Harry Potter

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Nov 12, 2001 7:56 pm

Fable, have you ever gone back and read Chronicles of Narnia as an adult? I loved those books as a kid, but as an adult, I was shocked at how overtly preachy they are. Kids don't mind preachy stuff, though.'

@Voodoo Dali, I only read 'em as an adult, and you're absolutely right: they are very preachy, and shockingly narrow-minded at times. I'm particularly thinking of the third book, The Horse and his Boy, which portrays Islamic countries as nations of idolators led by a bunch of comic-book despots. (There's a strong Edwardian, "Britain Rules the World" undercurrent to CS Lewis' thought, IMO.) Then there's the last book, The Final Battle, which only tells kids, in effect, that good can only be found in another world, after death.

If I want Christian fantasy for kids, I think George MacDonald does it much, much better. But then, MacDonald strikes me as a better-balanced personality, more at peace with himself and with the foibles of the world. He even deliberately balanced out the wise and powerful in his books between male and female--something very surprising in Victorian England.

[ 11-12-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

Tamerlane · Post by **Tamerlane** » Mon Nov 12, 2001 11:23 pm

Ahh the problems of reading children books from an adults perspective.

I read Salman Rushdies, Haroun And The Sea Of Stories when I was little and to my shock we ended up reading it again in high school.

I guess we read it because he did all that Satanic Verses stuff.

Adults sure can ruin a good childrens book with all those in-depth interpretations.

fable · Post by **fable** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:40 am

Originally posted by Tamerlane:
Ahh the problems of reading children books from an adults perspective.

I read Salman Rushdies, Haroun And The Sea Of Stories when I was little and to my shock we ended up reading it again in high school.

I guess we read it because he did all that Satanic Verses stuff.

Adults sure can ruin a good childrens book with all those in-depth interpretations.

You're barking up the wrong tree, @Tamerlane. We're not discussing putting adult interpretations on children's books. We're discussing the ideas that influence children while reading their own books. And if you don't think ideas in a favorite book can influence a kid, I'd strongly suspect you'd never had any.

Gibsonajt · Post by **Gibsonajt** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 1:10 am

Lots of kids who read harry potter will read other books as well and i think that harry potter is about as innocent as you can get of its genre. Books with special people and non-special people have been around as long as we have lived and i don't see how it could make a difference to childrens behaviour. I mean when i was young i thought that if i concentrated hard enough on an object i could make it move.
Everyone going ape over the Satanic verses is understandible but over Harry Potter it is just an excuse to criticise J.K.R
I have seen Harry Potter the movie and it was very good but the children were made to present too many cheesy grins american style and as with all films made from books they are not as you imagine them to look like in your head

Tamerlane · Post by **Tamerlane** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 6:52 am

@ Fable
Hmmm, OK

I guess my input was a tad out of context as I was relating my perceptions of parents to this particular statement in relation to my beloved Haroun.

Originally posted by fable:
If "kids' books" = "casual stuff, not to be taken seriously," how do you explain the fact that educators, parents, religious institutions and governments everywhere try very hard to determine the content of kids' books? No, it *is* a very serious business. The ideas we stuff into kids' heads have a major effect on their later behavior--and I suspect most parents would agree with me.

I considered it to be like any other typical fantasy book depicting good vs. evil however other people (my english teacher) saw a political motives behind it. Iran, his literature etc.

And I saw a similar connection between the Christian and the Potter craze. A bit late in the discussion I guess.

To me they are both great children books Potter and Haroun and that is all.

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Tamerlane ]

fable · Post by **fable** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 8:41 am

Tamerlane writes:
I considered it to be like any other typical fantasy book depicting good vs. evil however other people (my english teacher) saw a political motives behind it. Iran, his literature etc.

And I saw a similar connection between the Christian and the Potter craze. A bit late in the discussion I guess.

To me they are both great children books Potter and Haroun and that is all.

@Tamerlane, I know some bizarre fringe groups (no matter what their numbers, they're still fringe) go overboard, but children's writers don't simply "write books." They have agendas that are very subtle, and often go far beyond the simple addition of an obvious political or religious dimension.

If you don't believe this, take Theodore Geisel--Dr. Seuss. He published articles and gave speeches about how in his books violence deliberately never solves anything. It's a point he wanted to drive home to kids. He didn't do this by giving speeches to their parents. He did it by writing books that condition kids to look for non-violent solutions to problems. Maurice Sendak ("Where the Wild Things Are") has stated that he wants children to accept their own imaginations and wildness, and claim that for themselves, instead of stifling these qualities as they grow; and that's why he's written the stories he has, the way he has. Kenneth Grahame, who wrote the children's classic The Wind in the Willows, was a polemicist against urban progress, immigration, and the idle poor; and all this comes across at a certain level in his work. You don't have to analyze these books at an intellectual level to see the art of persuasion by example in effect. And the authors intended it that way.

