Is Harry Potter "twaddle"?

[KellyGirl]

Forgive me if this subject has already been beaten into the ground...I did search the forum, but didn't really find an answer. We used to be anti-Potter, but the more we think about it, the less sense that stance makes to us. I know the books are huge and it would be a big step for ds9 to go from Hardy Boys to Harry Potter, but I am trying to steer him towards more quality literature now that he has established a love of reading.

I have seen one movie, but haven't ever looked at the books. What says the hive?:bigear:

[Brindee]

I can't really help, cuz we're still in the anti-Potter camp, and don't consider those quality literature.

But one of dd's friends has read through all the books and loved them. Now she says she wants to find other witchcraft type books.......which is one reason we DON'T want out kids to read those books or watch the movies!

[Mom2legomaniacs]

Not entirely, no. It is entertaining. It is a great story with lots of good lessons, IMO. High quality literature, not really. But not twaddle either. Good fun reading for sure. I love them as do my kids. Both have read them. Older one, multiple times through the series. Younger is working his way through book 7 now.

It is okay to read stuff that is not always on the classics literature list too. Mine don't read pure garbage, imo again. But they do read a mixture of classics and better written fun stories too.

I hope you all enjoy them. We certainly have.

[jmgconner]

I vote no, they are not twaddle. There are many opportunities to tie Harry Potter to other great books. Hey, we even talked about the spells in relation to Greek and Latin roots during our vocabulary lesson today.

[JFS in IL]

Not twaddle. Not when you read the entire set and see how much thought went into details provided in the first books that crops up again in the later books. Not when you look at the overall theme of all seven books.

Last week I reread Pride and Prejudice for the third time. I also reread the seventh H.P. book for the sixth time. Ok, Rowling is certainly not Jane Austin (and Snape is not Mr. Darcy! ;)) but the enjoyment of reading a well-thought out book is the same.

Hope I make sense.

[Mom2legomaniacs]

I vote no, they are not twaddle. There are many opportunities to tie Harry Potter to other great books. Hey, we even talked about the spells in relation to Greek and Latin roots during our vocabulary lesson today.

Oh yes, that is certainly true! There is a lot of the Greek and Latin roots thrown in, both with the names and just words. Very cool when mine recognize that connection.

[Twinmom]

Great books, no...IMO, they definitely aren't. Twaddle? I think they are a level above that, but they definitely don't qualify as great books. I think they make an entertaining read personally, but they aren't going to be read by my kiddos because I have concerns about the subject material.

[KellyGirl]

I can't really help, cuz we're still in the anti-Potter camp, and don't consider those quality literature.

But one of dd's friends has read through all the books and loved them. Now she says she wants to find other witchcraft type books.......which is one reason we DON'T want out kids to read those books or watch the movies!

But what about Narnia or Lord of the Rings? Would you/do you steer away from those for the same reason? Do you see a difference between those and Potter? My kids all love Narnia and LOTR and it has not sparked any such interest.

[Alice]

I would say not twaddle (which to me is things like the TV or movie tie in books) but not great literature. I think they are fun and really enjoyed them all myself. I would look at them akin to good popular literature for adults (not a great classic but worth reading just the same).

[Oak Knoll Mom]

I don't think they are twaddle, but I wouldn't let a 9yo read most of them--they move into somewhat scary territory pretty quickly. I did let my son read the first one last year with the warning that he wouldn't be able to read the rest of them until he is older.

[E_Edgerton]

I love these books. They are well written, don't speak down to the audience, and are just such a fun time to read. I haven't known a child to get caught up in the magic or witchcraft of the book. It is more the great descriptions, funny characters and situations, and of course the fantastical creatures. Also, most kids I know are just so proud they read a book so big, often times so quickly. Harry Potter is a classic of our time and I hope you will allow your kids to enjoy.

[DB in NJ]

Well, as someone who used to be dead set against all things HP, I can tell you why I am now reading my way through the series (trying to finish at least Book 6 by the time that movie comes out in November).

My dd is in pony club, and all of the girls at the farm (all Christians, just for reference) told her how wonderful the books and movies were. She wanted to watch the movies, so I agreed to watch the first one with her while we were all together. It is your typical good vs. evil. We are big fans of LOTR, and we find the biblical parallels obvious in those books and movies. The same good vs. evil is in both series, even though J.K. Rowling isn't coming from the same perspective or worldview as Tolkien. But where does good vs. evil ultimately come from anyway?

