Harry Potter: Irritating Little Honor Student
Toward the so-so ending of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 I started to wonder: After all this time, when is Lord Voldemort going to catch a break? Here’s a guy who has worked tirelessly for years to extinguish one bothersome little brat, achieved ultimate power and yet — there’s always some last-minute technical loophole that foils him, through no fault of his own.
Still, his lack of attention to detail can be frustrating. When you kill somebody, you really should check your work. Don’t they teach that at Evil School?
My feelings for He Who Has No Nose (Ralph Fiennes) outweighed any emotional involvement in the fate of Harry, Hermione, and Ron. Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) is — let’s face it — a largely passive figure who is given all the magic, coaching, emotional support, and clues he needs at any given moment to ensure his temporary triumph at the next obstacle. In a way, Superman was boring too, but he was forced to be a loner. And his very squareness (particularly in the 1978 original film, in which his wide-eyed optimism clashed interestingly with the setting of a tawdry New York City at its Taxi Driver-era nadir) made him an outcast, even a contrarian. Harry isn’t a walking symbol of Truth, Justice, and the British Way. He stands for a generation who have been told at every step of the way that they are special, they are golden, they are chosen, they are bound to succeed. All around him good people are risking, or even laying down, their lives so he can self-actualize. He’s an irritating little honor student, isn’t he?
Another opinion piece criticizing the success of the Harry Potter series written by someone who clearly has not read the books. Trust me, most of the “cereal-dispenser” aspects are the films are very frustrating for the fans. The thing I dislike most about the films are the way the book plots are watered down so that those who only watch the films can follow. But this is not a piece criticizing the films vs. the books – it is a lazy attempt to take a swipe at my generation through one of its most beloved stories. I’ll be the first to point out what is wrong with people my age, but I suggest the author familiarize himself with the source material before embarrassing himself further with his “adult” analyses.
Hear, Hear!
The series is not without flaw. How could it be? But a recurring theme of the books is that Harry is NEVER comfortable with the adoration he receives. More than that, the wizarding world is as fickle as ours, and the press and public are willing to turn on him at the drop of a hat.
What the books do that the films cannot, is give insight into Harry’s frame of mind. Harry doubted that he was a genuine chosen one every step of the way, and later fully expected to die for his cause, perhaps not even achieving his goal. He was as prone to despair as anyone fighting a war might be, and Mr. Boot really begrudges him the support of what friends he still has?
The books were character-driven, and yes, sometimes the plots strained belief. What an unpardonable sin for a fantasy story. The movies don’t do a very good job of maintaining the focus on character. But at its heart, the series was about human interaction in extraordinary circumstances.
“Another opinion piece criticizing the success of the Harry Potter”
I re-read the article and cannot see where the “success” was criticized. Overall I agree with the author. Even if I put on my childhood beanie, I cannot buy into these stories. I think the problem is that they ask you to suspend disbelief so often and in so many disjointed ways that it ends up having the impact of an 8 year old making up a fantasy story on the fly. And as for the character struggles – where is the suspense if when painted into any corner – you can magically make a paint brush appear, paint a door on the wall, open it and walk out. At least Superman had kryptonite to worry about.
As I said, the author was using the fact that Potter has so enamored my generation as a means to criticize my generation. His attack on its success was inherent: he was lamenting the fact that Potter was successful, because of what it supposedly represents. And I surmise from your comment that you aren’t too familiar with the books as well.
“And I surmise from your comment that you aren’t too familiar with the books as well.”
Prove it.
If you are gonna put on your big boy pants then talk like one. You made a statement. Now you need to back it up with evidence.
Saying “Oh you just don’t know the material.” is not proving something wrong. It’s saying that it is but there are no points to back up the statement.
How about the fact that he says:
“And as for the character struggles – where is the suspense if when painted into any corner – you can magically make a paint brush appear, paint a door on the wall, open it and walk out. At least Superman had kryptonite to worry about.”
Tommy doesn’t need to prove presto-chango didn’t read too many of the books, presto already did with that comment.
But if you insist, I’ll provide reasons.
The character struggles involved a lot more than the fight scene in the last chapter. The second book, for example, involved the majority of the school thinking he was a freak. A similar struggle happened in the 5th book. Then from the 5th-7th books the main internal conflict is Harry being uncomfortable with people dieing for him. Then toss in the subplots (Ron and Hermoine bickering, Hermione working to free house elves) and the character surprises (Quirrel is evil! Moody is an imposter!) and you have a lot more than Deus ex Machina fights.
Created on the fly? The passing mention in the first book that Harry and Voldemort have wands with a similar origin comes back in the 4th. But it’s a good point, Harry got lucky a lot. And that’s exactly what he tells “Dumbledore’s Army” when they ask him to train them in Defense.
Thanks, AP. My point was that the fact that the author and prest-chango hasn’t read the books is obvious to anyone that has read the books, and AP did that nicely.
My kids enjoy the movies…I do not…it is their opinion that matters in this case…not the authors or the critics…
So all of you “adults” can tear them apart..the kids don’t care…and the author of Potter just laughs her way to the bank…
Once again, your opinion doesn’t matter..
‘Ear ‘Ear!
As I was reading what the kid wrote about Harry Potter, I was laughing to myself, going like , “Ahahhaha did he even read the book????”
“Don’t they teach that at Evil School?”
Wizards don’t use computers.
Without a computer, how could he find and study the Evil Overlord List?
I mean really, putting a horcrux into a snake? Everyone knows turning into a giant snake never helps.
Duh!
As for the movie, I agree.
The timing was awful, and the dialogue cheap. I see that as more the fault of the director and screenwriter, as the leads looked to be doing their best with rather weak material.
