writing books and developing stories and characters. She proves it with every book again.

;) :D

Originally posted by me
they are a simple and fun read. is that so wrong?

who needs to have thick character developement to have an enjoyable book? it's not trying to be the combined works of shakespere.

i just think that it's written in a simple, easy way that makes it an enjoyable read with or without in depth character development and/or plot development. that's why i read the books anyways, not for the intellectual stimulation (obviously) but for entertainment.

groovebuster

Jul 2, 2003, 02:27 AM

Originally posted by job
who needs to have thick character developement to have an enjoyable book? it's not trying to be the combined works of shakespere.

Nobody said that (at least I didn't ;) )! The books are fun to read somehow, that's why I read them too. But everytime I read one of those I end up in being annoyed by the weak narration style Rowling has. This is one of the really fascinating things about those books. They are so badly written (in almost every way possible) but they end up being fun reading anyway.

I guess it is just like with a lot of other things in our world... sometimes you ask yourself why a movie, a book, an actor, a music band is so succesful and you don't have an answer to it.

It's the same Phenomenon with those Harry Potter books.

groovebuster

job

Jul 2, 2003, 03:31 AM

Originally posted by groovebuster
Nobody said that (at least I didn't ;) )! The books are fun to read somehow, that's why I read them too. But everytime I read one of those I end up in being annoyed by the weak narration style Rowling has. This is one of the really fascinating things about those books. They are so badly written (in almost every way possible) but they end up being fun reading anyway.

I agree. :)

There were some parts in the fifth book that were absolutely awful such as the 'climax' of the book itself, but then there were other parts which made the book still fun to read.

Interesting how that works, huh. :)

groovebuster

Jul 2, 2003, 03:48 AM

BTW... I saw that there was also an adult edition of the book. Does anybody know the difference to the "normal" edition? Just wondering...

The adult edition has more sex and violence, or what is it? ;) :D

groovebuster

jbomber

Jul 2, 2003, 04:04 AM

Originally posted by groovebuster
BTW... I saw that there was also an adult edition of the book. Does anybody know the difference to the "normal" edition? Just wondering...

The adult edition has more sex and violence, or what is it? ;) :D

groovebuster

Yeah, you nailed it.

Come to think of it, so does Harry....

medea

Jul 2, 2003, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by jbomber
quit getting all defensive because some of us don't like the book/character/series...

it's not like you wrote it. :D

on that note, tho i REALLY like the author's story. Welfare mom turned multi-millionaire because she decided that she had to do something about her situation so sat down to write her story. Now THAT's interesting.
Not liking a book is one thing, I get defensive when idiots who do not know what they are talking about try to appear smarter than they really are. If someone say's "you know I just couldn't get into the series," or "I'm not really a fan of fantasy" etc then hey, whatever, but if you want to make comments like "literary trash" or "no real plot" then you should be able to back up those complaints.

brandon_deal

Jul 2, 2003, 11:07 AM

you are definately not the only one, i am tired of hearing all the harry potter crap also.

Pete_Hoover

Jul 2, 2003, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by medea
Not liking a book is one thing, I get defensive when idiots who do not know what they are talking about try to appear smarter than they really are. If someone say's "you know I just couldn't get into the series," or "I'm not really a fan of fantasy" etc then hey, whatever, but if you want to make comments like "literary trash" or "no real plot" then you should be able to back up those complaints.

He is entilted to his opinion, just as you are. Can't we all just get along?

shadowfax

Jul 2, 2003, 11:55 AM

Originally posted by medea
Not liking a book is one thing, I get defensive when idiots who do not know what they are talking about try to appear smarter than they really are. If someone say's "you know I just couldn't get into the series," or "I'm not really a fan of fantasy" etc then hey, whatever, but if you want to make comments like "literary trash" or "no real plot" then you should be able to back up those complaints. i'll take you up on that one. it's not you that needs a talking to. i don't give a damn about harry potter myself, and i suspect its quality, but i would run around trashing it unintelligently. it's much more fun to get onto the people who do.

Foxer

Jul 2, 2003, 12:25 PM

Am I the only one who sees much of the Harry Potter story as liberally lifted from the Star Wars series?

Rower_CPU

Jul 2, 2003, 01:11 PM

Originally posted by Foxer
Am I the only one who sees much of the Harry Potter story as liberally lifted from the Star Wars series?

