Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Harry VI

Expand Messages
  • Lezlie
    Hi all- (a bit of a ramble...) I like Rowling OK-- don t get me wrong. I just wish she d stop saying dumb things about *Witches* . As a teacher & parent, the
    Message 1 of 30 , Oct 6, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi all- (a bit of a ramble...)
      I like Rowling OK-- don't get me wrong. I just wish she'd stop saying
      dumb things about *Witches* . As a teacher & parent, the endless
      conversations about "pretend witches" gets a bit wearing after a
      while... it isn't as if there isn't piles of readily available
      information these days. In 2005, there is little excuse to "not know"
      any longer. Yeah-- the truth is very boring and fiction is ever so
      much more *fun* ...<sniff>... and all of *that*. (I am a *fantasy* fan
      after all.)
      Some of her folklore is a bit off, too...especially involving elfish
      critters. Of course, her knowledge of the occult in general is compete
      claptrap, but it's fine for fiction, I suppose. Her world-building
      skill is improving, however. Well, I could say all of that about a
      *lot* of writers about a *lot* of things.
      Rowling tells a good tale. Mostly. But, I haven't gone out and read
      the last. I've been reading other people I like a lot better. Personal
      taste, you know...

      Not really impressed with the name-thing... not really... a bit too
      Dickensonian, IMHO. A little *obvious* in this post modernist era (for
      a novel set in modern times with magical twists and turns that is).

      Now, Charles de Lint, in comparison, has his folklore right spot on,
      spins magical yarns – if a bit awkward at times – . He shows that he
      has done his research – no question—.
      On the other hand, Rowling is incredibly successful; I have to hand
      her that. And, the kids love her. Mostly harmless (as the cliche has
      become) I guess. Lezlie



      --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, Mike Foster <mafoster@d...> wrote:
      > I second Ms. Monk's motion.
      >
      > Rowling has a nominative (name-giving) gift that exceeds Lewis' and
      > perhaps is second only to Tolkien.
      >
      > Rank rash dismissal of her reminds me of remark made to me by a retired
      > ICC earth science prof at an ol' bleeps' breakfast last week:
      > "When you started teaching that Tolkien class [in 1978], there were a
      > lot of people who were skeptical."
      >
      > Yeah, well, coprolites to you, chum. Tolkien is literature of the
      > finest. Rowling may be nowhere near that level, but she should not be
      > sneered away to the toy department, Wendell.
      >
      > As Pogo the possum used to say:
      > "Rowrbazzle!"
      >
      > Cheers,
      > Mike
      >
      > Walkermonk@a... wrote:
      >
      > >In a message dated 7/22/2005 9:48:29 AM Central Daylight Time,
      > >WendellWag@a... writes:
      > >The Harry Potter
      > >books are still a teenage-angst series with magic names slapped on
      > >everything.
      > >This is incorrect. The stories are about the struggle between good
      and evil,
      > >and how difficult it is to sometimes recognize good and the sacrifices
      > >required for doing what is right. The ratio of magic names is quite
      low compared to
      > >just regular names. And teenage angst? When did angst become the
      sole province
      > >of teenagers and why is there contempt for teenage feelings? The
      situations
      > >being confronted by the teenagers in the HP books aren't for the
      faint of heart
      > >or the immature of character. Do the teenagers handle the situations
      > >differently than the adults portrayed? Yes. The teens aren't always
      correct either. But
      > >they matter, and I don't see anything wrong in that. The HP books
      aren't my
      > >favorite and I think they have some flaws. But Wendell's
      contemptuous one-line
      > >dismissal is far below what the books deserve.
      > >
      > >
      > >Incidentally, I read a news story about Rowling recently in which
      she said
      > >that she never read (or, more precisely, she never finished) either
      _The Lord
      > >of the Rings_ or _The Chronicles of Narnia_.
      > >Well, according to this particular article (which immediately loses
      points
      > >with me by mentioning Rowling's haircolor), Rowling must have at
      least read "The
      > >Last Battle." So if she hasn't finished Narnia, then I wonder which
      one(s)
      > >she left out. This is at odds, btw, with many other interviews and
      other
      > >statements about Lewis.
      > >
      > >Grace Monk
      > >
      > >
      > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
      > >Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
    • Pauline J. Alama
      I think one of the reasons that stories about teenagers are popular - - whether the teenagers are named Harry Potter, Buffy Summers, Wart/Arthur, Theseus, or
      Message 2 of 30 , Oct 13, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        I think one of the reasons that stories about teenagers are popular -
        - whether the teenagers are named Harry Potter, Buffy Summers,
        Wart/Arthur, Theseus, or Perceval le Galois -- is that
        adolescence/coming of age/whateveryouwwannacallit is an important
        time in most people's lives, a time when we became the people we
        are, and made some of the choices that have formed the rest of our
        lives. Rather than dismissing HP because it's "teen lit" one might
        more fairly say that part of its compelling appeal for many,
        including many adults, is because of its honesty in portraying the
        struggles and follies of adolescence. I know that in reading HP 5 I
        kept saying, with a rueful groan, "Oh, yes--I remember being 15." A
        couple of friends who are teachers found that book a bit of a
        busman's holiday, becuase Harry seemed too much like their students.
        Why make a weakness out of one of the series' strenghts? I admire
        the candor and perceptiveness with which Rowling captures the
        nuances of adolescents' mood swings, foibles, and triumphs. And she
        never cheats. She never gives Harry insights inconsistent with his
        level of maturity. She never steps out of POV in the Harry-POV
        chapters to deliver Authorial Wisdom (except indirectly through a
        more mature character's dialog). I think point of view is very
        important in fiction, and Rowling's skill at this technique is not
        often enough praised.