The books are so very well written. I wouldn't put them in the same class as Homer by any means (or even Austen for that matter), but they are FUN. My dd was a struggling reader and she read the entire series over and over again. It sparked a love of reading in her, which is a good thing. Now that I am reading the books and watching the movies, we have lots of good discussions about the stories and different elements in them.

My best advice to you would be to get the first book and read it yourself. Rowling is a good writer with an incredible ability to think like and relate to kids. I can feel myself fly as Harry takes to his broom for the first time :D

[KellyGirl]

Not twaddle. Not when you read the entire set and see how much thought went into details provided in the first books that crops up again in the later books. Not when you look at the overall theme of all seven books.

Last week I reread Pride and Prejudice for the third time. I also reread the seventh H.P. book for the sixth time. Ok, Rowling is certainly not Jane Austin (and Snape is not Mr. Darcy! ;)) but the enjoyment of reading a well-thought out book is the same.

Hope I make sense.

I think you make a good point. If one were to define twaddle, wouldn't that definition involve a weak and or predictable plot - something that doesn't challange the mind?

[Jenny in Atl]

But what about Narnia or Lord of the Rings? Would you/do you steer away from those for the same reason? Do you see a difference between those and Potter? My kids all love Narnia and LOTR and it has not sparked any such interest.

Exactly! I know a number of people who think HP is evil yet they love LOTR. I don't get that. I've never been a big sci/fi fantasy gal, but living with my dh and oldest dd (both sci/fi fantasy fan, has allowed me to gain some appreciation. Neither of them has tried to turn me into a toad yet, well, at least that I know of. :001_huh:

[Brindee]

But what about Narnia or Lord of the Rings? Would you/do you steer away from those for the same reason? Do you see a difference between those and Potter? My kids all love Narnia and LOTR and it has not sparked any such interest.We actually haven't read those either....

It doesn't HAVE to spark the interest, and I hear it doesn't in some. But, in my kids friends, every single one of them are now very interested in witchcraft and spells and things I just don't feel we need to get into. I don't begrudge anyone else's choice in those matters either, each person does what they feel is right for them. But with so much OTHER literature available, we feel they're not missing out by not reading these books.

[Pencil Pusher]

First, w/ regard to the quality of HP as lit: it qualifies. The plot is complex, the characters & their struggles are well-developed. There's foreshadowing & symbolism. I'm a VERY picky reader, & I consider these books to be excellent--EXCELLENT--overall. (Dh wouldn't let me read the 1st 2, bcs he said they were similar enough to the movie & written at a lower reading level that would drive me nuts. He's so keen on finding things I like, he wouldn't let those 2 ruin the series or my willingness to try something new, lol.)

I believe that HP could easily stand among other classics for kids, incl A Wrinkle in Time, Narnia (though not nec at the same level as Narnia), & others. Is it at the TOP of the list? Nope. Not at the bottom, either, though. IMO.

As far as the witchcraft element, I do see the diff between this & Narnia--the witches in this book are *good.* In N, they're bad. That said, though, I think the *theme* of HP redeems this element. The witchcraft is a setting, a plot device, not a main point. The THEME of the books, like others have said is good vs evil, & this is captured in a way that is truly insightful & rare.

Now, the evil in the book is truly evil. My dc will have to wait until they're much older to read these, & I would suggest that anyone considering intro'ing them to dc preread. But I wouldn't say it's any darker than LOTR, for ex.--we're just pretty conservative on things like that.

GL w/ your decision. From a Christian stance, I can see the difficulty. From a lit stance, rest assured. These are GOOD books.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

... even though J.K. Rowling isn't coming from the same perspective or worldview as Tolkien.



I think you might change your mind by the time you finish the last book.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

(Dh wouldn't let me read the 1st 2, bcs he said they were similar enough to the movie & written at a lower reading level that would drive me nuts. He's so keen on finding things I like, he wouldn't let those 2 ruin the series or my willingness to try something new, lol.)



Did you go back and read the first two?

[DB in NJ]

I think you might change your mind by the time you finish the last book.

Funny you say that; my 13 yo just said the same thing :D So I stand (sit) corrected. Reserving judgment on this until I finish reading the series, which I should've done from the beginning. My apologies to J.K. Rowling, et al.

