Harry Potter

[arturchix]

For those who are enjoying reading the Harry Potter books, just today was announced that the last book "Harry Potter and Deathly Hallows" will be released 21st July 2007!

Ain't it a bit weird from a marketing point of view that it's about a week later than the planned worldwide release of "Harry Potter and Order of the Phoenix" movie?

[theLuckyDragon]

Yay! Although she could have chosen a better title, IMO. I think this is the only one that doesn't sound as catchy as the other ones do.

[Panda Tar]

Goody. I wonder how they'll translate that to Portuguese. It was fairly good until 5th book. After that...well, sixth book went into a wild card.

Making it a week later will save, at least, one week of spoils of those who won't read the book. They'll know the ending nonetheless, because people WILL talk. Depending on it, the movies will gather more people or just be too disappointing so they won't keep watching the movies.

A friend of mine just told me the translation....
"Harry Potter e as Insígnias Mortais".

Oh, we should make a spoil discussion, eh?

So, what do you think will happen?

[theLuckyDragon]

This.

[Corribus]

I don't get all the Harry Potter hype. I read the first book and thought: meh. Thinking I must have missed SOMETHING I read the second and thought: meh again. For kids I can see the benefit because it gets them into reading but I just don't see the allure for adults.

[Veldrynus]

I don't get all the Harry Potter hype.

Easy. It is for kids, and adults who think like kids.

[arturchix]

I don't get all the Harry Potter hype. I read the first book and thought: meh. Thinking I must have missed SOMETHING I read the second and thought: meh again. For kids I can see the benefit because it gets them into reading but I just don't see the allure for adults.

That's a common mistake. First two books and the movies indeed are more for kids, but starting with the third they are just great. Try reading "Order of the Phoenix" which is my favourite HP book and you'll be surprised, how great book it is.

[theLuckyDragon]

Yes, it gets darker in the later books. I haven't had the chance to analyse the contents thoroughly because I don't have the books, but as far as I can remember, the action contains some general good lessons for the younger audience. As for other people, I guess it tickles their fancy for a blend of fantasy and real life.

Plus, Rowling's writing style is absolutely entrancing. I, for one, cannot put a HP book down until I've finished reading it to the very last word or sleep kicks in, and I mean this litterally. Twelve hours of uninterrupted reading, for example, isn't much for me if it's a HP book.

[ThunderTitan]

I don't get all the Harry Potter hype.

Easy. It is for kids, and adults who think like kids.

Once you read the first one you just have to know how it ends... if only for the hope that harry bites the bucket.

[Veldrynus]

Yes, it gets darker in the later books.

That's Rowling's (successful) attempt to conquer newer customer segments.

[Corribus]

I found Rowling's writing style dry, simple, juvenile and lacking color. The plots are shallow and predictable. The characters one dimensional. I don't know - I just did not find the books engaging at all. The books are written for children and it is reflected in the writing. But that's not really an excuse because so was The Hobbit.

[theLuckyDragon]

How many books did you read?

[ThunderTitan]

But that's not really an excuse because so was The Hobbit.

By publishers decree. It's more like a censored film then kid stuff.

That's Rowling's (successful) attempt to conquer newer customer segments.

Or keep her growing fans interested. Remember, this all got started as a story for her kid.

[Corribus]

How many books did you read?

2.5. I gave up halfway through the third after wondering why I was wasting my time.

[Panda Tar]

I found Rowling's writing style dry, simple, juvenile and lacking color. The plots are shallow and predictable. The characters one dimensional. I don't know - I just did not find the books engaging at all. The books are written for children and it is reflected in the writing. But that's not really an excuse because so was The Hobbit.

That's somewhat understandable, even if I like her way to write. I miss something about the characters, as if all other characters are left aside.

About those info of the 7th book:

What do you think of Snape? For me, until now, that's the most puzzling part of all, more than who will die at the end (and can be Snape himself for some aweing reasons ).

[arturchix]

I found Rowling's writing style dry, simple, juvenile and lacking color. The plots are shallow and predictable. The characters one dimensional. I don't know - I just did not find the books engaging at all. The books are written for children and it is reflected in the writing. But that's not really an excuse because so was The Hobbit.

Oh man. If you have read the first two books, OK, two and a half, you could think they are shallow and predictable (since the author's initial audience indeed were only kids) but talking about all of the HP books (six so far) in general like that, that's just wrong. If you had read all of the books and could say "Yeah, all of them are shallow and predictable, JKR's style is dry, simple, juvenile and lacking color", then I would respect that. It kinda reminds me a local cardinal here in Latvia once announced that Harry Potter books should be banned, they contain heresy, they suck etc. After a journalist asked whether the man had read any of the books or seen any of the movies, the reply was "No! And I don't even intend to". Meh, preconception. I'm not saying this is the case, but sounds familiar.

Plus, did I hear someone talking about mature stuff? What are you doing here at Celestial Heavens - the fansite of Heroes computer game - then?

P.S. I didn't enjoy the first two books too much either, actually. The best stuff starts in book 4 and later. So don't judge it too hard before trying out the best stuff.

[Panda Tar]

Narnia is something for kids, actually. I have a fit when reading something the writer keeps talking to the reader (in that particular way), as if talking to a very dim-minded person.