Of course overall I found the books to be rather weak to begin with, but then so many are enamored of them even trying to suggest any flaws is pretty much a lost cause.
You’re dead on with the “giant snake” comment. Apparantly neither Voldemort nor Harry ever watched “Buffy the Vampire Slayer”. She faced overgrown snakes (or snake/human hybrids) on at least four separate occasions, and never needed more than five minutes to kill any of them (and she did it without a wand – although she did use high explosives or incendiaries for two of them).
I haven’t read the books or seen the final film but I have read a lot of fantasy and seen a lot of fantasy films.
The Prisoner of Azkaban was a really fine film, one of the best in the history of fantasy cinema in terms of a weird vision and there have been many fine moments in the Potter series of films.
It is inevitable that such popular films will be analyzed but that is not why they are made. Yes they are made to make money but the designers and writers clearly stepped up to the plate for the most part. Advancements in special effects have given fans of fantasy visuals they only dreamed of when I was a boy and I say it’s been great.
So they’re full of deus ex machina; Burroughs had more happy coincidences than perhaps any fantasy/SF writer ever and I still loved him. Post-modernist fantasy like George R.R. Martin where heroes die is great too but I’m glad for the thrill of all is well at the end of a Burroughs novel when I had when I was 14. I hardly would’ve had that with Eddard Stark getting his head chopped off.
Relax, enjoy. It’s fantasy – that’s the whole point. Don’t bring the silly world into it.
I haven’t yet watched a Harry Potter movie without falling a sleep. I like British comedy, but in general I don’t like the British acting style. I find it drowsy. Also in Harry Potter movies the main characters are children. I think there are good child actors out there. When I was a kid and we were staging plays in school, there were some kids with real acting talent. The kind of acting where you couldn’t take you’re eyes away. I also noticed that whenever casting agents came to the school looking for kids to star in movies, they chose the 2-3 pretty kids. Which of cause couldn’t act for shit. Which gets us back to my initial point. I fall a sleep during Harry Potter movies. The reason is the British acting style combined with bad child actors.
Movie series like Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings are blockbuster successes because of the strength of the source material. The movies are not well made in my opinion.
OMG! someone DARED to criticize the British Institution which is The World of Potter.
All you Potter fans pull out your books and quote chapter and verse and say why the author has his head up his…well. IMHO The reason Harry Potter was popular was an Escape from the Hackneyed and Regurgitated Dreck that is being served up in the US. But we then find that it is new age Dreck from another country – Boo hoo.
I happen to agree with the author and further say that JK Rawlings kicked her dead horse for more profit.
Happily now The Harry Potter Franchise will sink into the mire of mediocraty that it deserves.
Nah, this wasn’t “criticizing.” This was a petty, spiteful, venomous little diatribe from a jealous little poison-pen scribbler who needs to shred anything better than himself to achieve self-justification.
How does it make him feel, I wonder, to know that this bitter little tantrum is probably the high-water mark of his writing “career,” and any fame or notoriety he achieves from it, he owes to J.K. Rowling and Harry Potter?
I like your comment!
What movies?
———————-
“Why don’t kids notice that their heroes get everything handed to them on a levitating platter?”
Say, WHAT?
———————-
Sheesh! Read a book!
(Read 7 books.)
If you haven’t read the books — preferably twice — you can’t possibly appreciate or intelligently critique the movies.
The Harry Potter series is a beautifully told allegorical saga, filled with memorable characters, delightful multi-lingual puns (with an old-school emphasis on Latin and Greek derivations), intricate plot twists, constant suspense, highly imaginative surprises, and charmingly British tongue-in-cheek humor.
Of course some people can’t, or won’t, appreciate any of that, much less all of it packed into a single work. IMO it’s a great read, beginning on page 1 of volume 1, and highly recommended for anyone who is even the least bit young at heart. Which I guess Mr. Boot, whoever he is, isn’t.
JB in VA says: If you haven’t read the books — preferably twice — you can’t possibly appreciate or intelligently critique the movies.
I call BS. A movie necessarily stands on its own merit. The story works or it doesn’t; cinematography is good or it isn’t. Actors and directors get the job done or they don’t.
In most cases, familiarity with a book actually tends to diminish the viewer’s enjoyment of the film. Such was the case with LOTR.
I haven’t read the first line of the Potter series. The films have been overall enjoyable, if juvenile, but I haven’t been able to talk myself into viewing the films at the local megaplex and probably won’t make the effort for the last in the series.
I agree that the films need to stand on their own merit, but this piece wasn’t criticizing just the films. It was criticizing Harry Potter as a whole. To make such blanket statements about the whole series, books included, one should really read the books as well.
And I can pee better and farther than any of you. Nyahhh.
Honestly….sheesh…it’s just a movie.
Who really cares. Maybe Hollywood will start making a few more movies about real people instead of movies loaded with special effects and animation. It’s all getting very, very, boring.
Spoken like a true fan of fantasy film, which needs fewer of them to be made, and those that exist with fewer special effects and more real-type people.
Mr Boot, I have to agree with Tommy, Ruhan, and JB above. It appears that you never read the books. I would agree with a review which points out the sad deficiencies of the movie(s) compared to the book(s), but that is always the case. The book is always better than the movie. But to judge the book series on the basis of the movies alone is devoid of any merit. If you want to improve your lot as a movie reviewer, I suggest you put a little more effort into your work and do some background preparation … like first reading the book upon which the movie you are reviewing is based.
Well done John! There’s no way, of course, to actually get through to the adults who swallow this thin gruel but we must try. As for the books being better, pishwa! They’re freaking unreadable to an actual … um … adult reader. I tried to read the first one to my kids and, unlike for instance, JRR Tolkien’s masterpieces, I found it poorly written, frustratingly stupid and pretty much a yawn from the word go. I agree entirely, like Superman, wave a wand magic is boring indeed. Harry Potter has been very good for Rawlings and Warners, however.
