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

Re: Elsie Dinsmore ? & others

Expand Messages
  • Wayne G. Hammond
    ... described as ... title of ... than ... Not that Harry needs me to defend him, but I d say that Pullman s books aren t better written than Rowling s,
    Message 1 of 8 , Dec 22 4:33 AM
      David Lenander wrote:

      >_The Golden Compass_ received the Carnegie Medal in Britain ( often
      described as
      >the British equivalent of the U.S. Newbery Medal), under its original
      title of
      >_Northern Lights_ (I think it was). I don't think they're as fine as some
      >others do, particularly the second volume, but they're far-better written
      >the _Harry Potter_ books

      Not that Harry needs me to defend him, but I'd say that Pullman's books
      aren't better written than Rowling's, they're just written very
      differently, for very different audiences -- in the first instance, for
      Pullman and Rowling themselves, who are poles apart. The Harry Potter books
      are well written for what they are, clever, witty, entertaining, with very
      sympathetic characters; if they weren't, they wouldn't be flying off the
      shelves so quickly, nor would their readers be so remarkably enthusiastic
      about them.

      But I agree that _The Golden Compass_ is better than _The Subtle Knife_.
      Both books should be much better known; the other day, I recommended them
      to a part-time elementary school teacher who hadn't heard of them. _The
      Golden Compass_ is compelling, and haunts the memory. _The Subtle Knife_
      doesn't hold together quite as well, though it too has its moments, and I
      may think better of it as a whole on a second reading. It's been so long,
      I'll need to re-read both books before the third, _The Amber Spyglass_, is
      published in May.

      Wayne Hammond
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.