[Remudamom]

Maybe we could call them very well written twaddle? The details from book to book are great, the story's fun and personally the "witchcraft" to me is just a way of telling an old story with a different twist.

[lighthouseacademy]

My opinion as a Christian is that they are good books. They are not simplistic at all. As for the issue of witchcraft etc, we have taught our children from a young age that magic is an illusion. Maybe we have ruined the fun of magic shows etc, but we have taught that the only TRUE magic and miracles are from God (how about Elijah calling fire down from heaven!) Even when my kids ask how I did something and I say that it was magic, my 6 yr old reminds me, "silly mommy, there is no such thing as magic. You know it is just pretend!" So, I have no concern that my children will find a need to pursue witchcraft etc, having been taught the difference between fantasy and reality.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Funny you say that; my 13 yo just said the same thing :D So I stand (sit) corrected. Reserving judgment on this until I finish reading the series, which I should've done from the beginning. My apologies to J.K. Rowling, et al.

:001_smile:

[Mom2GirlsTX]

I can't really help, cuz we're still in the anti-Potter camp, and don't consider those quality literature.

But one of dd's friends has read through all the books and loved them. Now she says she wants to find other witchcraft type books.......which is one reason we DON'T want out kids to read those books or watch the movies!

:iagree:
I really couldn't have said it better.

[Brindee]

My opinion as a Christian is that they are good books. They are not simplistic at all. As for the issue of witchcraft etc, we have taught our children from a young age that magic is an illusion. Maybe we have ruined the fun of magic shows etc, but we have taught that the only TRUE magic and miracles are from God (how about Elijah calling fire down from heaven!) Even when my kids ask how I did something and I say that it was magic, my 6 yr old reminds me, "silly mommy, there is no such thing as magic. You know it is just pretend!" So, I have no concern that my children will find a need to pursue witchcraft etc, having been taught the difference between fantasy and reality.My kids know the difference as well, dh and I just don't feel we need to read those, that's all. We've read some other good books though, so we're getting our reading in!:001_smile:

[Jami]

Here's a recent article by Martin Cothran of Memoria Press about the Harry Potter books.

Jami

http://www.memoriapress.com/articles/08/potter.html

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Here's a recent article by Martin Cothran of Memoria Press about the Harry Potter books.

Jami

http://www.memoriapress.com/articles/08/potter.html

I find L'Engle's comment puzzling, considering the theme of the books. "Nothing beneath them"? I guess I assumed she was Christian. ?? (Perhaps not... I shall google.)

ETA: Ok, I see she was an Episcopalian Universalist. So I remain puzzled.

[myfunnybunch]

Another vote for neither great literature nor twaddle.

The writing is not great writing. Sometimes it is awkward, a little clunky, very action-driven. Rowling's writing does improve from the first book to the last.

BUT Rowling is a gifted storyteller. The series is creative, well-planned, thoughtful, complex, intelligent. She tells her story with a great deal of respect for the reader's intellect. She doesn't spell out every last detail, doesn't wrap everything up in a neat little package, making the reader a partner in the storytelling. And HP is fun to read. The combination of intelligence and a great story makes the series well worth reading.

Cat

[kailuamom]

Not twaddle. Not when you read the entire set and see how much thought went into details provided in the first books that crops up again in the later books. Not when you look at the overall theme of all seven books.


I agree with this -- we are amazed when we look at the details that were scattered throughout the first books that made a difference in the later ones.

We are firmly in the "not twaddle" camp over here. We all love the books. We even dressed in Potter theme last Halloween, from Dumbledore (my hubby) and Prof McGonigal (me) all the way down to our littlest Hogwarts student (Neville Babybottom :001_smile:). Is Harry Potter great literature? Maybe not. Is it fun reading? We think so? Does it facilitate the discussion of good vs. evil and other deep questions? It can. Did it get my kids reading even more? Yup. :) Oh, and the latin / spell connection is way cool, too. :D

To each his own, but we think it is some pretty good 'mischief managed' over here. :D

[Trivium Academy]

I think it's more important for you to decide what you consider twaddle than it is for me to tell you my definition. What is good quality literature in your opinion? Compare a title you feel is quality to Harry Potter and decide for yourself (and him) whether H.P. would be a good choice for him. There are plenty of wonderful books available that are just as exciting as Harry Potter in case you decide not to encourage him to read them.