Horrors!!! How could anyone cast stones at the great Hairy Pothead, alumnus of Hogfarts?!!
I have read the books, much better than the movies, but Rowling is no Tolkein; not even close. . . .and Peter Jackson ‘s take on the Trilogy is a cluster****.
I’m always amused by the comments that are along the lines of “So-and-so doesn’t hold a candle to Tolkien…”
Dude, NOBODY holds a candle to Tolkien. He’s the epitome of fantasy and sub-creation. Comparing someone to Tolkien in order to criticize them is lazy.
Tolkein’s no Howard.
Snow-White’s corpse is moved and she resurrects as the poisoned apple jostles out of her mouth; Cinderella’s fairy-Godmother practically hands her a prince; Jack’s con-artist unwittingly trades him actual magic beans… It ain’t just right; them fairy-tale kids gets all the breaks.
The boy wizard’s last adventure is “a self-important, grandiose disappointment.”
Kind of like Obeyme’s pResidency. Only difference is, Obeyme was never a “boy wizard.”
As an educator, I am thankful that writers like Rowling write books like Harry Potter. The Harry Potter series has led many of the my students who professed to hate reading to not only read one book for fun, but to read 7, a few of which were several hundreds of pages long.
Several of my students were eager to discuss the books and several of them used the literary terms they learned in class to analyze and critique Rawlings work. Students came to me (on their own time) excited to discuss what they liked about the books and what they found lacking. When the movies came out, students engaged in debates about how poorly or well the movies recreated the books, arguing about the directors’ interpretations and the choice of actors to portray the beloved characters.
What was best about the book is that I could introduce my students to the works of Tolkien, Bradbury, and Orwell, and students were better able to grasp and appreciate these classics. In the end, I don’t care what so called sophisticated adults think about the Harry Potter series, the Twilight Series, or any other series geared towards adolescents, because in the end, they lead kids to reading.
Who reads classics after Harry Potter??
And no one reads Twilight because its a load of crap.
what Stephenie Meyer wrote isn’t even a book lol
Let me get this straight.
You have reviewed a kid’s movie and found it childish?
That’s kind of like the editors of Rolling Stone realizing the The Moody Blues were’t Wagner after all.
Or, maybe the dopers realizing Obambi wasn’t going to legalize it.
Yes, Virginia, tricks are for kids.
I am very surprised to read a critique of children’s movies and books on these pages. While we’re at it, let’s make fun of Dorothy and her buds who did most of the work to help her get back to Kansas. I am an intermediate teacher who has read the 7 books several times and seen all the movies because it helps me stay connected with my students. Yes, some of it is stretched, but it’s fantasy for Pete’s sake! Much of it is juvenile, but let’s not forget–these are CHILDRENS’ books!
These books and the 4 in the Twilight series have lead many, many of my “reluctant readers” to eagerly devour 600-page books when previously they wouldn’t even pick up a short book. If you haven’t read the books, you wouldn’t know that they are chockful of references to English and Roman history, ancient mythology and Latin root words. Example: Remus Lupin is a werewolf. Remus refers to the Romulus and Remus myth in which Rome’s founders were raised by wolves, and lupus is Latin for wolf. I have inspired many young readers to read at a deeper level with these books.
Rowling has had a major impact on encouraging young readers. Not too shabby an achievement.
Glad to see someone else agree with me about the value of young adult and children’s literature.
My oldest dauther was three when my wife and I listened to the first book on tape while on a long road trip. We turned the CD off thinking our daughter would be ready to listen to a Disney CD or some other children’s CD. To our suprise she was listening intently and protested vehemently to our turning it off. Today, she and her little sister devour books of all genres. I think Harry Potter had a bit to do with their love of reading. When go see the movies, we have lively debates about how well the movies retold the story, and I am proud to say that they agree that the books are far better.
Several people talk about how the Harry Potter books are unrealistic(fantasy, duh), but it is the real social issues Harry and his friends have to deal with that speaks to many young people. Bullying, young love, relationships with authority, friendship, acceptance of personal responsibility….
Maria and Troll hit the nail on the head. Who else could have encouraged children to read books and enjoy them so much and learn so many important lessons regarding literature and history and fantasy etal. I painfully recall being required to read The Scarlet Letter in high school. Wouldn’t it have been great to have Harry Potter to enjoy?
Also agree with JL that the movies do not stand up to the stories in the movie format.
I actually loved The Scarlet Letter. But I did not read The Scarlet Letter until I was a Senior in High School, after I had gained a level of maturity that allowed me to appreciate the book. I appreciated it more when I read it again in preparation to see the movie version that came out in 90′s.
In the end, it is important for young people to be given literature they can grasp. Books like Harry Potter relate to a child’s experience, thus they are intrigued. As an adult I enjoy the books because they are good fun. I don’t read fantasy and scfi for intellectual stimulation as much as I read them for entertainment. In other words, I go into the reading of the Potter Series with low expectations, so I am not disappointed.
BTW, a train wreck of a movie, The Scarlet Letter movie was a crime.
This.
My youngest son was left out of his older siblings D&D games because he could not (would not) bring his reading level up. He learned to read and comprehend well just so he could read those crazy D&D sheets. D&D got my son thru Princeton.
To the “So what? They’re reading!” crowd, I respond: How about those Obama-loving college kids — “So what? They’re voting!”
I tried to get through the first book and found it tedious as hell. Not only is the structure nonexistent; the prose itself is bad. I saw one of the movies (Prisoner of Azkaban) and found it equally awful. I had to fight off sleep.