Yes. ;)

Go with it, though. What do you see as specific details in SW that HP uses?

Be careful, we don't want to trip down the path of Joseph Campbell and archetypal figures in literature...:p

Doctor Q

Jul 2, 2003, 11:09 PM

Originally posted by tazo
Oz was never banned from a library though no? Yes. I looked it up at a good Oz site (http://www.eskimo.com/~tiktok/faq02.html#19) that I've consulted before. Here's an excerpt:There have been several recent attempts to remove The Wizard of Oz from school libraries or reading lists. Some school students in Tennessee and Louisiana have been excused from reading the book on religious grounds. Some reasons critics have given is that the book depicts good witches, which they claim is theologically impossible, and that animals are elevated to the same level as humans.

In the 1950s, when Senator Joseph McCarthy was chairman of the House Un-American Activities Committee and saw Communism in all walks of life, many libraries removed the Oz books for being too "radical." Fantasy was also felt to be harmful to children at the time, and that children's books should be more educational.

In Detroit in 1957, Director Ralph Ulveling admitted that The Wizard of Oz had not been available in the main library's children's room or any branch for thirty years, as it was not well-written, "the story relies on fantastic rather than fanciful happenings," the story didn't build to any sort of climax, "there is too much exaggeration in carrying out each detail, [and is] old-fashioned and out-dated...It does not meet present day standards of book selection for children."

On a catalog card for the book in 1939, a Detroit library employee wrote, "[T]he reader's mind is not fired by this type of imagination...no need to reinstate this book."

In Florida in 1959, State Librarian Dorothy Dodd sent out to libraries a list of books that were "not to be purchased, not to be accepted as gifts, not to be processed and not to be circulated." The list included Edgar Rice Burroughs' Tarzan books, F. W. Dixon's Hardy Boys series, H. R. Garis' Uncle Wiggily books, Laura Lee Hope's Bobbsey Twins books, Carolyn Keene's Nancy Drew mysteries, all of Horatio Alger's titles, and Victor Appleton's Tom Swift books. But at the very top of the list was L. Frank Baum's Oz books. Dodd said on the list: "The presence of books of this type on the library shelves indicate [sic] waste of time and money on the part of the librarian and lack of interest in the welfare of the children of the community."

voicegy

Jul 3, 2003, 12:31 AM

Originally posted by Doctor Q
Yes. I looked it up at a good Oz site (http://www.eskimo.com/~tiktok/faq02.html#19) that I've consulted before. Here's an excerpt: [...] Librarian Dorothy Dodd sent out to libraries a list of books that were "not to be purchased, not to be accepted as gifts, not to be processed and not to be circulated." The list included [...] F. W. Dixon's Hardy Boys series...

Well, you can go STRAIGHT to Heck in a Handbasket, Ms. Dodd...I grew UP on The Hardy Boys' books and they were a turning point in my reading material maturation. What kind of MORONS who claim the title of "Librarian" would ever turn people AWAY from books such as these?! Horrific, absolutely horrific.:mad:

Doctor Q

Jul 3, 2003, 12:58 AM

Originally posted by voicegy
What kind of MORONS who claim the title of "Librarian" would ever turn people AWAY from books such as these?! Horrific, absolutely horrific.These days, the American Library Association fights hard against book challenges. Here is their list of The 100 Most Frequently Challenged Books (http://www.ala.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Our_Association/Offices/Intellectual_Freedom3/Banned_Books_Week/Related_Links7/100_Most_Frequently_Challenged_Books_of_1990-2000.htm) of the decade ending in the year 2000. The ALA is one of the sponsors of the annual Banned Books Week, which calls attention to the problem.

tazo

Jul 3, 2003, 01:44 AM

I stand corrected. :o

wdlove

Jul 3, 2003, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by Foxer
Am I the only one who sees much of the Harry Potter story as liberally lifted from the Star Wars series?

My wife mentioned this to me the other day. She thinks that Harry reminds her of Luke Skywalker, Ron of Hans Solo, and Herimone of Princess Leah. I found that to be a very intresting concept.

Rower_CPU

Jul 3, 2003, 04:59 PM

Originally posted by wdlove
My wife mentioned this to me the other day. She thinks that Harry reminds her of Luke Skywalker, Ron of Hans Solo, and Herimone of Princess Leah. I found that to be a very intresting concept.

Of course there are similarities. All of the characters are archetypes.

