Young Writers Society

Ofour wrote:I say, stop obsessing over one set of books and read a broad variety so you can really tell whether they are so super brilliant.

Now, that's a little insulting, ne? Maybe you didn't intend for it to be, but it sounded it. I am a Harry Potter obsessed fangeek, but I'm still pretty well read, if I do say so myself. I am a fangeek because I've read so many other really good books, and very, very few of them have been even close to as singularly excellent as the Harry Potter series*. Some were even better, but very, very few books or series lend themselves to the in-depth, intertextual referencing and research that Rowling's work lends itself to. It's like Lord of the Rings in that you can research it extensively and never run out of interesting new information.

---
*or, the first and third books, which were the best

I know, people seem to discredit it because it's an easy-to-read "children's" book. The amount of depth and history that has gone into that world is incredible. Of course, in that area you could never compare to Tolkein. But that's what gets me mad. We may never see another book that is as in depth in the history and world as Tolkein's, and it's irritating that all other fantasy books are constantly compared to it. It's in a league of its own, and it should just be left that way.

I'm thinking about reading those books over summer break...I found the movies terrible, but since everybody's comparing them to Paolini, I guess I should try...


Anyway, just because we enjoy talking 'bout HP DOES NOT mean that we only read them! I would DIE if I only read HP!
The reason we like to talk about it is because -gasp!- EVERYBODY ELSE KNOWS WHAT THE HECK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT!
If, for instance, I started blabbering about the Gerald Morris King Arthur books, most of you would probably have no idea what was going on. (GO, TERENCE, GO!) But with HP, it's sort of a given that everybody knows at least what the term "Minister of magic" is. :l

When I read the books for the first time I thouht that they were very good. However, I then went on to read a large collection of Robert Westall, some Kurt Vonnegut and some stories by H G Wells. I found all of these much more enjoyable books. I thought (wrongly) that all those who thought that Harry Potter was brilliant could not have read many books because I had found so many which were better (in my opinion, that is). I apologise if anyone felt insulted, that was not my intention.

KazSmurf wrote:I know, people seem to discredit it because it's an easy-to-read "children's" book. The amount of depth and history that has gone into that world is incredible. Of course, in that area you could never compare to Tolkein.

The real difference is that Tolkein's work is entirely self-referential*. It exists entirely on it's own; Rowling's world depends on the real world. Subjectivity aside, they are different genres within the larger umbrella of fantnasy.

---
*mostly; there are some parallels and references to the real world, and according to the canon it's an alternate history of England, or so I hear, but the world can (and does) exist in it's own little universe

I've read all of the books, but only once for each one. So the last time I read the first book was the year it came out. I'm not ZOMG obsessed with them. I don't remember half the things that most people do. I've seen all of the movies, as well, and know what they screwed up in the last one, such as that the Weasley twins are supposed to be given Harry's winnings from the tournament so that they can leave school and open their joke shop in the next movie, but that didn't happen in the Goblet of Fire movie. I've joined a few sorting communities on Livejournal but I've ended up leaving them- either because of stupid drama or because I really don't fell like I'm in to the fandom enough to really be able to sort people. I do enjoy the books and movies, but not to the obsessive extent that most people do.

I think that Harry and Voldemort definitely have to die, in order for no one else to be able to continue to write more books. Outside of them, Ron, Hermione, Hagrid, McGonigal, and any other member of the Weasley family seem to all be up for possible death. Pretty much anyone that's been like a family to Harry...outside of the Dursleys, because while they were his family, they didn't treat him like he was family, and also because they're not magic users. I'd be very surprised if they were to get killed off...although it might be an interesting twist of events.

I think what draws even adults so much to these books is that it's an original idea, and if their kids read the books, and because they're so popular they'll have the opportunity to experience the books with their kids. I didn't exactly say that right but I'm not sure how else to explain it. XD My aunt, who is in her...60's or so...and she's read them (I don't remember if she's read all of them or not) because my (second) cousin, her grandson, has gotten in to them.

So yes, that's my rant on that. I think it's sad that people want to ban those books from schools because they "teach witchcraft," because it's like they don't trust their own child's intelligence and whether or not they can tell the difference between fiction and reality. If a kid is old enough to be able to read a chapter book consisting of more than, say, ten chapters, then they can probably tell the difference between what's fiction and what's real, especially if they've seen enough movies and tv shows to know that they're not all real.