There is great kiddie lit out there. Fifty years from now, people will wonder at the popularity of this badly-written series.
As for the Twilight series, they say that Stephenie Meyer’s writing is improving (she’s turned to aliens for her next story), which is great, but I still revolt against this whole new “Young Adult” genre. Young adults can read and love the classics. I wonder when those who love the sex-and-blood-crazed Cullen clan will figure out that Emily Bronte has all that and more in Wuthering Heights. Team Heathcliff or Team Edgar, yo?
Who reads Twilight??!?!?!
no one wants to read about some… sparkling vampire having sex with a girl
I mean, I stopped reading after the second book because it got sooo boring!
Honestly, I don’t get the book covers. What’s with the apple? and the ribbon? and the chess board?
“I happen to agree with the author and further say that JK Rawlings kicked her dead horse for more profit.”
Bah humbug, wish I could do that. A lot of little kids had a great time, and it only cost mom and dad the cost of today’s theatre tickets, and overpriced drinks, and overpriced popcorn… That aside, Harry isn’t just an irritating little honor student, he is an orphan, a selfless heroic survivor who rises to every occasion, who every little kid might positively emulate and identify with, without having nightmares because it gets too real. It wasn’t, after all, intended to be In Cold Blood, Romeo and Juliet or Saving Private Ryan…
Good comment. I find HP rather shallow, and Rowling needs a sterner editor almost as much as Tom Clancy. But, 1) the books helped to get my kids reading at an early age, and 2) the idea that if one confronts one’s fears, has faith, and tries to be brave, good will come of it, is not a bad lesson for kids at all.
The fool who wrote this article has just exposed himself as the fool he is. The books and movies have made and will continue to make billions of dollars because they are entertaining. That is something the writer of this article clearly hasn’t a clue about, and most likely never will.
You don’t even need evil school. All he needs to do is search for Evil Overlord List.
http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html
#6 is particularly instructive, “I will not gloat over my enemies’ predicament before killing them.”
It’s funny how any criticism of a current cultural icon – Michael Jackson, Lady Gaga, “Common,” and yes, Harry Potter – always succeeds in roach-bombing the fans out of the woodwork. Unlike the cucarachas, however, these scuttlers immediately gang up on the exterminator. It happens on every blog I read.
Seriously, we’re talking about a kids’ book here. Entertainment. It’s not as if the author said bad things about the U.S. Constitution. We should all have better things to do. On the other hand, there are probably people writing their doctorial dissertations about Harry Potter and the Latest MacGuffin.
So in the end, who cares? I think “Nothing But Trouble” is a great film, but that don’t mean I’ll beat you up if you disagree with me.
Stand up and say that.
Hey kid, btw, Harry Potter is NOT a kids book. The Harry Potter series is a page-turner to every human being–young or old, male or female.
It’s also based on one of the weakest books in the septology. There is a predetermined destination — the passion play — that doesn’t fit the tone of the first books and doesn’t follow from the plot elements of the earlier books. I would venture a guess that Rowling had the last chapters of book seven imagined and was firmly attached to them, but didn’t really think about setting them up when writing the other books.
It’s really the same problem as the trek across Mordor in The Return of the King. It has to be done to reach the ending, but why oh why does it have to be the focal point of the book? At least Return has the Minas Tirith action to balance out Mordor even if it needed a lot more viewpoint cuts to keep Mordor from dragging. HP has no Minas Tirith. Everyone surrenders to the new order or goes into hiding. The closest thing there are to partisans are people running pirate radio.
It’s the Star Trek effect: which is better? TOS or “The Next Generation?”
One may argue, but there is no comparison…James T. Kirk was far superior to all of his successors, because he waded right in and took charge, no matter what, and solved problems via sheer grit and hard, nasty work. TNG and all that follows was all about being cool, analytical, and solving all problems via some neat, topical quick-fix, which had been discussed over tea in the ready-room.
PJM Trekkies, do you agree?
In TOS, Spock could put someone to sleep by touching their neck. In TNG, the whole cast could put the audience to sleep by talking for an hour.
Oh, and Harry Potter wasn’t an “honor student”… he was a jock who happened to be good in one of his classes.
Brilliant crack about TNG! I was raised on Kirk, and never watched more than 10 minutes – total- of the pale ripoff. Damn, at least Kirk knew how to cut loose with the photon torpedoes! None of this “Prepare …. to negotiate!”
Those who can, do.
Those who can’t, make posts on blogs about how trivial a success the multi-billion dollar book/movie was.
Went to the midnight showing, enjoyed the heck out of it. Nobody under Hogwarts admission age in the crowd, very quiet and respectful, and the only movie I have ever seen where the audience applauded at the end. ’nuff said.
I suppose this is great material if you happen to live the cultural backwater void that is the United States of Moronica. These CGI ventures into video game euphoria simply bore me and my wife to tears. It is comforting to know that this is the final installment, unless the producers somehow manage to dredge up some sort of segue involving one of the characters. Outside of that, hopefully these stories will relegated to Harry’s Secret Chamber Pot forever.
And I suppose you’re MUCH too good for all that “Star Wars” nonsense too.
I did not state that I was “too good” for anything, that was your rush to judgement. The implication was that this material was trite at best and deserves to be dispensed with based on the fact that there is volume of content for children to read, in which contains principals of virtue at a much higher plane…this speaking from a historical standpoint, of course. Are we to assume that young readers in the past were less likely to gain a greater appetite for learning by indulging in works such as Moby Dick, Tom Saywer, Man O’ War or even Nancy Drew? I think not. The young minds that absorbed these writings, myself included, managed to continue on to achieve a greater understanding of life, love, devotion, personal responsibility, etc. without the need to view them all on the silver screen garnering billions for their creators and thereby solidifying their beliefs that these are great literary works. What these minds have produced in comparison to the contemporary crop, only history will bring to bear. BTW…I was wondering how long it would be before one of the contemporary culture junkies would resort to a personal attack rather than respond with anything of substance to this post. Quite possibly, you may be the problem rather than the solution for the current cultural quagmire we find ourselves embroiled in as a nation.
