2265Re: [mythsoc] interesting take on harry potter
- Sep 4 6:14 AMIn a message dated 9/4/00 6:40:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> Well, I've just been running writing workshops with kids,How did reading the Harry Potter books inspire them to write about 16th
> based on things I've always been interested in myself--
> folktales, mythical creatures, monsters and fairies: and
> guess what? Many more kids are interested in those
> things now, because of the HP books. They fought over
> my copy of Katherine Briggs' A Dictionary of Fairies;
> they wrote brilliant stories about 16th century Venice,
> alchemists, and the like (my suggestion).
century Venice? Is it mentioned in one of the later books. (I've only read
> The HP thing is not a fad; it was created by the childrenPerhaps the early good reception of the books was created by the children
> themselves, not by adults--the hype has come later.
themselves, but the more recent publicity campaigns stink to high heaven of
> And children are reading beyond it--my own books areI didn't even realize you were an author, Sophie. Are your books only in
> enjoying something of a renaissance because of it.
print in Australia? Or are they available elsewhere and I've just missed
> I don't have to explain anymore why I like usingI don't think that anybody here has complained that Rowling is working in a
> traditional stories as a base. Let's face it, JK Rowling
> is not being 'original' ;she is simply reinventing tradition.
bad tradition. I think we all love children's fantasy. If we didn't, we
wouldn't be contributing to this list. Our complaints are that the Harry
Potter books just aren't a very good example of children's fantasy.
> This is an old old way of writing, and a very good one.Are the Goosebumps books that bad? I've never read any of them.
> She is not, by any stretch, the best writer working in
> this field--but she is good. This is not Goosebumps,
> that's for sure.
> As to the complaints about characters--they areWhat can I say? I like archetypal characters, and I didn't find the
> archetypes, just as fairytale characters are. Just as
> the characters in Lewis or Tolkien are. So what?
characters in the Harry Potter books to be interesting archetypal characters.
> Harry is marked out from birth as the hero with aWhat can I say? I find Lewis's and Tolkien's language to be consistently
> destiny--all such heroes, from Cuchulain to Arthur,
> have that about them: this kind of still quality. The
> people around them often change much more. As
> to the language--well, the books are not always as
> inventive in that way as they could be--but let's be
> honest. Is Lewis? Is Tolkien? Always?
> And one must admit her ideas are most inventive,Again, what can I say? I didn't find her ideas particularly brilliant or
> sometimes even brilliant. There's a sprightliness, a
> delight in tradition which I for one find most appealing.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>