Definition of archetype from Dictionary.com
1. An original model or type after which other similar things are patterned; a prototype: “‘Frankenstein’... ‘Dracula’... ‘Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde’... the archetypes that have influenced all subsequent horror stories” (New York Times).

2. An ideal example of a type; quintessence: an archetype of the successful entrepreneur.

3. In Jungian psychology, an inherited pattern of thought or symbolic imagery derived from the past collective experience and present in the individual unconscious.

Character similarities are not enough to say HP and SW are the same story. We need to look at the plot/story line and see if they are really that similar. I don't think they are.

jefhatfield

Jul 3, 2003, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by Foxer
Am I the only one who sees much of the Harry Potter story as liberally lifted from the Star Wars series?

and star wars is lifted from the cinematic archetypes of akira kurosawa, who took literary types and made then concise and simplified for the screen...there are 7 major types and i can't think of them off the top of my head but there is the hero, the damsel, and the comic

and the music of star wars and almost any adventure type movie after that borrows a lot from richard wagner's "the ring" with its heroic melodies

what makes harry potter so amazing is that it's the most accessible story on screen and in a book series since star wars and its fantasy is a good escape for these generally troubled times

i hear the left behind series is also very universally popular with a lot of different type of people

who cares if some don't consider jk rowling's story great fiction? it touches a nerve somewhere...as does jenkins and la haye's series

medea

Jul 3, 2003, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by jefhatfield
and star wars is lifted from the cinematic archetypes of akira kurosawa, who took literary types and made then concise and simplified for the screen...there are 7 major types and i can't think of them off the top of my head but there is the hero, the damsel, and the comic

and the music of star wars and almost any adventure type movie after that borrows a lot from richard wagner's "the ring" with its heroic melodies

what makes harry potter so amazing is that it's the most accessible story on screen and in a book series since star wars and its fantasy is a good escape for these generally troubled times

i hear the left behind series is also very universally popular with a lot of different type of people

who cares if some don't consider jk rowling's story great fiction? it touches a nerve somewhere...as does jenkins and la haye's series
Very well said Jef.

ColoJohnBoy

Jul 3, 2003, 06:29 PM

Yes.

Yes, you are the only one.

;)

I personally waited in line for three hours to buy it and then read it in about 12 hours. It's truly is a wonderful. The first truly original piece of literature.... well GOOD piece of truly original literature in a while.

Visit Blue Pudding!
http://bluepudding.1hwy.com

shadowfax

Jul 3, 2003, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by ColoJohnBoy
I personally waited in line for three hours to buy it and then read it in about 12 hours. It's truly is a wonderful. The first truly original piece of literature.... well GOOD piece of truly original literature in a while. original literature? it's still very much pop literature, if literature at all yet. i suspect it will become more like the boxcar children series than anything else. i don't see it ever becoming like the more famous literature in our history--like tom sawyer or anything like that.

jefhatfield

Jul 3, 2003, 08:42 PM

Originally posted by medea
Very well said Jef.

wow, my bs talk worked...i don't even know who kurosawa is and i thought wagner was the house painting company in the next town;)

oh, another archetype...the mac user!!!

Doctor Q

Jul 3, 2003, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by Shadowfax
i suspect it will become more like the boxcar children series than anything else.Except that there will be only 7 Harry Potter books, and there are about 100 Boxcar Children books. Of course, each story about Harry and friends is a lot thicker than those stories about Henry, Jessie, Violet, and Benny!

shadowfax

Jul 3, 2003, 08:47 PM

Originally posted by Doctor Q
Except that there will be only 7 Harry Potter books, and there are about 100 Boxcar Children books. Of course, each story about Harry and friends is a lot thicker than those stories about Henry, Jessie, Violet, and Benny! yes, but the size of a book is more like your post count than anything. it can drag a bad story on too long or can make a great story too short. it all depends... i didn't know there would only be 7 harry potters though. surely not, would she turn down the money she'd get from continuing?

jelloshotsrule

Jul 3, 2003, 09:02 PM

allz i know iss. i greaw up on mistre men bookes and i terned out jus fyne

seriously though, mr men books rule... anyone know about these things?