I have certain books I want my children to read and some I have resigned that if they WANT to read them, I'll be okay with it. I'm reserving all my protests for the books I absolutely, do not, under any circumstances, want them to read.

:) Good luck!

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

The combination of intelligence and a great story makes the series well worth reading.

I agree. The wonderful storytelling makes up for the places where the writing is lacking.

[CleoQc]

Now, the evil in the book is truly evil.

Yes truly evil! After all, the evil guys banned ->homeschooling <-

Use your mouse to select the word hidden between the two arrows to see what I'm talking about!

[kailuamom]

I believe that HP could easily stand among other classics for kids, incl A Wrinkle in Time, Narnia (though not nec at the same level as Narnia), & others. Is it at the TOP of the list? Nope. Not at the bottom, either, though. IMO.

As far as the witchcraft element, I do see the diff between this & Narnia--the witches in this book are *good.* In N, they're bad. That said, though, I think the *theme* of HP redeems this element. The witchcraft is a setting, a plot device, not a main point. The THEME of the books, like others have said is good vs evil, & this is captured in a way that is truly insightful & rare.



Very well said, and :iagree:.

:001_smile:

[Erica in PA]

That's such a subjective question. The definition of "Twaddle" varies so much from person to person, or family to family. Some people think Harry Potter is junk, others consider it quality children's literature.

My suggestion would be to read a Harry Potter book for yourself, and decide whether or not it would be acceptable for your family.

Erica

[Stacy in NJ]

Forgive me if this subject has already been beaten into the ground...I did search the forum, but didn't really find an answer. We used to be anti-Potter, but the more we think about it, the less sense that stance makes to us. I know the books are huge and it would be a big step for ds9 to go from Hardy Boys to Harry Potter, but I am trying to steer him towards more quality literature now that he has established a love of reading.

I have seen one movie, but haven't ever looked at the books. What says the hive?:bigear:

I don't go in for the whole "twaddle vs not twaddle" argument. Somethings are well written with an interesting theme. Sometimes they're well written with an insipid theme. Sometimes they're poorly written with an interesting theme. Not all books are the total package. I don't think it ruins a child to learn to identify the difference in quality, and if they want to kiss a few frogs, I'm fine with that. In fact, I think the contrast is helpful.

Harry Potter is, IMOP, reasonable well written. The multiple themes are interesting, but not transformative.

I wouldn't necessarily recommend them to a youngish (under 10) child who doesn't show all that much interest.

How about The Mysterious Benefict Society? Well written and wholesome.

[lighthouseacademy]

My kids know the difference as well, dh and I just don't feel we need to read those, that's all. We've read some other good books though, so we're getting our reading in!:001_smile:
My comment was not meant towards you Brindee. It was a general comment. I do wonder when some parents require Tolkien or C.S. Lewis but ban Harry Potter because to my mind, they are all in the same realm, but as you said, you don't feel a need to read any of them. I can respect that.

[runningirl71]

Not twaddle. Not when you read the entire set and see how much thought went into details provided in the first books that crops up again in the later books. Not when you look at the overall theme of all seven books.

Last week I reread Pride and Prejudice for the third time. I also reread the seventh H.P. book for the sixth time. Ok, Rowling is certainly not Jane Austin (and Snape is not Mr. Darcy! ;)) but the enjoyment of reading a well-thought out book is the same.

Hope I make sense.

:iagree: I used to be very anti-Potter for a long long time. When the 1st book came out, my ds was 4 or 5. I said absolutely not, when I heard about the witchcraft element, and he was still too young to read them. Also, I preferred to stay away from them for a long long time b/c my family was so adamantly against them {my sister has a distant connection to an actual practicing witch through her in-laws side} and so I told myself my kids won't read them.

But, then I really, really had to re-evaluate. What was I basing my opinion on? Other's opinions! I then did research on the books, took a closer look, and decided it would be okay for ds to read them.

Now, much, much time passed during all of this and ds is now 13. I let him start reading all the books a year ago, but I STILL hadn't read them myself. So, this spring I sat down and read them, so I could finally have an educated personal opinion!

I really, really can see how some people could say it is all about witchcraft, if they only read the first book. But, if one takes the time to read the whole series, and evaluate the over all themes, there is so much more to them, like JFS in IL said whom I quoted.

