Monk vs. Harry Potter

[ISiddiqui]

What will my son learn from reading Harry Potter?

As in the last book: "There is the easy way to do things and the right way..."

I'm not saying that no one should read the Potter books. But if you could pick one book for, seemingly, everyone in the universe to read, would you pick Harry Potter?

It's close. Either Potter or the first three Foundation Books.

DEFINETLY NOT the Lord of the Rings, my pick for most overrated book of all time.

You really like Harry Potter more than everything on that list? It certainly is true that there is no accounting for taste.

My opinion is different than yours, so that means you have no taste! And since I said it, it must be true!

[Anrhydeddu]

Imran, you can't argue with someone that likes "The Matrix", one of the most senseless and overrated movie of all time.

[ISiddiqui]

It would have been nice if there was something about Harry to admire that would actually be of benefit to the kids to emulate.

I guess we know where you stand on the issue, but I would love for my kids to turn out like Harry. Very brave and loyal to his friends. Great qualities for any kids to have.

[wbonnell]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
I didn't say I read all of them (most I read or tried to before I got bored). But I will check out "A Game of Thrones". You guys know I read a lot of non-fiction history books. Every once in a while, I like much more light and fun reading. That's why I really enjoyed Harry Potter (at least the first two) and Clive Cussler.

Then I implore you to immediately check out "A Game of Thrones". George Martin spins an incredible yarn.

[ISiddiqui]

Imran, you can't argue with someone that likes "The Matrix", one of the most senseless and overrated movie of all time.

I liked the Matrix (1st one, haven't seen the second one yet). The problem is that you have people who want to pigeonhole it into other things. I went and saw a nice action flick with some minor philosophy thrown in. I enjoyed the shooting and kicking .

[Marmel]

I am not a Harry fan, but it has gotten millions of kids who never read, to read books. That cannot be a bad thing.

I'm off to the bookstore. Have a fun night arguing the merits of Mr. Potter.

[Marmel]

dola....

Those jelly beans that have spawned from these books are pretty cool. Extremely disgusting, but pretty cool.

[wbonnell]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
Imran, you can't argue with someone that likes "The Matrix", one of the most senseless and overrated movie of all time.

Though it is metaphysically simplistic (contrived?), I was still intellectually stimulated by the Oracle and Architect scenes in "Reloaded". Since I am a software engineer who happens to be currently reading hard core philosophy for fun, "Reloaded" was certainly apropos.

[oykib]

Originally posted by ISiddiqui


My opinion is different than yours, so that means you have no taste! And since I said it, it must be true!

I wrote that there was no accounting for taste. I didn't write that you were a moron. Discussions can become personal arguments eeither because people make personal attacks or because people decide to take the fact that others have different opinions than them personally.

'There's no accounting for taste' means that there is no way to accurately figure out what someone will like.

I'm very similar to my father. Look like him, Talk like him, the whole deal. His favorite dessert is sweet potato pie. I can't stand the stuff. Even the smell of sweet potatoes makes me ill.

There's no accounting for taste.

[Anrhydeddu]

who happens to be currently reading hard core philosophy for fun,

I guess I shouldn't criticize, I am currently reading both cryptanalogy and 19th century military strategy for fun.

[ISiddiqui]

'There's no accounting for taste' means that there is no way to accurately figure out what someone will like.

Well usually it is used to put down someone's preference, so sorry if I jumped to conclusions.

[oykib]

Originally posted by ISiddiqui


I guess we know where you stand on the issue, but I would love for my kids to turn out like Harry. Very brave and loyal to his friends. Great qualities for any kids to have.

Can you find a children's book where the hero isn't loyal? I think that there aren't that many published. As for the brave thing-- Brave or reckless: you make the call.

[wbonnell]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
I guess I shouldn't criticize, I am currently reading both cryptanalogy and 19th century military strategy for fun.

Fictional, yes, but have you read "Cryptonomicon"?

Tagentially related but worth checking out: "Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid".

[bosshogg23]

Did anyone else pre-order Harry Potter? And if so did you get yours early? I pre-ordered it through B&N and got mine today at around 2pm. The package clearly says not to deliever before 6/21. Guess Rowling will be suing someone else......

[wbonnell]

Originally posted by oykib
Can you find a children's book where the hero isn't loyal? I think that there aren't that many published. As for the brave thing-- Brave or reckless: you make the call.