Doctor Q

Jul 3, 2003, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
allz i know iss. i greaw up on mistre men bookes and i terned out jus fyne

seriously though, mr men books rule... anyone know about these things? I've got a whole bunch of them. Besides Mr. Tickle, Mr. Grumpy, Mr. Greedy, and my favorite: Mr. Nosey, there were Little Miss books. I've got a couple of those too. They are all by Roger Hargreaves. I think I'll go read one right now. They are slightly faster to read than Harry Potter.

wdlove

Jul 3, 2003, 09:19 PM

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Of course there are similarities. All of the characters are archetypes.

Character similarities are not enough to say HP and SW are the same story. We need to look at the plot/story line and see if they are really that similar. I don't think they are.

My wife was just stating what the characters reminded her of in "Star War." The relationships of the characters in each of the stories!

jelloshotsrule

Jul 3, 2003, 09:23 PM

Originally posted by Doctor Q
I've got a whole bunch of them. Besides Mr. Tickle, Mr. Grumpy, Mr. Greedy, and my favorite: Mr. Nosey, there were Little Miss books. I've got a couple of those too. They are all by Roger Hargreaves. I think I'll go read one right now. They are slightly faster to read than Harry Potter.

very slightly though. ;)

yeah, the little miss too... not as many. plus, my army dad didn't wanna raise no girly-man! (sounds better in a hans and frans type voice...)

Originally posted by wdlove
My wife was just stating what the characters reminded her of in "Star War." The relationships of the characters in each of the stories!

seriously rower, give wdlove a break! what has he ever done to you?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!? ;)

jayscheuerle

Jul 3, 2003, 09:23 PM

MarkCollette

Jul 3, 2003, 10:33 PM

You do know that the Narnia books, which C.S. Lewis wrote, have magic and witches, etc. in them? And in them, magic is not presented as bad, it's presented as good or bad, depending on how it's used, which is the same in the Potter books.

In fact, I'd say that the Potter books have better characterization, since the characters are more multi-dimensional than the Narnia ones. In the Naria books the characters are all completely brave, or fully noble, or totally evil, etc... Lots of stereotypes, and no shades of grey. The Potter books have this to a degree, but not nearly as much as the Narnia ones.

Anyways, I just read the whole Narnia series, and then read the Potter series immediately after. I haven't had that much fun in years. After 7 years of University text books, programming books for work, and political books, etc. it was nice to take a break. Hell, my bed time reading is the 2003 (Canadian) Senate Report on Cannabis :)

jelloshotsrule

Jul 3, 2003, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by MarkCollette
You do know that the Narnia books, which C.S. Lewis wrote, have magic and witches, etc. in them? And in them, magic is not presented as bad, it's presented as good or bad, depending on how it's used, which is the same in the Potter books.

In fact, I'd say that the Potter books have better characterization, since the characters are more multi-dimensional than the Narnia ones. In the Naria books the characters are all completely brave, or fully noble, or totally evil, etc... Lots of stereotypes, and no shades of grey. The Potter books have this to a degree, but not nearly as much as the Narnia ones.

Anyways, I just read the whole Narnia series, and then read the Potter series immediately after. I haven't had that much fun in years. After 7 years of University text books, programming books for work, and political books, etc. it was nice to take a break. Hell, my bed time reading is the 2003 (Canadian) Senate Report on Cannabis :)

so you're saying edmund was totally good or totally evil? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

jayscheuerle

Jul 3, 2003, 11:17 PM

Originally posted by MarkCollette
Hell, my bed time reading is the 2003 (Canadian) Senate Report on Cannabis :)

I use that text for rolling papers!

shadowfax

Jul 4, 2003, 12:55 AM

Originally posted by MarkCollette
You do know that the Narnia books, which C.S. Lewis wrote, have magic and witches, etc. in them? And in them, magic is not presented as bad, it's presented as good or bad, depending on how it's used, which is the same in the Potter books.

In fact, I'd say that the Potter books have better characterization, since the characters are more multi-dimensional than the Narnia ones. In the Naria books the characters are all completely brave, or fully noble, or totally evil, etc... Lots of stereotypes, and no shades of grey. The Potter books have this to a degree, but not nearly as much as the Narnia ones. man, my dad would eat you alive on that one. you should read the narnia books more carfully. like jello mentioned, characters are not in the least just one way or the other, completely polarized. CS lewis believed in a right and wrong that was more or less absolute, but never saw people that way, and certainly didn't make his characters that way. not the human ones, any way. characters like Aslan and the witch represent, or are types of, christ and satan, respectively, and in the christian sense of them. that's why they tend to be rather black and white. but his characters aren't simple, even given that. do you just not want to see anything in them?