Yes, PsychoDad…I did give the sequels a chance and found that after one jump to hyperspace as in the original, the subsequent offerings for me fell flat like a week old party balloon…kind of tired, worn out and cliché at best. Mel Brooks was right to mock.
“Comforting?” Did someone make you watch these films – are you unable to ignore their presence somehow? Perhaps you could’ve done better with casting three unknown kids who’d carry 7 films over 10 years. Maybe you could’ve made a better set of screen plays that stripped out the non-essential to deliver a film length version one could understand.
Would to god Robert E. Howard had had such “bad luck” as did the Potter films. As a result of Arnold’s mess the mainstream public still doesn’t know what wonderful short stories Howard wrote about Conan. Conan was a shrewd, smart guy not some muscle bound moron with a giant sword. Can you imagine what would’ve happened had that creative team gotten their hands on Potter?
I think it’s time for an adaptation of “Podkayne of Mars.” She’d whip Potter fer fair. I’d play poker with Potter, maybe not Hermione, for sure not with Podkayne, or Trigger Argee.
My family loves the books and movies. Have since day one and that includes my 58 yr old computer brain husband. He started off by reading the books to the kids when they were little and now even my son-in-laws are fans. Fun family fantasy times. Harry Potter is fun:) Something positive in this day and age…thank God!
I’m afraid I have to join the chorus respectfully disagreeing with this. There’s no denying the books are flawed in some aspects (and frankly, the best care wasn’t taken in adapting them to film) but honestly, there’s nothing wrong with indulging one’s imagination for a bit. My parents read us all sorts of classics when my siblings and I were younger–Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Norse and Greek mythology, even Norwich’s “History of Byzantium”–but whenever a new Harry Potter came out, we’d all gather ’round and read that too. It’s not the be-all and the end-all of human literary achievement, but it was entertaining and engaging, and it certainly didn’t teach any of us kids to expect to be handed everything.
Even better, Harry Potter is something that’s managed to largely escape the stigma of being a geek thing. Say “Star Trek fan” and a large number of people immediately think of a man in a basement with Cheetos crumbs on his shirt, but Harry Potter fans can be found in all walks of life, and it’s very refreshing for a fantasy property not to be sidelined by the larger culture. I attended the midnight premiere last night, and the excitement was palpable: everywhere, people were talking about it, sharing their favorite moments, wondering if this or that tidbit would be in the film. The whole theatre burst into applause at the “not my daughter” moment. Sharing something like that–hundreds of strangers, all united by their love of one simple silly story–was absolutely wonderful.
People told me I was stupid for reading Edgar Rice Burroughs as a kid. And although it IS true I am stupid, that’s not why.
It never fails. If something is popular, some people will be there to trash it to show how they are superior to all the morons doing the popular thing.
Are they the best books or movies ever made? No, but I managed to sit through the movies with my kid. The books got her to finally enjoy reading books, and now she reads better stuff, but we all have to start somewhere. When I was a lad, I read all the James Bond novels, which were new at the time. Not the heights of literature, but I enjoyed them and it was better for me than watching cartoons on TV. And they bear little relationship to the crappy movies of the same name.
I have actually read the complete seven volume story twice. I read the first five books to my daughter as bed time tales. Books 6 & 7 she read herself. I read them to to find out what happened. Last summer I read all seven end to end. It is a much better story if you read the whole thing. Watching the movies is useless to judge the worth of the books. With the exception of the Godfather, no movie has ever faithfully represented the book.
The purpose of a novel is to take you somewhere you have never been before, entertain you with a story, and maybe teach you something about life. Harry Potter does all three. The point; there are several. Sometimes the bad guys turn out to be good guys, like Snape or Black. Sometimes famous heroes are poseurs, Lockhart. Sometimes heroes die saving others, Dumbledore. War is Hell, the casualty list at the end is massive. Winning wars takes persevering through the hard times. Those who are the only ones standing up to evil are not always popular, despite their being on the right side of history. Considering that it is a children’s book, those are some important things to be teaching. Concepts that were left out of much of the award winning “literature” the school sent home with my child. Harry Potter is the best thing she read in grade school.
Better stuff??
I stopped reading your comment half-way through because I was so offended!
What’s better than Harry Potter??
Have to agree with many of the previous commentators — this article misses the mark badly. Far from being an “Irritating Little Honor Student” who has everything handed to him on a levitating platter, Harry is painstakingly depicted as a maltreated orphan who grows into a brave and honorable young man who does heroic things in hard circumstances. The various magical mcguffins are just that — props to make the books magical to kids without altering the plot-driving character development story. Perhaps you could argue that the books do not fulfill this, but this piece seems to be arguing a case completely counter to the series’ overt narrative.
I also think that the libertarian anti-statist and pro-individualist themes of the books should commend them to many Pajamas Media readers. I think the series is certainly far, far better than the next likely thing the kids would be reading (if anything).
Harry is not depicted as a mistreated orphan in the book. Not for the most part. He’s usually surrounded by people who adore him and sympathize with his plight, either by affection or obligation. He’s literally never alone in any of the book. That’s why some critics see Potter as some “Trust Fund” kid who has his quest handed down for him.