        Pauline J. Alama
        THE EYE OF NIGHT

        --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, Mike Foster <mafoster@d...> wrote:
        >
        > I second Ms. Monk's motion.
        >
        > Rowling has a nominative (name-giving) gift that exceeds Lewis'
        and
        > perhaps is second only to Tolkien.
        >
        > Rank rash dismissal of her reminds me of remark made to me by a
        retired
        > ICC earth science prof at an ol' bleeps' breakfast last week:
        > "When you started teaching that Tolkien class [in 1978], there
        were a
        > lot of people who were skeptical."
        >
        > Yeah, well, coprolites to you, chum. Tolkien is literature of the
        > finest. Rowling may be nowhere near that level, but she should
        not be
        > sneered away to the toy department, Wendell.
        >
        > As Pogo the possum used to say:
        > "Rowrbazzle!"
        >
        > Cheers,
        > Mike
        >
        > Walkermonk@a... wrote:
        >
        > >In a message dated 7/22/2005 9:48:29 AM Central Daylight Time,
        > >WendellWag@a... writes:
        > >The Harry Potter
        > >books are still a teenage-angst series with magic names slapped
        on
        > >everything.
        > >This is incorrect. The stories are about the struggle between
        good and evil,
        > >and how difficult it is to sometimes recognize good and the
        sacrifices
        > >required for doing what is right. The ratio of magic names is
        quite low compared to
        > >just regular names. And teenage angst? When did angst become the
        sole province
        > >of teenagers and why is there contempt for teenage feelings? The
        situations
        > >being confronted by the teenagers in the HP books aren't for the
        faint of heart
        > >or the immature of character. Do the teenagers handle the
        situations
        > >differently than the adults portrayed? Yes. The teens aren't
        always correct either. But
        > >they matter, and I don't see anything wrong in that. The HP books
        aren't my
        > >favorite and I think they have some flaws. But Wendell's
        contemptuous one-line
        > >dismissal is far below what the books deserve.
        > >
        > >
        > >Incidentally, I read a news story about Rowling recently in which
        she said
        > >that she never read (or, more precisely, she never finished)
        either _The Lord
        > >of the Rings_ or _The Chronicles of Narnia_.
        > >Well, according to this particular article (which immediately
        loses points
        > >with me by mentioning Rowling's haircolor), Rowling must have at
        least read "The
        > >Last Battle." So if she hasn't finished Narnia, then I wonder
        which one(s)
        > >she left out. This is at odds, btw, with many other interviews
        and other
        > >statements about Lewis.
        > >
        > >Grace Monk
        > >
        > >
        > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
        > >Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
      • Pauline J. Alama
        I wouldn t say Rowling s folklore was off (by which I suppose you mean inaccurate ), but that she has decided to do different things with the folklore. As
        Message 3 of 30 , Oct 13, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          I wouldn't say Rowling's folklore was "off" (by which I suppose you
          mean "inaccurate"), but that she has decided to do different things
          with the folklore.

          As Pete Seeger said of folk music, that's what makes it folk --
          everyone sings it in their own way.