MarkCollette

Jul 4, 2003, 02:05 AM

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
so you're saying edmund was totally good or totally evil? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Even Edmund and Eustace, who initially had attitude issues, both learned their lessons and made life-altering personality changes quite quickly. They then became well-behaved, brave guys for the rest of their lives (as far as the book's timeline goes). Caspian's son was only sotof bad when he was bewitched, otherwise he was that typical all-for-valour type.

So yeah, besides a few brief exceptions, everyone had pretty linear personalities. I'm not trying to knock the series, just showing how much less multi-dimensional the characters were than the Potter characters.

MarkCollette

Jul 4, 2003, 02:16 AM

Originally posted by Shadowfax
man, my dad would eat you alive on that one. you should read the narnia books more carfully. like jello mentioned, characters are not in the least just one way or the other, completely polarized. CS lewis believed in a right and wrong that was more or less absolute, but never saw people that way, and certainly didn't make his characters that way. not the human ones, any way. characters like Aslan and the witch represent, or are types of, christ and satan, respectively, and in the christian sense of them. that's why they tend to be rather black and white. but his characters aren't simple, even given that. do you just not want to see anything in them?

They are all richly portrayed, and have a certain depth, but are all very singular in their mentalities.

Yes you might have a Tummus (sp?) the faun who does something wrong, but he of course only did it out of fear, and immediately tries to fix his mistake, and then spends the rest of his life completely loyal.

Perhapse C.S. Lewis intended to portray internal conflict, but he does not do it as well as J.K. Rowling does with someone like Prof Snape.

Anyways, I really feel stupid sitting here arguing the literary merits of childrens' books, when we obviously don't read them for that. I just tend to not let a reply go unanswered :)

shadowfax

Jul 4, 2003, 03:27 AM

Originally posted by MarkCollette
They are all richly portrayed, and have a certain depth, but are all very singular in their mentalities.

Yes you might have a Tummus (sp?) the faun who does something wrong, but he of course only did it out of fear, and immediately tries to fix his mistake, and then spends the rest of his life completely loyal.

Perhapse C.S. Lewis intended to portray internal conflict, but he does not do it as well as J.K. Rowling does with someone like Prof Snape.

Anyways, I really feel stupid sitting here arguing the literary merits of childrens' books, when we obviously don't read them for that. I just tend to not let a reply go unanswered :)

how about edmund, as jello mentioned?

also, these may be children's books at the face of them, but i can promise you that there is much more to Narnia than that. i don't really know much about Harry Potter, but i do know a good bit about Lewis, and his interest in the christian conversion, his experience of that, and the way that that has a very broad influence on that particular series of books. with, i think it was edmund, but they called him "useless" or something all the time, as i recall, you have a character who betrays like Judas, succumbs to greed, turns into a dragon, as i recall, an imagery i hope is not lost on you, has a very deep internal struggle about it, and...man i hope i haven't mixed this up... he ends up struggling with repentance pretty roughly, the idea of, as it goes, shedding one's hideousness. he tries, and only gets his outer scales off. it's Aslan that really gets his skin off. whether or not you believe in the doctrines of salvation by faith, lewis' character development within his very creative metaphor is multifaceted and very deep. it's not simple by any means, and you can miss a lot of it as a child who doesn't understand a lot of things, and still love the books to death for other reasons, but the character depth and development is there, complex enough to make it a great book for adults, and subtle enough for children to read without choking on it like a wall street journal article.

i guess i haven't read the part in harry potter you're talking about, but character development isn't a narration of what goes on in someone's head during a temptation. that's cheap, easy character development. plain terms children catch on to easily, but lose interest in fast, which is why such style is not appreciated in adult literature. not to suggest that such development is the case in Harry potter, but to suspect it :D

groovebuster

Jul 4, 2003, 03:46 AM

Originally posted by Rower_CPU Character similarities are not enough to say HP and SW are the same story. We need to look at the plot/story line and see if they are really that similar. I don't think they are. [/B]

Wait until it turns out that Voldemort is Harry's real father!! ;) :D

groovebuster

MarkCollette

Jul 4, 2003, 02:49 PM

Originally posted by Shadowfax
how about edmund, as jello mentioned?