Memoria Press had an article on the Harry Potter series in The Classical Teacher this spring. It was written by Martin Cothran. In the article, he addresses parents concerns and basically says that this series may not be up to the level of the "great books" {he said that the HP series lacks depth of meaning on a deeper literary level} but it certainly is a good book. He does base this decision on just the 1st book {quoting Madelaine L'Engle} and when I read the article, I did disagree with this assumption, since you've got to evaluate the whole series, just not one book. They build on each other too much.

I don't mind talking with people about the HP series. But, I have a hard time talking with my family as they are so opposed to them but haven't taken the time to read and really evaluate them. How can I have a discussion with them if they have already judged me before I open my mouth? :glare:

Also, I treat the HP series like I would another good book in deciding if it is appropriate age wise. Although I allowed ds to read through them, if I could do it all over again, I would have him read the book that corresponds to his grade. So, the first book is when Harry is in 6th grade, so let ds read that one when he is in 6th grade and so on and so forth. Later on in the series, there are some more mature themes, but presented in a very sensitive way, imo.

[abbeyej]

I find L'Engle's comment puzzling, considering the theme of the books. "Nothing beneath them"? I guess I assumed she was Christian. ?? (Perhaps not... I shall google.)

ETA: Ok, I see she was an Episcopalian Universalist. So I remain puzzled.

I just wondered which book(s) she had read. Cothran's article references an article that was published 8 months after L'Engle died, and who knows how long before that the *comment* was made. Was it a comment about the *first* book? Or the set of seven? (Of which the last was published only very shortly before her death.)

I'm a definite fan of L'Engle's (though I think her religious views are far less conventional than Rowling's), but I would say that the Harry Potter books (taken as a whole) are deeper and as well written as anything I've read of L'Engle's...

[runningirl71]

Yes truly evil! After all, the evil guys banned ->homeschooling <-

Use your mouse to select the word hidden between the two arrows to see what I'm talking about!

That's very clever of you! Very Harry Potter-ish:)

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I just wondered which book(s) she had read. Cothran's article references an article that was published 8 months after L'Engle died, and who knows how long before that the *comment* was made. Was it a comment about the *first* book? Or the set of seven? (Of which the last was published only very shortly before her death.)

I'm a definite fan of L'Engle's (though I think her religious views are far less conventional than Rowling's), but I would say that the Harry Potter books (taken as a whole) are deeper and as well written as anything I've read of L'Engle's...

That's a fair point. And yes, I agree that she is less conventional than Rowling, and it shows in her writing. She does delve into "love conquering all," but not to the explicitly "Christian redemption" extent that Rowling does.

[runningirl71]

I just wondered which book(s) she had read. Cothran's article references an article that was published 8 months after L'Engle died, and who knows how long before that the *comment* was made. Was it a comment about the *first* book? Or the set of seven? (Of which the last was published only very shortly before her death.)

I'm a definite fan of L'Engle's (though I think her religious views are far less conventional than Rowling's), but I would say that the Harry Potter books (taken as a whole) are deeper and as well written as anything I've read of L'Engle's...

My understanding of the article is that she was speaking only of the 1st book:

"In a May 2008 interview in Newsweek magazine, L'Engle made an interesting observation: 'It's a nice story,' she said of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, 'but there's nothing underneath it.'"

If that is the only book her opinion is based on, I would say it would be an incomplete observation. :)

[nukeswife]

I guess a lot depends on your definition of "Twaddle" I personally hate that word, because in my circles it means something that simply isn't worth the paper it's printed on. It's something that adds nothing to ones learning or life. I don't think this is the case with HP. We are huge Harry Potter fans and after seeing Narnia's first movie I wondered why it was supposedly so much safer for kids. It still has witches in it, so what makes a Narnia witch more appropriate than a Potter witch. It's really a story about good vs. evil and my kids have gotten a lot out of the movies. My dh and I have each read all the books many times over and can't wait to start using them as read alouds for the kids.

My biggest issue is why must every thing always be "Great literature" what ever happened to reading for the fun of reading. HP got many kids to enjoy reading books again. To many it was a real turn around in library and bookstore usage.

Just my .02

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

My understanding of the article is that she was speaking only of the 1st book:

"In a May 2008 interview in Newsweek magazine, L'Engle made an interesting observation: 'It's a nice story,' she said of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, 'but there's nothing underneath it.'"