Being adults, we've all developed (hopefully) critical filters as well as ideas about the world and its structure that buffer us against these messages. But children are much more open to conditioning, and anything that catches the imagination, at any age, is capable of furthering that. For example, if children are exposed to plenty of stories that speak of going off to fight a war and help win against ugly invaders, then you will have a culture that views patriotic duty to the armed forces as a virtue; and that's precisely what was done, deliberately, in the major European powers (Britian, Germany, France) at the turn of the 20th century. (In fact, one horrible little psuedo-medieval kid's novel by Arthur Conan Doyle, author of Sherlock Holmes, actually inserts a tract about the stupidity of other "races" and the glories of being British right in the middle of his tale.)

Children's books don't write themselves. Authors do, and with a very definite sense of what they want to convey--and a certain cultural baggage that may add things they hadn't even consciously considered. It's ridiculous to argue that the HP books "promote Satanism," but it's also unarguable that they present a world divided between silly, stupid, powerless, non-magical types, and the magical, powerful ones who have all the fun.

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

ThorinOakensfield · Post by **ThorinOakensfield** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 1:28 pm

Well its a book, and i'm not interested in deeply analyzing it. Maybe because i don't have kids and don't have to worry about what they learn is a reason. I won't know till a few years.
But i never scrutinize books for their inner meaings. I just want to enjoy them. Maybe "fun" is not a word in the vocabulary of people these days.

Ned Flanders · Post by **Ned Flanders** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 2:22 pm

posted by fable
It's ridiculous to argue that the HP books "promote Satanism," but it's also unarguable that they present a world divided between silly, stupid, powerless, non-magical types, and the magical, powerful ones who have all the fun.

Is this a prod at all those not educated in ivy league schools. Just kidding.

posted by thorinoakensfield
Well its a book, and i'm not interested in deeply analyzing it. Maybe because i don't have kids and don't have to worry about what they learn is a reason. I won't know till a few years.
But i never scrutinize books for their inner meaings. I just want to enjoy them. Maybe "fun" is not a word in the vocabulary of people these days.

Both are good points. I have been reading these books along with my oldest for the past six+ months. She's nine and we're currently on book four. She reads, I read and we talk about the books a lot. To put in my two cents on this, I had to consult the child's mind to see what she reads into this.

We talked about the book for its' entertainment value, plot and character development, and separtist ideals it may or may not be promoting. After giving the young one my dissertation, she looked at me puzzled and said, "Outside of the book, everyone is a muggle. It's fiction, remember dad."

That was good enough for me.

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ned Flanders ]

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 3:34 pm

For all those that haven't read the books, I recommend them to you.

IMHO they are quite good.

Nippy · Post by **Nippy** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 3:49 pm

Originally posted by Ned Flanders:
"Outside of the book, everyone is a muggle. It's fiction, remember dad."

That was good enough for me.

I could not have put it better myself.

fable · Post by **fable** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 5:19 pm

Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield:
Well its a book, and i'm not interested in deeply analyzing it. Maybe because i don't have kids and don't have to worry about what they learn is a reason. I won't know till a few years.
But i never scrutinize books for their inner meaings. I just want to enjoy them. Maybe "fun" is not a word in the vocabulary of people these days.

That kind of label won't stick, @Thorin. I get plenty of fun out of what I read, without being a mindless absorber of entertainment, either.

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 6:22 pm

Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield:
Well its a book, and i'm not interested in deeply analyzing it. Maybe because i don't have kids and don't have to worry about what they learn is a reason. I won't know till a few years.
But i never scrutinize books for their inner meaings. I just want to enjoy them. Maybe "fun" is not a word in the vocabulary of people these days.

ROFL, Thorin, right on

Lazarus · Post by **Lazarus** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 6:34 pm

Originally posted by Ned Flanders:
...<snip>...We talked about the book for its' entertainment value, plot and character development, and separtist ideals it may or may not be promoting. After giving the young one my dissertation, she looked at me puzzled and said, "Outside of the book, everyone is a muggle. It's fiction, remember dad."

That was good enough for me.

Well said! When people talk about these "subliminal" themes to books, I always wonder to myself: are we not capable of thinking for ourselves? Everyone seems to think that children do not have the ability to understand these ideas, but I rather think otherwise.

In any event, I applaud Mr. Flanders for his parenting style: don't screen your children's books against some perceived threat - instead, try using the book as a basis for discussion. Ask the kid what they think, and then bring up some ideas and bounce them off the young one. It'll probably teach your kid a thing or two, and it may even benefit you!

As for me: I read the books, and enjoyed them very much. But I agree with an earlier post, too: they are addictive to read, and while reading them you like them and want to keep reading them; but they don't have any particular depth, nor do they make you think too much about them after you put them down.

humanflyz · Post by **humanflyz** » Tue Nov 13, 2001 8:52 pm

Are we supposed to tell kids that the world is perfect? I find it unfortunate that some of the themes that books talk about such as morals, ethics, honor, courage, ect, are often not true in the real world. I would rather want my innocence destroyed at an early age than at an older age with more pain. If everyone read books that taught us that that everyone should do what is right, then we would really be living in a perfect society. I think that children should learn more about the not-so-good sides of society and get prepared to get screwed over in the real world while knowing that there are still good in the world.

