I just don't get the love for these books. Not that they are bad. I am glad they inspired a lot of kids to read that might not otherwise read. I read them, they are reasonably interesting. There is just such better science fiction books around.
OT: Harry Potter
- Thread starter Carolina4
- Start date
I just don't get the love for these books. Not that they are bad. I am glad they inspired a lot of kids to read that might not otherwise read. I read them, they are reasonably interesting. There is just such better science fiction books around.
The books just had a magical (of course!) feel, and I think a lot of people were drawn in by following the kids as they grew up. Plus, this isn't anything close to science fiction.
These books just had a "feel" that kept me coming back over and over. Can't really explain it. I read every night when I go to bed to help me get to sleep. But while I was reading these years ago, I actually looked forward to going to bed to read.
It is true many call this area as science fantasy rather than science fiction. I know a lot of people are fans of the book series. Critics point out the idea at least of a fantasy book about a wizard school like Hogwarts is directly stolen from Ursula K. LeGuin. The books are dumbed down to middle school level, probably why it is so popular with middle schoolers. The great science fantasy writers like JRR Tolkien, Piers Anthony, TH White, Roger Zelazny, etc probably are glad she got kids reading, but hope they graduate to higher grade works.
Here is what LeGuin said about the ripoff of her book A Wizard of EarthSea:
Modern writers have credited A Wizard of Earthsea for introducing the idea of a "wizard school", which would later be made famous by the Harry Potter series of books, and with popularizing the trope of a boy wizard, also present in Harry Potter. Reviewers have also commented that the basic premise of A Wizard of Earthsea, that of a talented boy going to a wizard's school and making an enemy with whom he has a close connection, is also the premise of Harry Potter. Ged also receives a scar from the shadow, which hurts whenever the shadow is near him, just as Harry Potter's scar from Voldemort. Commenting on the similarity, Le Guin said that she did not feel that J. K. Rowling "ripped her off", but that Rowling's books received too much praise for supposed originality, and that Rowling "could have been more gracious about her predecessors. My incredulity was at the critics who found the first book wonderfully original. She has many virtues, but originality isn't one of them. That hurt."
I think it was the Bible that said there is "nothing new under the sun."
There is, I think, an originality to both Rowling's work and that of Leguin, who from what I've read takes herself very seriously. I think I gave Earthsea a try some years back and couldn't get into it. I may try again after reading your post.
I think those who dismiss Rowling as "dumbed down" are being unfair to both her and to adults who find the story a good read. I can think of far, far worse writers than Rowling.
By the way, while I am not a reader of fantasy in general (a good story is a good story; good writing is good writing) I am a fan of both Tolkien, which I read in high school, and also T.H. White's "The Once and Future King," which I have read as both a youngster and as an adult.
I believe it is one of the best books I've ever read on Arthurian legend. It was cool to see a mention of his name. I thought he'd been forgotten. That's why I weighed in on your post.
And, I wish Peter Jackson would give a try and making "The Once and Future King."
The Once and Future King could be a hilarious movie.
Rowling deserves credit for putting the apprentice Wizard story in a form that so many enjoy. LeGuin is a lot more densely written and not as "fun" to read in the manner Rowling managed to write. Thus Rowling caught lightening in a bottle. I just agree with LeGuin it is silly to call it original. That doesn't mean it isn't good. Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe is a great shipwreck story, even if Shakespeare's The Tempest was written 100 years earlier. It doesn't have to be the first shipwreck story to be a good one.
If reading LeGuin, I would pick The Left Hand of Darkness over Wizard of Earthsea. But if I get to direct your reading, I wouldn't go with LeGuin at all. Try Roger Zelazny's truly awesome series (the Amber series) starting with Nine Princes in Amber. Piers Anthony's Xanth series starting with A Spell for Chameleon is very similar in light tone to the Rowling books. If you haven't read Larry Niven's A Mote in God's Eye you should, though that is closer to sci fi than sci fantasy. That is my recommendations. I could give 100 more.