Potter’s really not a multidimensational character. He’s naturally gifted in some areas by the virtue of his “Chosen” status, and Rowlings treats his academic (magical subjects) struggles as an annoyance that typical high school kids experience in class. Harry’s not shown honing his magic skills to become a stronger wizard (to fight Voldemort) or making tough moral choices by himself.
He does develop a sense of angst and guilt in the last two books, where he shows a penchant for lashing out at his friends and snap at figures from the ministry. He’ll occasionally use the death of his parents to win some arguments. I was just relived that Hermione was not killed in the last book, which I predicted as the next big twist.
Today: Harry Potter — Irritating Little Honor Student
Tomorrow: Cowboys & Aliens — Not Historically Accurate
Is *nothing* sacred on this forum?
Oh hell no…that’s a part of it’s charm.
Be careful, I once banned a commenter from my blog, “Occam’s Critical Pedagogy”, for saying men built the pyramids.
I always thought the “potter effect” on children’s reading habits were overrated. IMO Harry Potter is a brand and a cultural event, and kids pick the books for the same reasons why grownups flock to the theatre to see the next transformer film. Are there studies that demonstrate how Potter love inspires you to read in general?
And it’s just not Potter – when I tutored some Asian kids, their parents would brag “he finsihed all of that LONG Potter books, and read advanced works by Joyce or Kafka!” But almost without fail, the majority of these kids could not pick up on the majors themes or context of the story. If they were to write an essay that compares and constrasts Harry Potter to the characters in “A Wrinkle in Time”, most would read something like “Harry Potter and Meg are both missing a parent and they’re on a journey to fight an evil figure”.
How you read matters almost as much as how MUCH you read.
Agreed, the reading of the books alone will not foster higher levels of thought and literary analysis. That is why parents, mentors, and teachers must engage kids in discussion. Very few children have the ability to analyze and evaluate literature on deeper levels without some guidance. Do I have a study to prove that the the books have help young people improve the quality of how they read? No. I can speak to what I have observed. Harry Potter is accessible. Kids get it. With coaching from mature readers, children can get there.
Example: I had a student come to me in irritation because she noticed the inconsistencies in the plot. She had three books and pointed out how Rowling had not kept the tightest continuity in her work. She felt betrayed. I aksed her why she thought that had happened. I could go into depth about what came out of that conversation, but this is not the forum. Two things struck me. First she said she guessed she needed to do what I she learned Shakespear’s audience did, suspend reality and enjoy the book for what it is, entertainment. Second, similar to why Shakespear wrote his plays, Rowling wrote the books to sell them, not to make literary history or produce the next great classic. This was a ninth grader.
Wow. Was this for real? I’m not a huge HP fan, but someone sure sounds like he has a bad case of sour grapes.
Hee hee… you just reminded me of “Sour Grapes Snape” from the second Harry Potter musical on YouTube!
I must say that these films are all extraordinary well made. It is a great artistic triumph to carry a narrative over that many films over that many years with mostly the same cast and varying directors and have such consistently entertaining and compelling results. Given the rather hokey concept of it all, their ability to charm the audience into a complete suspension of disbelief amazes–it is near instantaneous. There are surprisingly few rough patches.
In the end, I believe that it is the poetics of the films (and to use here the term “atmospherics” would be churlish) that carries the the audience forward, and, yes, one must admit even the “ethics” of the world they create compels. I have seen few films that rely so strongly on special effects use them so deftly as to actually rise above the special effects to a higher level of expression and artistry.
Of course, that they had a polished set of books to work from must contribute to this success, but to me, and here I know some will take me to task, the films are much better than the books. I attempted one of the books and really could not get through it. I found the writing pathetically simple and cartoonish. If this is what passes for the “youth literature” of today, standards have fallen sharply.
The films, on the other hand, are quite sophisticated in intent, content, wit and style–much more so than the standard youth film fare of yore. They most certainly have a broader adult appeal than boomer or Gen x youth films.
When set against such childish stuff as say the Star War films, the Potter films come off rather well. All of the great crossroads of life, good and evil, love and hate, beauty and ugliness, faith and despair, selflessness and megalomania, and slavery and freedom, are given a stunning, almost electric visual expression. They have great iconic force; the archetypes are richly and deeply drawn. Somehow it all rings true. These will remain past youth. Boomers too, whether they know it or not, had such archetypes etched in there minds, notably by Walt Disney (and perhaps Ben Cartwright) and have carried them forward in life, yet compared with the Potter films, Walt looks, well, cartoonish.
The books are weak as literature but the films have real depth. This is the reverse of the experience of the Boomers. Perhaps it is this irony that says more about the differences of the generations than anything else.
I couldn’t agree more with Mr. Boot’s analysis. I found the whole series to be quite boring, including the written word. I celebrate Ms. Rowling’s vision and marketing scheme. I also celebrate the way in which she divined the yearning of the consuming public for fantasy. I celebrate her financial success, something not possible in a non-capitalist society. I simply think it is not good fantasy. The movie versions are little different from “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy and I am more than happy to pass on both books and movies.
david,
The LOTR movie trilogy, while flawed and in need of editing, is far better. It’s not an episodic mess like any Harry Potter book/movie.
I completely disagree with the article, which hints to me that he has not read any of the books. Our son with autism read the whole series over the course of about 3-4 years. The Harry Potter books are the reason he now LOVES to read. His reading and language skills greatly improved, largely due to these books. Part of the joy from reading came with noticing the differences between the books and the movie. We now have a seventh grader who is reading at or above his grade level, and it’s largely due to the books of J.K.Rowling.
Reading this article and most of the comments it provoked, I am left with the feeling that people, incl the writer, substitute the films for the books. Blockbuster movie adaptations of best-selling books is always disappointing.