          Pauline J. Alama
          THE EYE OF NIGHT

          --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, "Lezlie" <lezlie1@z...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi all- (a bit of a ramble...)
          > I like Rowling OK-- don't get me wrong. I just wish she'd stop
          saying
          > dumb things about *Witches* . As a teacher & parent, the endless
          > conversations about "pretend witches" gets a bit wearing after a
          > while... it isn't as if there isn't piles of readily available
          > information these days. In 2005, there is little excuse to "not
          know"
          > any longer. Yeah-- the truth is very boring and fiction is ever so
          > much more *fun* ...<sniff>... and all of *that*. (I am a *fantasy*
          fan
          > after all.)
          > Some of her folklore is a bit off, too...especially involving
          elfish
          > critters. Of course, her knowledge of the occult in general is
          compete
          > claptrap, but it's fine for fiction, I suppose. Her world-building
          > skill is improving, however. Well, I could say all of that about a
          > *lot* of writers about a *lot* of things.
          > Rowling tells a good tale. Mostly. But, I haven't gone out and read
          > the last. I've been reading other people I like a lot better.
          Personal
          > taste, you know...
          >
          > Not really impressed with the name-thing... not really... a bit too
          > Dickensonian, IMHO. A little *obvious* in this post modernist era
          (for
          > a novel set in modern times with magical twists and turns that
          is).
          >
          > Now, Charles de Lint, in comparison, has his folklore right spot
          on,
          > spins magical yarns – if a bit awkward at times – . He shows that
          he
          > has done his research – no question—.
          > On the other hand, Rowling is incredibly successful; I have to hand
          > her that. And, the kids love her. Mostly harmless (as the cliche
          has
          > become) I guess. Lezlie
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, Mike Foster <mafoster@d...> wrote:
          > > I second Ms. Monk's motion.
          > >
          > > Rowling has a nominative (name-giving) gift that exceeds Lewis'
          and
          > > perhaps is second only to Tolkien.
          > >
          > > Rank rash dismissal of her reminds me of remark made to me by a
          retired
          > > ICC earth science prof at an ol' bleeps' breakfast last week:
          > > "When you started teaching that Tolkien class [in 1978], there
          were a
          > > lot of people who were skeptical."
          > >
          > > Yeah, well, coprolites to you, chum. Tolkien is literature of
          the
          > > finest. Rowling may be nowhere near that level, but she should
          not be
          > > sneered away to the toy department, Wendell.
          > >
          > > As Pogo the possum used to say:
          > > "Rowrbazzle!"
          > >
          > > Cheers,
          > > Mike
          > >
          > > Walkermonk@a... wrote:
          > >
          > > >In a message dated 7/22/2005 9:48:29 AM Central Daylight Time,
          > > >WendellWag@a... writes:
          > > >The Harry Potter
          > > >books are still a teenage-angst series with magic names
          slapped on
          > > >everything.
          > > >This is incorrect. The stories are about the struggle between
          good
          > and evil,
          > > >and how difficult it is to sometimes recognize good and the
          sacrifices
          > > >required for doing what is right. The ratio of magic names is
          quite
          > low compared to
          > > >just regular names. And teenage angst? When did angst become the
          > sole province
          > > >of teenagers and why is there contempt for teenage feelings? The
          > situations
          > > >being confronted by the teenagers in the HP books aren't for the
          > faint of heart
          > > >or the immature of character. Do the teenagers handle the
          situations
          > > >differently than the adults portrayed? Yes. The teens aren't
          always
          > correct either. But
          > > >they matter, and I don't see anything wrong in that. The HP
          books
          > aren't my
          > > >favorite and I think they have some flaws. But Wendell's
          > contemptuous one-line
          > > >dismissal is far below what the books deserve.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >Incidentally, I read a news story about Rowling recently in
          which
          > she said
          > > >that she never read (or, more precisely, she never finished)
          either
          > _The Lord
          > > >of the Rings_ or _The Chronicles of Narnia_.
          > > >Well, according to this particular article (which immediately
          loses
          > points
          > > >with me by mentioning Rowling's haircolor), Rowling must have at
          > least read "The
          > > >Last Battle." So if she hasn't finished Narnia, then I wonder
          which
          > one(s)
          > > >she left out. This is at odds, btw, with many other interviews
          and
          > other
          > > >statements about Lewis.
          > > >
          > > >Grace Monk
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
          > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          >
        • Lezlie
          All I can say is this: I don t like Pete Seeger s expurgated renditions of old folk songs, either. His orgiinals are fine, very sing-alongable -- So, there
          Message 4 of 30 , Oct 13, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            All I can say is this: I don't like Pete Seeger's expurgated
            renditions of old folk songs, either. His orgiinals are fine, very
            sing-alongable -- So, there you have it. Matter of personal taste, I
            *suppose*.

            There are Other authors I like better, even for youth, but Rowling
            serves a very important purpose in the literacy battle. And, that
            battle, we cannot afford to loose. More HP, I say! Bring them on!