also, these may be children's books at the face of them, but i can promise you that there is much more to Narnia than that. i don't really know much about Harry Potter, but i do know a good bit about Lewis, and his interest in the christian conversion, his experience of that, and the way that that has a very broad influence on that particular series of books. with, i think it was edmund, but they called him "useless" or something all the time, as i recall, you have a character who betrays like Judas, succumbs to greed, turns into a dragon, as i recall, an imagery i hope is not lost on you, has a very deep internal struggle about it, and...man i hope i haven't mixed this up... he ends up struggling with repentance pretty roughly, the idea of, as it goes, shedding one's hideousness. he tries, and only gets his outer scales off. it's Aslan that really gets his skin off. whether or not you believe in the doctrines of salvation by faith, lewis' character development within his very creative metaphor is multifaceted and very deep. it's not simple by any means, and you can miss a lot of it as a child who doesn't understand a lot of things, and still love the books to death for other reasons, but the character depth and development is there, complex enough to make it a great book for adults, and subtle enough for children to read without choking on it like a wall street journal article.

i guess i haven't read the part in harry potter you're talking about, but character development isn't a narration of what goes on in someone's head during a temptation. that's cheap, easy character development. plain terms children catch on to easily, but lose interest in fast, which is why such style is not appreciated in adult literature. not to suggest that such development is the case in Harry potter, but to suspect it :D

I was raised a Christian, so I fully understood all of the symbolism you described, when I read the books as a child, and recently again. I think we all agree that there is character development, but I stated that there is only obvious, linear development of the form:
1. I hate you all and will do naughty things
2. Oh no, I've been bad, and regret it
3. Now I'll always be a good person

shadowfax

Jul 4, 2003, 03:05 PM

Originally posted by MarkCollette
I was raised a Christian, so I fully understood all of the symbolism you described, when I read the books as a child, and recently again. I think we all agree that there is character development, but I stated that there is only obvious, linear development of the form:
1. I hate you all and will do naughty things
2. Oh no, I've been bad, and regret it
3. Now I'll always be a good person if all you see is intention, then i am sorry. i think it's kind of limiting.

Rower_CPU

Jul 4, 2003, 03:59 PM

Originally posted by groovebuster
Wait until it turns out that Voldemort is Harry's real father!! ;) :D

groovebuster

LOL, that would be funny...but not likely.;)

Mr. Anderson

Jul 4, 2003, 04:47 PM

Originally posted by groovebuster
Wait until it turns out that Voldemort is Harry's real father!! ;) :D

Haha! Well, that would be a little too StarWars like.....;)

I'm sure with only two books to go, things will get even more interesting. As of this book with the prophecy - only one will live. Sounds more like Highlander now to me.....:D

D

groovebuster

Jul 5, 2003, 01:42 AM

Originally posted by Mr. Anderson
I'm sure with only two books to go, things will get even more interesting. As of this book with the prophecy - only one will live. Sounds more like Highlander now to me.....:D

But we'll know who will live anyway, don't we? So since we know the ending already, what will be the point anyway to go on reading the books! ;)

groovebuster

allyk

Jul 5, 2003, 02:55 AM

The harry potter books are not necessisarily great literature. They are entertaining stories that appeal to everyone and are fun to read. Kids understand them. Adults enjoy them and don't feel as if they are being talked to as kids. J.K. Rowling is a talented author partly because she appeals to the masses. THere are large amounts of great books which do not make it. THe books could be popular because one review led to more readers, with good reviews, causing more readers etc. The content of the books is fantasy, but also a story of a normal bunch of pre-teens/teenagers. THe books are interesting. They are still interesting the 5th time you read them. Trust me, i have.

kiwi_the_iwik

Jul 5, 2003, 04:44 AM

Originally posted by groovebuster
Wait until it turns out that Voldemort is Harry's real father!!

Nah - I'm convinced that Harry and Voldemort are one-and-the-same.

Voldemort co-exists with Harry, and it will only be by Harry's death in the last book when Voldemort will disappear.

So then all those people that didn't like Harry will get their justice, by having the hero die!

It'd make an interesting ending in the showdown at book 7...

Harry's dark side conjures up Voldemort - the dark side brought about from the attack as a child (where he got the scar). That's why Voldemort can only really be thwarted by Harry (or Dumbledore, at a stretch) - because these incarnations are actually created by Harry himself...

Just speculation!

On the other hand, I might be WAAAAY off base, here.

;)