If that is the only book her opinion is based on, I would say it would be an incomplete observation. :)

And then there's that unfortunate American retitling -- "Sorcerer's Stone."

Bah.

Honestly, I wouldn't read it for YEARS because I thought Rowling was an idiot calling it a "sorcerer's stone." PHILOSOPHER'S stone. Scholastic didn't figure the American public could handle a book with the word "Philosopher's" in the title.

Bah, again.

[runningirl71]

And then there's that unfortunate American retitling -- "Sorcerer's Stone."

Bah.

Honestly, I wouldn't read it for YEARS because I thought Rowling was an idiot calling it a "sorcerer's stone." PHILOSOPHER'S stone. Scholastic didn't figure the American public could handle a book with the word "Philosopher's" in the title.

Bah, again.

Yes! I know! We lived out of the country when these books came out. Why did Scholastic change it? It confused me for awhile as I always knew it as philosopher's stone too!

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Yes! I know! We lived out of the country when these books came out. Why did Scholastic change it? It confused me for awhile as I always knew it as philosopher's stone too!

Truly, they thought a US audience could not handle something as weighty as the word "philosopher." Makes me so proud to be an American. :glare:

[KellyGirl]

I am really enjoying this discussion. It has given me some food for thought, but thought I should clarify my own stance on twaddle and such. I obviously allow it, he is reading lots of Hardy Boys and Boxcar Children this summer. But, there are some books that I say no to. I want him to at least be reading somewhere near his reading level.

We do get our share of good lit. in during the school year, as we are Sonlighters. Often he thinks he won't like a book, but then loves it once he gets into it. He has become an avid reader over the last year.

Part of the problem with ds is that whenever I suggest a title, he will say no. He will only pick books from the series or authors he has read and liked in the past. But he is like that about everything...a little obsessive and afraid to try new things.

[runningirl71]

Truly, they thought a US audience could not handle something as weighty as the word "philosopher." Makes me so proud to be an American. :glare:

Wow. Alls I can do is second your "bah." :)

[strider]

While I would not put these books on the same plane as LOTR, I personally find them to be well-written and engaging. I was impressed that the writing quality extended all the way through the end--I have read many an author who could not sustain the passion through the latter books in a series. I also thought JKR was masterful in her ability to weave details consistently through the whole of the series. Furthermore, I was impressed with her ability to create a fantasy that felt "real"--so many fantasy fiction writers are poor writers who rely heavily on the magic and mystical bells and whistles to keep the reader's attention. So, I do not consider these books twaddle at all. I do think they are well done and worth both the paper they were printed and the time to read them.

[clwcain]

I am really enjoying this discussion. It has given me some food for thought, but thought I should clarify my own stance on twaddle and such. I obviously allow it, he is reading lots of Hardy Boys and Boxcar Children this summer.

Okay, perhaps I missed it as I skimmed through the earlier posts buy, how are you defining twaddle? I wouldn't consider Hardy Boys or Boxcar Children twaddle.

It's not a binary choice between Great Lit & Twaddle. There is a vast realm of works that is neither poor enough to be twaddle nor important enough to be Great Lit. Much of that field needs to be encountered or the Great Books don't mean anything.

If you are concerned about Harry Potter, check out John Granger's work on the subject over at Hogwart's Professor (http://hogwartsprofessor.com/) and in his published works.

I'm of the opinion that it's much closer to Great Lit than most folks give it credit for, and that's in spite of Jo Rowling's skill as a writer.

HTH

[Starr]

I agree that you need to take the time to read a book through yourself to make the decision. We enjoy them but the dc did not read them until they were 11 or so. They read them when they were the ages of the main characters in the first few books.

[Oak Knoll Mom]

Okay, perhaps I missed it as I skimmed through the earlier posts buy, how are you defining twaddle? I wouldn't consider Hardy Boys or Boxcar Children twaddle.

Yes, I'd like to know your definition of twaddle, because I too wouldn't consider either of these twaddle.

[Michelle in MO]

First, w/ regard to the quality of HP as lit: it qualifies. The plot is complex, the characters & their struggles are well-developed. There's foreshadowing & symbolism. I'm a VERY picky reader, & I consider these books to be excellent--EXCELLENT--overall. (Dh wouldn't let me read the 1st 2, bcs he said they were similar enough to the movie & written at a lower reading level that would drive me nuts. He's so keen on finding things I like, he wouldn't let those 2 ruin the series or my willingness to try something new, lol.)