Then again, like Thorin said, we can forget everything about subliminal messages and deeper meanings and live our lives in ignorance. After all, ignorance is bliss. Unfortunately, I have never found anyone who is actually able to live in ignorance.

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: humanflyz ]

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 6:28 am

Originally posted by humanflyz:
Then again, like Thorin said, we can forget everything about subliminal messages and deeper meanings and live our lives in ignorance. After all, ignorance is bliss. Unfortunately, I have never found anyone who is actually able to live in ignorance.

I don't think that's what was meant; I think Thorin's point (and please correct me, TO, if I'm wrong

) was that books can and may be read for sheer entertainment value, without assigning specific meanings to them and/or claiming that they intentionally carry some instructional message. For example, I like to read horror stories but I don't pretend that they promote and teach violence or any kind of real-life horror. They're just fun to read.

VoodooDali · Post by **VoodooDali** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 7:35 am

This thread is making me think about the books my father (a rather eccentric guy) encouraged me to read at a young age. This, I believe, is why I am totally warped. The moral, I suppose, is: children are just as smart as adults--they only lack the wisdom that comes from experience. I think that children should always be encouraged to read above their level.
Literature that stands out:
Dylan Thomas (I had an album of his, loved A Child's Christmas In Wales, also had other poems like Fern Hill--"...time held me green and dying, though I sang in my chains like the sea..." I loved the sound of Dylan Thomas' voice and the musicality of his language)
The Hobbit. I was taught to read by sitting in my dad's lap while he ran his finger under the words while reading it aloud to me.
LoTR. Read the trilogy when I was 10--was really blown away. I remember crying my eyes out when Gandalf *died*. Too young to recognize that as a typical plot twist.
Dante's Inferno. Encouraged to read this when I was 11, can't say that I totally understood it, but I loved any book with a map. The Inferno has a fabulous map of hell.
Kafka's Metamorphosis. Read this when I was 11 also. Limited understanding, but still plowed through it since I was captivated by the whole idea of being transformed into a gigantic insect.
Shakespeare's Macbeth. Read this at 12. Also limited understanding, but I liked the language. Made it easier for me to tackle Shakespeare in high school.

And so on.

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » Wed Nov 14, 2001 3:07 pm

Originally posted by humanflyz:
Are we supposed to tell kids that the world is perfect? I find it unfortunate that some of the themes that books talk about such as morals, ethics, honor, courage, ect, are often not true in the real world. I would rather want my innocence destroyed at an early age than at an older age with more pain. If everyone read books that taught us that that everyone should do what is right, then we would really be living in a perfect society. I think that children should learn more about the not-so-good sides of society and get prepared to get screwed over in the real world while knowing that there are still good in the world.

Like the fact that many books say that the ends do not justify the means.

In the real world, can anyone answer this? No.

Georgi · Post by **Georgi** » Fri Nov 16, 2001 12:55 pm

Well, I saw the movie today (yep, first day of release, and no, I didn't have to book in advance

), and thoroughly enjoyed it

Whenever I go to a movie featuring kids, I usually worry that they'll be irritating little brats (especially when the director previously directed Home Alone... *shudder*), so I was pleasantly surprised when the kids in this movie weren't. Daniel Radcliffe gives a fairly mature performance as Harry, and I particularly liked Rupert Grint as Harry's friend Ron... The adults were also very well cast, and as good as one would expect from the cream of British acting talent. It's beautifully shot, with some excellent special effects (the Quidditch match is great), and the script is touching without being overly sentimental. At two and a half hours (long for a kids' movie), it never drags and still manages to leave you wanting more. I've heard criticisms that a lot that was in the books has been omitted, but it seemed to me there was a great deal of detail included.

Two thumbs up!

Georgi · Post by **Georgi** » Fri Nov 16, 2001 1:05 pm

Oh, and another thing...
Why was the title changed from the Philosopher's Stone to the Sorceror's Stone for America? (Originally for the book, and subsequently for the movie, which meant that two versions of some scenes had to be filmed...)

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » Fri Nov 16, 2001 1:53 pm

Originally posted by Georgi:
Oh, and another thing...
Why was the title changed from the Philosopher's Stone to the Sorceror's Stone for America? (Originally for the book, and subsequently for the movie, which meant that two versions of some scenes had to be filmed...)

Also the fact that the American Goblet of Fire was 700+ pages, and the British/Canadian version was 634 pages long. A difference of 100 pages!

IIRC, they change words like "time table" to "scheduale (or however you spell it

)". Might have made Hagrid's accent easier to read, and probably made the print larger (perhaps explaining the 100 page difference of the Goblet of Fire).

Must.. see... movie...

[ 11-16-2001: Message edited by: Gaxx_Firkraag ]