            Lezlie

            --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, "Pauline J. Alama" <PJAlama@e...> wrote:
            >
            > I wouldn't say Rowling's folklore was "off" (by which I suppose you
            > mean "inaccurate"), but that she has decided to do different things
            > with the folklore.
            >
            > As Pete Seeger said of folk music, that's what makes it folk --
            > everyone sings it in their own way.
            >
            > Pauline J. Alama
            > THE EYE OF NIGHT
            >
            > --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, "Lezlie" <lezlie1@z...> wrote:
            > >
            > > Hi all- (a bit of a ramble...)
            > > I like Rowling OK-- don't get me wrong. I just wish she'd stop
            > saying
            > > dumb things about *Witches* . As a teacher & parent, the endless
            > > conversations about "pretend witches" gets a bit wearing after a
            > > while... it isn't as if there isn't piles of readily available
            > > information these days. In 2005, there is little excuse to "not
            > know"
            > > any longer. Yeah-- the truth is very boring and fiction is ever so
            > > much more *fun* ...<sniff>... and all of *that*. (I am a *fantasy*
            > fan
            > > after all.)
            > > Some of her folklore is a bit off, too...especially involving
            > elfish
            > > critters. Of course, her knowledge of the occult in general is
            > compete
            > > claptrap, but it's fine for fiction, I suppose. Her world-building
            > > skill is improving, however. Well, I could say all of that about a
            > > *lot* of writers about a *lot* of things.
            > > Rowling tells a good tale. Mostly. But, I haven't gone out and read
            > > the last. I've been reading other people I like a lot better.
            > Personal
            > > taste, you know...
            > >
            > > Not really impressed with the name-thing... not really... a bit too
            > > Dickensonian, IMHO. A little *obvious* in this post modernist era
            > (for
            > > a novel set in modern times with magical twists and turns that
            > is).
            > >
            > > Now, Charles de Lint, in comparison, has his folklore right spot
            > on,
            > > spins magical yarns – if a bit awkward at times – . He shows that
            > he
            > > has done his research – no question—.
            > > On the other hand, Rowling is incredibly successful; I have to hand
            > > her that. And, the kids love her. Mostly harmless (as the cliche
            > has
            > > become) I guess. Lezlie
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, Mike Foster <mafoster@d...> wrote:
            > > > I second Ms. Monk's motion.
            > > >
            > > > Rowling has a nominative (name-giving) gift that exceeds Lewis'
            > and
            > > > perhaps is second only to Tolkien.
            > > >
            > > > Rank rash dismissal of her reminds me of remark made to me by a
            > retired
            > > > ICC earth science prof at an ol' bleeps' breakfast last week:
            > > > "When you started teaching that Tolkien class [in 1978], there
            > were a
            > > > lot of people who were skeptical."
            > > >
            > > > Yeah, well, coprolites to you, chum. Tolkien is literature of
            > the
            > > > finest. Rowling may be nowhere near that level, but she should
            > not be
            > > > sneered away to the toy department, Wendell.
            > > >
            > > > As Pogo the possum used to say:
            > > > "Rowrbazzle!"
            > > >
            > > > Cheers,
            > > > Mike
            > > >
            > > > Walkermonk@a... wrote:
            > > >
            > > > >In a message dated 7/22/2005 9:48:29 AM Central Daylight Time,
            > > > >WendellWag@a... writes:
            > > > >The Harry Potter
            > > > >books are still a teenage-angst series with magic names
            > slapped on
            > > > >everything.
            > > > >This is incorrect. The stories are about the struggle between
            > good
            > > and evil,
            > > > >and how difficult it is to sometimes recognize good and the
            > sacrifices
            > > > >required for doing what is right. The ratio of magic names is
            > quite
            > > low compared to
            > > > >just regular names. And teenage angst? When did angst become the
            > > sole province
            > > > >of teenagers and why is there contempt for teenage feelings? The
            > > situations
            > > > >being confronted by the teenagers in the HP books aren't for the
            > > faint of heart
            > > > >or the immature of character. Do the teenagers handle the
            > situations
            > > > >differently than the adults portrayed? Yes. The teens aren't
            > always
            > > correct either. But
            > > > >they matter, and I don't see anything wrong in that. The HP
            > books
            > > aren't my
            > > > >favorite and I think they have some flaws. But Wendell's
            > > contemptuous one-line
            > > > >dismissal is far below what the books deserve.
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >Incidentally, I read a news story about Rowling recently in
            > which
            > > she said
            > > > >that she never read (or, more precisely, she never finished)
            > either
            > > _The Lord
            > > > >of the Rings_ or _The Chronicles of Narnia_.
            > > > >Well, according to this particular article (which immediately
            > loses
            > > points
            > > > >with me by mentioning Rowling's haircolor), Rowling must have at
            > > least read "The
            > > > >Last Battle." So if she hasn't finished Narnia, then I wonder
            > which
            > > one(s)
            > > > >she left out. This is at odds, btw, with many other interviews
            > and
            > > other
            > > > >statements about Lewis.
            > > > >
            > > > >Grace Monk
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
            > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.