That's because we need to be careful not to corrupt the developing mind. While real life may not be so black and white, our children (well, my children ) need to believe that good will prevail. Let them learn later that it's not that simple- they'll have ample opportunity.

[ISiddiqui]

As for the brave thing-- Brave or reckless: you make the call.

Um... when the Dark Lord of all evil is coming back or threatening to kill you, I don't think anything done by Harry would be considered 'reckless'.

[kcchief19]

Marmel, you should have made this a poll.

Not to douse any cold water on the Up-With-People/Harry Potter vibe going on here, but you ladies do realize that this is a CHILDREN'S BOOK, right? What, did you all of you marry 12-year-olds?

I can (somewhat) understand reading the book to your kids. However, I must admit that I'm puzzled that anyone over the age of 13 would read Harry Potter books for fun, much less a GUY.

I s'pose I just don't understand the world anymore.

[ISiddiqui]

kcchief... I guess then when you turned 18, you magically thought that Huckleberry Finn and the Chronicles of Narnia sucked overnight right?

It's that type of closed minded thinking that prevents people from experiencing wonderful things that they never would have because "you are not supposed to".

Go ahead, try it out... read a book... you might find you like it .

--

Oh, and btw, Monk was awesome .

[Marmel]

I'm Baaaaaack!

It was not too bad. We got there at 10:30, and my wife, God Bless her, waiting in line for an hour and a half all by herself while I lounged out with a coffee and started reading Moneyball.

At 12:05 we got a copy, and by 12:10 we were out the door. Of course it is easy to get in front of the cashier's line when a bunch of little kids move out of your way.

[mckerney]

Originally posted by Marmel
I'm Baaaaaack!

It was not too bad. We got there at 10:30, and my wife, God Bless her, waiting in line for an hour and a half all by herself while I lounged out with a coffee and started reading Moneyball.

At 12:05 we got a copy, and by 12:10 we were out the door. Of course it is easy to get in front of the cashier's line when a bunch of little kids move out of your way.

Well, way to kick the asses of those little kids I guess. Though after your wife finishes reading whatever the hell the name of that book is, make her read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and the uncut version of Stranger in a Strange Land to see what really great literary characters are like in Mike, Jubal Harshaw, and Micheal Valentine Smith are, especially when compared to Harry Potter.

[ISiddiqui]

make her read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and the uncut version of Stranger in a Strange Land to see what really great literary characters are like in Mike, Jubal Harshaw, and Micheal Valentine Smith are, especially when compared to Harry Potter.

I've read 'em both. I'll take Potter, thank you (but Moon is a Harsh Mistress was a very good read)

[mckerney]

I'll take Heinlein anyday over Potter, though Revolt in 2100 kinda got me pissed off because it consists of several stories that seem unrelated and it changes right when you're really getting into the one before. Each time it switched I stopped reading for at least two weeks before picking it up again.

[CamEdwards]

I'm back as well. I went with a friend to pick up a copy for his little sister, and I was surprised to find that I could buy a copy as well. It wasn't too bad, although 40 year old men dressed up as 12 year old boys are a little creepy.

[bbor]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
It wasn't too bad, although a 40 year old man dressed up as a 12 year old boy is a little creepy.

You dressed up?

[CamEdwards]

no sir, that would be an asshatted thing to do. And as you know, real men don't act like asshats (or wizards, for that matter)

[kcchief19]

Originally posted by ISiddiqui
kcchief... I guess then when you turned 18, you magically thought that Huckleberry Finn and the Chronicles of Narnia sucked overnight right?

It's that type of closed minded thinking that prevents people from experiencing wonderful things that they never would have because "you are not supposed to".

Go ahead, try it out... read a book... you might find you like it .

Well, I'm not supposed to dress up like a school girl and get my ass spanked, but maybe I should open my mind ...

Sarcasm aside, we all have our escapist outlets and there is nothing wrong with that. I have plenty of CDs, movies and books that I love that have little or not artistic merit. There is nothing wrong with that. As I have grown older, and hopefully wiser, I realize escapism for what it is and not make it into more than that. I think Harry Potter is great in that it has gotten kids (and apparently adults) to read.

Actually, well before I was 18 I though that Twain and most of Lewis' works were overrated. You can throw into that category as well. Frankly, I thought Lewis' "Mere Christianity" was much more interesting and thought-provoking than the Narnia stories.

Read a book my ass.

[bigdawg2003]

Well, despite never having watched a single episode of Monk or having read any of the previous four Harry Potter books, I ended up doing both last night.