The worst dis-service Rowling made to her books is to let Hollywood make the films. Given the power and money of Hollywood, Rowling never stood a chance. She increasingly lost control of the narrative. By the end, the movies were telling a tale which no one read about in the books.
From the very beginning, it was evident to me that Rowling did not realise what was happening and about to happen. Allowing Warner Brothers to replace “Philosopher’s Stone” by “Sorceror’s Stone” was a game-changer. Consider the running theme of the books. Voldemort wanted immortality above all. He desired the P Stone because it could help him make the Elixir of Life. But he already knew that it was too risky to rely on this, so he had already started on his Horcruxes. Then, he sought the Elder Wand to make him invincible. The Sorceror’s Stone has no such literary tradition.
The same dumbing down happened to the Ring stories of Tolkien. Only, Tolkien himself was not around to keep control over his work. Rowling is complicit in the serial diluting of her captivating tale. When special effects replace imagination, the story line must adapt to CGI. Sad, really.
Beg pardon, but whan exactly did “honor student” become a term of abuse?
So I should give my 11 year old a copy of Wuthering Hieghts? Most 11 year olds are not ready to digest that type of book because it does not speak to them. They lake the intellectual sophistication and life experience. I say meet kids where they are and help them move up the continum of great works. Most of the “At least they are reading crowd,” on this page has not said Harry Potter is end game, but rather a gateway. If Harry Potter will help my kid access the classic, so be it. YA Lit can help young people become readers so long as they are coached by parent, mentors, and teachers.
37. Mike Stone said:
“Beg pardon, but whan (sic) exactly did “honor student” become a term of abuse?”
It’s been such at least since 1971, when I started school!
Who got abused – constantly – by all the less-evolved?
Yup!
What’s troubling is that now the “ADULTS” see it the same way – which is I guess further proof of the ongoing infantilization of our society.
Well … yah see … those “honor students” cause all kinds of trouble … these kids are always thinkin’ for themselves … believin’ in math-and-science … reading what the Founders actually *wrote* … heck, they might even grow-up to question the wisdom of PJM/Tatler editors!
We can foresee future PJM/Tatler columns pretty clearly:
Harry Potter – Irritating Little Honor Student
Han Solo – Authority-Defying Scofflaw
Indiana Jones – Professor Turns Tomb-Robber
Elwood P. Dowd – Hollywood’s Compromising Softy-Psycho
John Connor – Anti-Corporate Vandal
Henry F. Potter – Heroic Free-Market Evangelist
The Harry Potter books are not great literature… but nor will anyone remember this cranky review in ten years. Or probably five.
Oh … I dunno … folks are finding plenty of enjoyment in making fun of Mr. Boot’s “cranky review” … so maybe he *intended* his review as a parody?
Not to mention, bringing fun to folks definitely *is* a literary achievement. For which, thanks go to Mr. Boot!
I think it’s easy to miss the point Boot is making, forget the movie series even. Why are adults reading Harry Potter again? It’s not even good childrens’ literature, the Narnia stories (which I loved as a kid, you don’t have to be Christian to enjoy them on their own terms), Alice in Wonderland etc – this is good childrens’ literature. So adults devour in the millions derivative and stale juvenile literature (Harry Potter), that I would have considered too juvenile by the age of gee eleven at the oldest; well if that ain’t symptomatic of the decline of Western civilization, what is?
It’s not even the escapist aspect to all this, heck we all need to escape, it’s the brazen juvenile aspect to this escapism that could not have been imagined even thirty years ago, and it is frightening..
Edward Gibbon wrote the Delcine and Fall of the Roman Empire. Some future historian will be writing of this era, ‘The rise of Harry Potter and Barack Obama and the fall of the West’.
MINISTRY OF MAGIC CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL:
The above post is certified to be free of HUMOR, TOLERANCE, and VERIFIABLE FACTUAL CONTENT
(signed) Dolores Umbridge
DIrector, Muggle-born Registration Commission
Funny and true!
You’re funny.
I have to agree with many here. How can we suspect that Mr. Boot has read – or even watched – much of the series with even the slightest bit of attention?
To say “All around him good people are risking, or even laying down, their lives so he can self-actualize” shows a complete lack of understanding. The whole wizarding world knows Harry was attacked by Voldy as a child and ended his reign of evil. Now that the “second wizard world war” is upon them they look to Harry as the one who can stop it – again. This is not something Harry wants.
If a special missions team had one member who had the ability to disarm a big baaad bomb, members of that team would fight – and die – to get that person in the position to do his job. In case Mr. Boot didn’t even see DH-1 (one does have to wonder), Ron sets Harry straight in that people are not dieing for *him*.
“He’s an irritating little honor student, isn’t he?”
An honor student? Come on John, clearly you are not in touch with the material here. Sure, there are some places where the improbable happens at a most fortunate time, but all in all I found it to be a most engaging series where the overall themes and story far outweigh the few literary “tight spots.”
From a guy in his 50′s.
What irritates us math-and-science types is that the HP books never explain how magic works … the students at Hogworts learn magic entirely by rote … with the sole goal of obtaining high scores on state-sponsored proficiency exams … which every teacher knows yields the flimsiest and most fragile kinds of knowledge.
That’s why a really interesting series would have focused on … Minerva McGonagall … Luna Lovegood … Neville Longbottom … and Severus Snape … and the Weasely twins, Fred and George.
Six people (both old and young) who had the habit of authority-questioning independent thought … much more interesting than those boring social conformists Harry, Ginny, and Ron!