I believe that HP could easily stand among other classics for kids, incl A Wrinkle in Time, Narnia (though not nec at the same level as Narnia), & others. Is it at the TOP of the list? Nope. Not at the bottom, either, though. IMO.

As far as the witchcraft element, I do see the diff between this & Narnia--the witches in this book are *good.* In N, they're bad. That said, though, I think the *theme* of HP redeems this element. The witchcraft is a setting, a plot device, not a main point. The THEME of the books, like others have said is good vs evil, & this is captured in a way that is truly insightful & rare.

Now, the evil in the book is truly evil. My dc will have to wait until they're much older to read these, & I would suggest that anyone considering intro'ing them to dc preread. But I wouldn't say it's any darker than LOTR, for ex.--we're just pretty conservative on things like that.

GL w/ your decision. From a Christian stance, I can see the difficulty. From a lit stance, rest assured. These are GOOD books.

much of what Aubrey says here. I did allow my oldest to read the first two books when she was about eight, but she was a little scared by them, and because of that and also because of the general perception among many Christians that the books were not a good idea, we avoided them. I promised my girls they could read them when they were teenagers.

So, this summer they've been reading the books, and I would say that J.K. Rowling is an excellent author. I think she has an amazing ability to portray children in a way that reaches out to other kids. I still see a difference between LOTR and the Narnia books, but I would say that the HP books are perfectly fine for most kids. I think problems might arise if a child were to get absolutely obsessed with the books, but that hasn't been a problem for our girls. In the HP books, good ultimately triumphs over evil, although it does seem like witchcraft is portrayed differently in the HP books than in LOTR or Narnia. But, I say that having watched the movies that are out, because I haven't finished all of the books. My kids have, though, and have thoroughly enjoyed them.

I respect families with different convictions, because we held them ourselves, early on (as described above). However, I really believe my girls are old enough to read the books, enjoy them as good literature, and remain balanced with the whole experience.

It seems like sayings from HP have entered into the popular culture, too. Now I know what people are referring to when they speak of "Him who must not be named"!


I think

[Kathy in MD]

I find L'Engle's comment puzzling, considering the theme of the books. "Nothing beneath them"? I guess I assumed she was Christian. ?? (Perhaps not... I shall google.)

ETA: Ok, I see she was an Episcopalian Universalist. So I remain puzzled.


I thought she was commenting on the first book only, not the entire series. I wonder if L'Engle read the entire series? Possibly not if she didn't enjoy the first one. And the first one isn't as heavy as the others.

But J K Rowlings purposely wrote the series to become meatier as Harry and his friends matured enough to understand more of their world and deal with more of it's problems.

[lovemywhirlygirls]

Madeleine L'Engle died on September 6th of last year. Not sure when the last HP book was released. Just FYI.

[abbeyej]

But J K Rowlings purposely wrote the series to become meatier as Harry and his friends matured enough to understand more of their world and deal with more of it's problems.

And that's something that she does *amazingly* well. I've never seen anyone else attempt to tread each step of the way as a child becomes an adult -- not a single pivotal moment, but a slow maturation over seven years -- and she does it with such incredible understanding. The frustrations, the setbacks, the emotions, the growth... I was just blown away as I looked back over the series...

[6packofun]

Don't know, don't care. We preread them, didn't find them offensive and some of our kids enjoy them. Some don't bother with them. They aren't assigned reading at our house, but they are books read with pleasure and they inspire some great discussions. So I can't say that they are twaddle, whatever that is. I still haven't figured that out. LOL

[nakitty]

Not entirely, no. It is entertaining. It is a great story with lots of good lessons, IMO. High quality literature, not really. But not twaddle either. Good fun reading for sure. I love them as do my kids. Both have read them. Older one, multiple times through the series. Younger is working his way through book 7 now.

It is okay to read stuff that is not always on the classics literature list too. Mine don't read pure garbage, imo again. But they do read a mixture of classics and better written fun stories too.

I hope you all enjoy them. We certainly have.
ditto

[laylamcb]

Is there a twaddle spectrum? ;) At one end you have The Babysitters Club and the like. At the other end...what? Newbery winners? I'd say HP books fall somewhere near the middle, with the books progressing up the spectrum (becoming less twaddlish) almost in order from 1-7. Just MHO.