Monk is an excellent show, and I'll definately try to watch it reguarly. It's smart, funny, and despite knowing who commited the murder the whole time, kept me guessing.

I've only read two chapters of the new Harry Potter book, but my interest is definately piqued. My main concern was that b/c I hadn't read the other four, I wouldn't understand this one. That is not the case at all. Everything is clearly explained and the plot is engaging. Overall, A Friday/Saturday well spent.

[oykib]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
no sir, that would be an asshatted thing to do. And as you know, real men don't act like asshats (or wizards, for that matter)

Actually, I'm planning to call the girl over tomorrow and putting on my robe and wizard hat.

[ISiddiqui]

I've only read two chapters of the new Harry Potter book, but my interest is definately piqued.

GREAT opening chapters! Just read the 2nd one, and went out for a bit. This one starts off with a bit more excitment than the other 4 . I have a feeling this book will be REALLY dark.

Oh, Marmel, I went to the mall today at 11:30, picked the book off the shelves and got it. No need to wait in line or anything . Though at least you got to read a little of 'Moneyball'. I read a chapter or two of that at Costco. Seems very interesting, I'll have to pick it up.

[tucker342]

I'm pretty far into it, and it seems to be much, much darker so far...

[bosshogg23]

My girlfriend has the book in her hands now. She stopped reading 2 other books to read this. I figured she would finish her other books THEN read HP, leaving me plenty of time to read it. Dammit........

[ISiddiqui]

I'm pretty far into it, and it seems to be much, much darker so far...

I agree... it's so dark that I don't really think it qualifies as a children's book anymore. It seems she's altered her style to write it for older teens or young adults (she knows they read her too!).

Btw, Marmel, get to watch Monk yet?

[Anrhydeddu]

Earlier this afternoon, my wife had to go to Target to get a birthday card and picked up the Potter book - one of over 30 they had on the shelves - for $16.86. Remind me again why folks had to wait in line at midnight to pay $30 for the book?

[ISiddiqui]

Who said they HAD to wait in line at midnight? They WANTED to, to get the book before anyone else (the same reason why people waited in line for SW1). And no one YET has paid $30 for the book. It's all been on sale everywhere since midnight.

[Celeval]

Hehe... I waited in line at midnight, finished my first reading by 6:30am, and finished my second reading an hour or so ago. And I'm a 27-year old guy. And I still like sports, steak, and hot women.

[Easy Mac]

None of which you'll get b/c you're reading a 10-year old's book

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by oykib
Tell me the lesson that Harry Potter teaches to make it a classic children's book.

I'm not sure that I'd agree with the "if...then" assumption this seems to be based upon, but...

The HP books have a recurring theme about elitism and stereotyping. In the book, the divide between magic-born and non-magic-born people ("muggles") is a pretty fair allegory for real-life differences between whites and blacks, for instance (or other social/racial strata, I suspect). Throughout the books, there are numerous instances where the characters who hold other people's state of birth against them are portrayed as being insensitive and unkind. I think this is an effective way to present a good moral message about judging people by their class, rather than their own actions.

There are moral strains throughout the books... while they might be susceptible to criticism in many ways, I think it's a real stretch to suggest that these children's books are devoid of any sort of "message" compared to the rest of their extended genre.

[scooper]

Originally posted by ISiddiqui
I agree... it's so dark that I don't really think it qualifies as a children's book anymore. It seems she's altered her style to write it for older teens or young adults (she knows they read her too!).

Those teens she's writing for were the small children that made up the original fans of Harry Potter. Her books are growing up with them. If the characters are getting older, it makes sense that the tone of the book does as well. Even in the wizard world, a 15 year old is more jaded than an 11 year old.

[oykib]

Originally posted by QuikSand
I'm not sure that I'd agree with the "if...then" assumption this seems to be based upon, but...

The HP books have a recurring theme about elitism and stereotyping. In the book, the divide between magic-born and non-magic-born people ("muggles") is a pretty fair allegory for real-life differences between whites and blacks, for instance (or other social/racial strata, I suspect). Throughout the books, there are numerous instances where the characters who hold other people's state of birth against them are portrayed as being insensitive and unkind. I think this is an effective way to present a good moral message about judging people by their class, rather than their own actions.

There are moral strains throughout the books... while they might be susceptible to criticism in many ways, I think it's a real stretch to suggest that these children's books are devoid of any sort of "message" compared to the rest of their extended genre.