There is an incredibly well-written fanfic (yes; such things do exist) of the Harry Potter milieu, titled: Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality. The first installment may be read here:
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5782108/1/Harry_Potter_and_the_Methods_of_Rationality
It is written by the author of the Less Wrong Wiki:
http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Sequences
…a site devoted to rationality and logical thought. The author takes the alternate approach that the orphaned Harry Potter was raised by his LOVING aunt Petunia and her professor husband. Harry becomes a devoted rationalist early enough in life for it to raise in his mind all the questions might expect when he is ultimately informed of his magical heritage.
The story is well-crafted, and maintains a crisp sense of humor as Rational!Harry explores the wizarding world. And, yes, Voldemort is a student of Advanced Overlord Theory, and makes none of the stupid mistakes ascribed to him in the books. HP fans and critics, alike, would do well to give this one a chance. =^[.]^=
DH2 pulled in an estimated $92 million on opening day in the U.S. That’s what you call a winner.
I don’t think too many critics share Boot’s opinion, and the audiences seem to like it too.
I read the first book of the series, didn’t care for it. Loved all the movies, though.
This article makes sense only if you imagine it being written by Severus Snape
. . . or Rita Skeeter
Well, in Star Trek they didn’t explain in any serious way how phasers worked, or the FTL drive. The Star Wars movies, of course, worried even less over such details. Didn’t seem to stop people enjoying them.
The only difference I can see is that Harry Potter dispenses with the pseudo science and calls magic by its real name.
LOL … for the very good reason that schools don’t really want kids to learn how to do magic, fire phasers, or build FTL spaceships!
Heck, wasn’t Scotty the most interesting Star Trek character? “Aye laddie …transparent aluminum … that’s the ticket!”
Or a little more realistically, do schools really want kids to read what the Founders actually wrote about their vision of American republican democracy?
`Cuz there are too many parents—equally on the ideological left and the ideological right—who would be upset if kids learned what America’s Founders really thought and really wrote, about how to build a nation, and upon what foundations.
The Age of Reason
by Thomas Paine
URL: http://books.google.com/books?id=2PgRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA3
Wow, I’ve not seen such arrogance and obnoxious elitism since Obama gave his last speech.
For those of us that have read a wide variety of books – from the classics to the “trite”, I find some of these comments hilarious. Yes, I love Tolkien and he was a good writer – but not perfect. I love James Michener, but he can describe a scene until your eyes glaze over. I like some of Shakespeare’s works, but hate others. The Great Gatsby wasn’t my favorite book and I wasn’t that enthralled with the writing. I love Steinbeck, Lee, Austen, De Cervantes, Homer and Sophocles but can hardly endure Twain, Melville, and Thoreau. I hate the ridiculous and elitist conclusions of Shaw and Marx. Does that mean everyone agrees with me? No. Some of these are listed as great masterpieces, while I found them outright pedantic and supercilious.
HP books may not have been perfectly written masterpieces, but they were hugely entertaining if one allowed their imagination to roam through the pages. They took a reader into a different world and away from their boring everyday lives. That is WHAT a story is supposed to do. They also have led many children to realize books provide a window into other worlds – that of imagination, understanding and enlightenment.
For those of you who do not like HP – so what? It certainly doesn’t mean you have a higher IQ or that your have better taste in books. It just means your imagination is uncomfortable in that world and possible a wee bit stagnant. For those of us who did find them entertaining, despite the triteness, more power to us. We’ve learned to overlook our own smugness and enjoy the little things in life, like Harry Potter, Hermione and Ron.
Certainly not my favorite but wind-ups are seldom the best of a series. My only real disappointment was that after ridding the world of Voldemort, Harry apparently became an accountant.
Read enough of Harry Potter to understand that I didn’t need to read more. Though I don’t particularly enjoy that genre myself, I recognize the talent. And to those naysayers who insist that children reading 700-page books is meaningless because they didn’t get out of the books as much as an adult would…they get more out of it than if they hadn’t read anything. Yes, I’m sure if they read Kafka or something their comprehension will be less than yours. How much do you think they’ll get out of it if they don’t read at all?
On a completely different note: my favorite Harry Potter joke: After a decade, Harry returns to Hogwarts to teach a class of unruly seniors. The name of the book or movie: “Welcome back, Potter.”
It is perfect time to make some plans for the longer term and it is time to be happy. I have read this put up and if I could I wish to suggest you few interesting things or advice. Perhaps you can write subsequent articles relating to this article. I desire to learn more things approximately it!
These discussions miss the point because they miss the “genre” of the
whole book/movie series. That it is a Greek Tragedy from the point
of view of Voldemort and an anti-tragedy from the point of view of Harry.
That is, the subject is the working out of Fate. It is fated that Harry
will succeed (though not necessarily that he will survive) and that Voldemort
will be destroyed. Dumbledore believes that he is the medium guiding harry along the path that Fate dictates, and to some extent that is true. But as
often as not, his plans go somewhat askew. When they do, Fate intervenes …
Harry somehow gets rescued and learns something or does something that furthers the Quest.
Finally, and this is Rowling’s finest achievement, Harry, starting
in book 5 and getting better it it thereafter, realizes this! Note that in the final dialogue between Harry and Voldemort (not seen in the movie) he discusses the ownership of the Elder Wand and what it means. This meaning he figured out on his own, and had all the clues he needed long before his final walk into the Forbidden Forest. He does not state that he knows it during his walk (through the narrator, of course) but we do not know that it was not
in his subconscious. Rowling is literary enough to know that a certain type
of analyst would think of this. I’ll bet she knew it perfectly well
as she wrote the last chapters.
The relationship between Fate, Harry, and Dumbledore is very deep indeed in this series.
Shut up, man, just shut up.
Read the actual series before you start commenting about the movies.
Honestly, I don’t know why I even bother to leave a comment on this crap.
Wonderful issues altogether, you simply won a emblem new reader. What could you recommend in regards to your put up that you made a few days ago? Any positive?