There have been a few books about wizarding schools. One of my favorite series that I've been reading(really just waiting for the last book in the trilogy) is the Kingkiller Chronicles. A young man who belongs to a troup of entertainers has his whole family murdered and he goes off to the university to study magic and try to find the truth about the supernatural killers who murdered his family.
Recommend going to Universal.. Took my grandkids two years ago this month. They knew everything about Harry Potter. Nana and I knew nothing. Now, I have just completed the 2nd movie and I see a lot in the movies that I saw at Universal. Wish I had seen the movies or read the stories first...
Don;t forget to have a Butter Beer, and a chocolate frog!!
I guess I'm the only person who enjoyed both the books and the movies. The only movie I didn't care for out the series was part 1 of the Deathly Hallows. Fantasy as a whole has always been difficult to duplicate on screen, kinda like Stephen King(never a movie to equal any of his books, Christine, maybe?). I think they've done a decent job on HBO with Game of Thrones and they did a decent job with Lord of the Rings although with both, so much had to be cut out of the books to make it on screen.
I enjoyed both books and movies, although I think the books are far better. (As books usually are). A lot of my enjoyment of the HP books came from the same area as my enjoyment of the A Song of Ice and Fire series (Game of Thrones): speculation. I really enjoyed the theories regarding how the series would end, what role certain characters would play, what some random, seemingly meaningless prop might be to the deeper understanding of the story. With ASOIAF, there are way more speculations and theories to be enjoyed. Unfortunately, it looks like we may never get our answers, as book 5 was published 8 years ago.
I was hoping the last book would hit the shelves before the last season came on HBO. I thought that may have been the reason for the long hiatus between the new season and the one before. Guess I was wrong.
Yeah, I've been hoping for several years that Winds of Winter would be released before an HBO season. Now, I'm hoping GRRM has not only finished Winds of Winter, but also book 7 (A Dream of Spring?) and is waiting for the HBO series to be complete before publishing...in my little fantasy world, GRRM, his publishers, and HBO have decided that waiting to release the final books would be better for the book and TV series.
Yeah, its just a dream.
As for the ASOIAF theories/speculations: I'm not sure if it is good, bad, or perhaps even inaccurate, but several of the more popular theories appear to have been confirmed on HBO. Now, I'm actually hoping that GRRM decides to go in a different direction with the books on a few.
R+L=J, Frey Pies, Sandor Lives, Robert Strong/Mountain. (Those are just a few theories that are "confirmed", not necessarily ones I want written differently. In fact, I like all 4 of those.)
I've never read any of the HP books, but have watched all the movies several times over each. I didn't get into the books, but knew of them and knew that they were very popular. When the first movie came out, and it was a success, I decided to watch the 2nd one, and watched the 1st one afterwards. I was inspired to watch after watching the Lord of the Rings - I had read those books at a younger age, and enjoyed the movie version so much, that I guess I considered them to be similar in genre, being both fantasy fiction.
I agree, the first 2 Potter movies were more geared for a younger audience, while the later ones got more darker and more mature with each release. I guess that makes sense to a degree: the earlier movies focused more on kids learning about the wonders, mysteries, and dangers of magic and all that, and then once that was all done, the later movies focused more on why the point of the movies were there to begin with....
I agree, the first 2 Potter movies were more geared for a younger audience, while the later ones got more darker and more mature with each release. I guess that makes sense to a degree: the earlier movies focused more on kids learning about the wonders, mysteries, and dangers of magic and all that, and then once that was all done, the later movies focused more on why the point of the movies were there to begin with....
Notta biggie here, but Tom Felton (i.e. he played Malfoy) is in this YouTube series, as is the girl that played Tonks...
Last edited:
Latest posts
-
-
-
It sickens me when I realize Muschamp ran our program so far into the ground it's going to take- Latest: Southern Fried Chicken
-
-