I never said that it was devoid of positive messages. But, for me, to be a classic a book has to break new ground, be a marvel of literary craftsmanship, or have a broad and useful message.

It's very difficult to do the first one in any genre. It's nearly impossible to do the second one in children's books-- kids don't read well enough to get subtext. Number three is what most of the non-illustrated children's classics have.

I don't see it with Harry Potter. I do think that it has nearly as many bad points as good, though. That's okay for a nice little tale. Actually, most of us go through life hoping to have a few more good points than bad. But it's just not a classic to me.

My original point was that I thought the Potter books are so phenomenally successful almost because they are. The just seem to be in the right place in the right time. There are a great number of people who've read them just because everyone else was.

It's like all the people who've bought every John Gray book ever published and still have shitty relationships. People just seemed to pick them up because they had that '#1 National Bestseller' quasi-sticker on the cover.

I'm not saying the books arrren't enjoyable. I am saying that they aren't amazing. While personal taste is a personal thing-- with the true classics, you can point to some sort of objective comparisons to show what's great about them. I can even do that for books that I don't like that are considered classics.

[Anrhydeddu]

I, for one, never said they were classics or even amazing - just fun and enjoyable as light reading.

My original point was that I thought the Potter books are so phenomenally successful almost because they are. The just seem to be in the right place in the right time. There are a great number of people who've read them just because everyone else was.

I would use the exact same analogy for some of the blockbuster movies (most of which I have or will not see) or even very popular sports superstars. It seems most of us pick and choose our likes/dislikes without much thought as to why and there's nothing wrong with that, as well as picking out what we like about a book or movie. As far as Potter, I like it for a simple morality tale of good vs evil (which is funny considering their occult theme).

But, for me, to be a classic a book has to break new ground, be a marvel of literary craftsmanship, or have a broad and useful message.

This is a debate we have had here. As QS can tell you, I have taken the stance of being anti-elite or anti-snobbery when it comes to high culture and supposedly "classic" works. For instance, I believe I have a college-level reading level, how else can I fully comprehend many of my hardcore nonfiction history books? However, I cannot comprehend non-modern prose or extremely obtuse prose from authors like Eco (you knew I had to bring him up again, QS). Folks have said that the harder it is to read/comprehend, then more meaningful the message. That is hogwash, imo. If the author cannot express the message or plot in a clear and concise manner, than perhaps the message is being obscured or faked. The prose of HP is written to a broader audience on purpose but the same principle can be applied to other genres as well. I just believe in the democratisation (sp?) of communications. Why write something that only a few can comprehend when the message of the text can be useful for the many?

[scooper]

I disagree that folks read them because everybody else does. That is probably the reason for reading the first book. But reading requires a commitment of time and effort above and beyond other mediums, such as movies. Hype can only carry a book or series of books so far. For 4-5 books to have the success the HP books are having, a lot of people must really enjoy them.

oykib, I'm not saying this is your case, but people who don't like something mainstream, be it music, books, etc., often find a need to bash said phenomenom and question the real reason for its popularity. Things become popular for a reason.

[scooper]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu



Folks have said that the harder it is to read/comprehend, then more meaningful the message. That is hogwash, imo. If the author cannot express the message or plot in a clear and concise manner, than perhaps the message is being obscured or faked.

Amen. I have an English degree. I have read a lot of literature from ancient times to now. Some of the classic and required reading, I just don't get. How anyone can sit down and enjoy Melville is beyond me. I once had a professor tell the class, "I don't like Moby Dick, but I had to study it so you will too."

[Anrhydeddu]

Originally posted by scooper
Amen. I have an English degree. I have read a lot of literature from ancient times to now. Some of the classic and required reading, I just don't get. How anyone can sit down and enjoy Melville is beyond me. I once had a professor tell the class, "I don't like Moby Dick, but I had to study it so you will too."

I am happy to hear from an English major on this, I guess they would be most offended by my opinion on this. We cannot criticize for the classic authors, Shakespeare, Beowulf for reading in the style that they did (or even the literai for pushing James on us), but to say they are more meaningful and important because of their style, is wrong imo.

[oykib]

I agree with the points about elitist literature. I don't like it either. But writing that is simple to understand doesn't have to be simple.

There are some classics, like Animal Farm, that are easy reads, yet have layers of depth beyond the obvious text.

This is the second time I'm making this comparison-- But I equate HP to "The Matix" ( or, for Bucc, "Armageddon" or "Independence Day" or whatever ). It's fun. Everyone can enjoy it. But it ain't exactly The Godfather.