[theLuckyDragon]

2.5. I gave up halfway through the third after wondering why I was wasting my time.

Well I won't say you might like it better after you read the fifth or sixth one if that's how you feel about the first two and a half. It's your opinion.

I will however point out that there is a difference between Rowling and Tolkien, from the point of view of their personalities, their past experiences, their motivations to write, and that difference most probably has something to do with the differences in style.

Also, could you please tell me if/why is Harry one-dimensional in your opinion?


@arturchix
Yes, right after Cedric dies. Vel might have a point with what he said about that "strategy", but I tend not to attribute that kind of thinking to people I don't know.

@Tar
I've read all the Narnia books and indeed it feels as if it's directed to a very young audience. What annoy me the most are the references to Christianity that become more obivous in the last books.

[Panda Tar]

Also, could you please tell me if/why is Harry one-dimensional in your opinion?

May I give an answer from my part, but mostly taking my and my friends opinion?

The book is mostly about Harry's thinking, isn't it? "He was sure that...", "He swore that...", "What's the problem with him...?". You're not allowed to know about anyone's thinking, but his. You may tell what they are thinking by their attitudes - and those the parts where I mostly laugh (because of the image we make in our head about that event ). We don't know about personal daily deeds of any other character, even Hermione, which is one of the main characters. We know she has muggle parents, but so what? Nothing more than'at. We discovered where Snape was living just in the last book! The other teachers, we have no idea of their living. Besides, where are those other teachers when ruckus happens at Hogwarts? Like, that Vector, Sinistra and Sprout, don't sprout by anytime during danger (Trelawney is quite understandable, though). They are like ghosts, more than Binns is himself. McGonnagal is supposed to live at Hogwarts, for sure, but nothing more you know about her. Nothing. Dumbledore is also mystical, having a brother and such, but nothing more as well. It looks like he is 150 years-old at least.

Back to Harry, you know about his thoughts and such, but you know nothing about his learnings, studies, etc. You reach certain chapters and they already know lotsa stuff and you don't know when they have learned those. It gets a bit sad, because you feel like you have missed their evolution, and just the dimension of tragedy and plot seems visible (in Eldest, you have quite a long way with Eragon learning all his abilities - although I particularly don't think Harry Potter's books would be better in that way. So, the problem is about the way to write that was chosen ). There are no other branchs of story leading to other paths within characters. It gets wearing sometimes. For instance, in 1st book, the only spell you know they learned is Alorromora and the Vingardium leviosa (Wingardium or else). It's just that strange that in Book 2, they already know many other things, and you didn't catch up with it. All the other characters are "just there", filling up blank spaces. Odder becomes on book 5 and 6 that they use the same spells that appeared in the book, but nothing new appears from their part, but you know there's something else. I cannot explain properly. It just looks so unlikely for Hermione to cast Petrificus Totallus in 1st book, then they keep using that spell for the next all books, as if nothing really stronger or more efficient exists, doesn't it? Stupefy is also a deja vuuush.

And Hagrid...will Avada Kedavra bounce onto him as all other spells? Why don't those Death Eaters cast that spell on Hagrid for a change? Where's Fluffy? Grawp? Some people just vanish and are never mentioned for a long while.

The fourth book becomes interesting because it shows more other characters, their behavior, actions and appearances. It's interesting seeing things outside Hogwarts for once. You know that's there is "life outside". What about other witches and wizards that could join Voldemort's club from other countries. We know none of those, at all, even having references about him going to and fro.

For me, those are the most frustating topics within JK's books, because they only show Harry's thinking and his path into some events, but shows not his evolution in a detailed manner. And that's why I think it could be considered one-dimensional.




And the plots can be caught by following the ellipses and dashes! If you read something on the last books, you'll see a hint of something important being followed by dash or ellipses. "Vanishing cabinet..."; "It hurt more when he was torturing Avery..."; etc. But by now, I'm just puzzled by Snape, only. Nothing really tricky is banging my mind when talking about the rest (I've had a long thinking when Sirius died, which was weird and full of holes where he can be back at any time, but again, he can simply die in that way - leaving no explanations, which would be something like Jk to write). Snape can be good or bad (very thoughful). If he is bad, it'll be too simple. If he is good, he'll be like I think he is, but then I'd be less happy because I don't like to know the right thing in a book. I like to be surprised.

After reading that site, something has still got my attention: Lily Evans will be important. Harry's eyes. This is something that wasn't expected. I just hope it's nothing silly, or those things like heir of a mystical hidden power, since he has already got many unlikely powers. About Umbridge. It's possible for her to return to Hogwarts in Snape's place. It's most likely to have a term happening in Hogwarts while Harry and Co. is going around looking for those Horcrux. I won't fit sending them to Hogwart by any means at all, maybe just to call for help, or maybe for a dramatic finishing touch: "Where Harry has started being a wizard, is where he'll die like one".

And for really wild guesses: What if that two-side mirror of Harry's is Sirius' Horcrux?

[theLuckyDragon]

@ the first part of the post
Do remember that JKR doesn't describe the whole semesters. Usually things happen at the beginning of the year, at Halloween, at Christmas, some generic timeframe during spring, and around Harry's birthday. Would you have liked a detailed account of all courses?

As for things being presented from Harry's point of view... what's wrong with that? It's like a first-person narrative, just in the third person (a sort of litterary concept that you need to look at standing on your head )