Harry Potter

[Marileangorifurnimaluim]

Ah, Controversy! (Maril rubs her hands together with glee.)<P>We seem to have three topics running through this thread:<BR>*The relative value of Harry Potter, how does it compare to the LotR, does it really encourage children to read?<BR>*Is HP really just a "commoners" book, well-pumped up by the marketing machine?<BR>*Does HP invoke (so to speak) witchcraft? And is violence or use of witchcraft caused by media images?<P>On the first point: HP is brilliant, funny, but only shares a genre with the LotR. It does get kids to read who otherwise don't, and anyone who's ever struggled to get a kid to just <I>try</I> to read would be happy if they read the cereal box. I doubt these HP kids will still only read HP when they're 40. But if my Tolkien obsession is any measure, they will probably re-read them, with their other books, many times and perhaps participate in a Potter-Downs Forum.<P>Marketing does not effect Rowling's humor or brilliance one iota. Marketing is a machine, it never cares whether a product is good or not, it just markets.<P>On media violence, Kalimac has the point of the day: exposure to violence did not begin with the invention of TV or video games. In the not-too-distant past hangings were the order of the day for such crimes as horse thieving.<P>On increasing witchcraft and magic due to popularized images of it... has anyone here ever levitated, or seen someone so much as levitate a feather? I would sign up for witchcraft in a heartbeat if I could just say "Illuminato" or whatever it is, and make a tiny ball of light hover about the room. That would be a blast! <P>Alas, I fear I must put off removing the electrical wiring from my place, because there is no such thing. What makes Hogworts so much fun is its impossibility.<BR>(Though given the way I treat my books, I guess I should be grateful they don't bite outside of Harry Potter.)