[oykib]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
I am happy to hear from an English major on this, I guess they would be most offended by my opinion on this. We cannot criticize for the classic authors, Shakespeare, Beowulf for reading in the style that they did (or even the literai for pushing James on us), but to say they are more meaningful and important because of their style, is wrong imo.

I was an English major, too. Basically, every elective that I took was a Shakespeare or a composition class. I avoided Chaucer and Milton like they were lepers.

I got through most of the classics pretty easily. But those two gave me fits just from cracking the book open.

[scooper]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
I am happy to hear from an English major on this, I guess they would be most offended by my opinion on this. We cannot criticize for the classic authors, Shakespeare, Beowulf for reading in the style that they did (or even the literai for pushing James on us), but to say they are more meaningful and important because of their style, is wrong imo.

Oddly enough, I love Shakespeare but it took me quite some time to reach that point. I really had to immerse myself in it to get used to the language. Once I did, I found out there is really some good stuff there. He was a great story teller and some of his comedies, once you figure out what the jokes really mean, are quite funny.

[scooper]

Originally posted by oykib


This is the second time I'm making this comparison-- But I equate HP to "The Matix" ( or, for Bucc, "Armageddon" or "Independence Day" or whatever ). It's fun. Everyone can enjoy it. But it ain't exactly The Godfather.

That's a fair comparison. That's why I like the HP books, I enjoy reading them. I don't think anybody here is saying anything different.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by scooper
Oddly enough, I love Shakespeare but it took me quite some time to reach that point. I really had to immerse myself in it to get used to the language. Once I did, I found out there is really some good stuff there. He was a great story teller and some of his comedies, once you figure out what the jokes really mean, are quite funny.

My problem with Shakespeare is that whenever I read him, I wind up thinking in iambs for a half hour afterwards.

[Anrhydeddu]

Originally posted by oykib
I agree with the points about elitist literature. I don't like it either. But writing that is simple to understand doesn't have to be simple.

There are some classics, like Animal Farm, that are easy reads, yet have layers of depth beyond the obvious text.

This is the second time I'm making this comparison-- But I equate HP to "The Matix" ( or, for Bucc, "Armageddon" or "Independence Day" or whatever ). It's fun. Everyone can enjoy it. But it ain't exactly The Godfather.

Writing that is simple to understand definitely does not have to be simple [in its message]. For me, the greatest example of this is the Bible. It has to appeal to the most humble serf and to the most brilliant genius and every culture, race and age in between. A more recent example is one of my favorite Civil War authors, James McPherson who won a Pulitzer Prize for Battle Cry of Freedom. Even though he is a Princeton lecturer, he has been critical of the more academic approaches to literature (esp. in his Civil War genre) where "they are writing more and more about less and less to the fewer and fewer". If a reader has an interest in the topic, why should an academic-minded author (or even in the more technical field) not communicate effectively to them but instead, only among themselves? I am reading a book on the history of cryptanalysis (applying specifically to WW2 code-breaking). It is written in an easy to read prosem whereas other books on the exact same subject are much more drier and harder to read. What does this happen all of the time?

I would love to discuss the differences between Godfather and other movies but I have hijacked this thread to much already. In parting, I can that, like books, it's all what we want to get out of a movie and enjoyment factor. How else can one explain that in my Top 10 movie list, I have both The Godfather and The Mummy?

[bamcgee]

I finished the Harry Potter book last night.

I just didn't want to stop reading it. It met expectations - like the others, it has sympathetic, lifelike characters in a fantastic world caught up in a powerful series of events. Makes for a great read.
I recommend it to anyone still sitting on the fence about the series- you won't regret it.

That being said, overall I preferred the Fourth book. Frankly, what Voldemort's after this time just didn't seem all that big a deal, and that detracted from the climax's impact, especially when compared to the Fourth's powerful conclusion. She's doing an admirable job of maturing the series however. Less innocence, more anger, more hormones.

It's interesting to me that some posters have started at the fifth book, which I don't recommend. The references to the prior adventures are frequent and likely bewildering at some point. In fact, even though I had read the earlier ones, I had a desire to reread them, especially to touch up on some of the characters. Can't remember Lupin at all, for example. For those new to the series, I envy you. There's a whole new world out there to enjoy.

On the other hand (back to the thread subject), I found the Monk premiere to be somewhat lifeless. Won't be watching it again.