[Michelle T]

many, many books that are considered classics, or great books.

I for one don't care if a book is on every classic book list there is, if it's a boring, dated read. Putting on my flame resistant suit here, because truthfully, I think a lot of the whole twaddle vs non-twaddle, "my second grader reads only the classics", no-series-books-will-enter-my-home-and-pollute-my-child's-pure-brain nonsense is really just elitist snobbery.

I always get a chuckle out of the frequent "what are you reading?" threads here, because I notice that nobody ever admits that they are reading some bosom-heaving romance novel, or trashy best seller. Everyone claims to be reading Moby Dick, or some similar, high brow novel. But I can't believe that out of the hundreds on the board, nobody is reading Heaving Bosoms of Lust, or some such book!

I loved the Harry Potter books. I don't consider them twaddle. DS has not read them, because he hasn't wanted to. I'd certainly let him if he wanted.

Of course, I also enjoy reading the occasional "chick lit" book, and various other materials that would not make the "great conversations, great books" lists.
MIchelle T

[laylamcb]

I always get a chuckle out of the frequent "what are you reading?" threads here, because I notice that nobody ever admits that they are reading some bosom-heaving romance novel, or trashy best seller. Everyone claims to be reading Moby Dick



Here's a promise: I for one will NEVER, ever claim to be reading Moby Dick. You can take that one to the bank. ;) And I just finished re-reading Outlander--that's right: I just RE-read it. And I'm nearly 40 and have read all of the Harry Potter books--twice. :001_smile: Life's too short to read nothing but Hemingway. (OK, IMHO, life's too short to read ANY Hemingway, but that's another thread entirely.)

[KellyGirl]

Yes, I'd like to know your definition of twaddle, because I too wouldn't consider either of these twaddle.
I haven't yet really taken the time to define twaddle in my own mind. And with Boxcar and Hardy Boys, I think that the originals books are decent, but the newer ones border on twaddle. Even my son has noticed this - if given a choice he will pick the older Hardy Boys.

And maybe for a 7yo they are not twaddle, but for a 9yo they are? It is really in the last year that he has transitioned from liking to be read to -- to wanting to read on his own when he could be doing other things. But, he only wants to read these few series. Maybe it is his "addiction" to them that makes me see them as twaddle.

Junie B. Jones, definate twaddel. I told him I won't count those toward our library's summer reading.

Reading these responses is forcing me to think a lot about this. I guess I just assumed there was a broad and widely accepted definition already in existance. But, as I think...to be "not twaddle" a book should offer something besides entertainment. My ds reads BC and HB just to get through them. I don't think he really learns anything or is forced to think or reflect, etc.

And again, sometimes it is okay to read books that don't offer anything (IMO). I just want to push him more towards experiencing the richness of lit. And I wanted to know what you all thought about the quality of the writing in Harry Potter.

[Stacia]

We've certainly enjoyed them and they are constantly being re-read in our house.

We've also had some great discussions about the books. We also got The Sorcerer's Companion (http://www.amazon.com/Sorcerers-Companion-Guide-Magical-Potter/dp/0767919440/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217533623&sr=1-1) and The Magical Worlds of Harry Potter (http://www.amazon.com/Magical-Worlds-Harry-Potter-Fascinating/dp/B000BNPG1O/ref=pd_sim_b_3). Both of these companion books go into the history, folklore, and mythology on which lots of the things in HP were based. Reading a section or two of these companion books at the beginning of lunch has provided us w/ some great discussion topics. So, besides enjoying the HP books, we've also had fun discovering all the historical & mythological links w/in the books.

My fil (who is one of the smartest people I've ever met) thoroughly enjoyed the books too, esp. all the Greek & Latin roots.

The series is two-thumbs up at our house. :001_smile:

[KellyGirl]

We've certainly enjoyed them and they are constantly being re-read in our house.

We've also had some great discussions about the books. We also got The Sorcerer's Companion (http://www.amazon.com/Sorcerers-Companion-Guide-Magical-Potter/dp/0767919440/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217533623&sr=1-1) and The Magical Worlds of Harry Potter (http://www.amazon.com/Magical-Worlds-Harry-Potter-Fascinating/dp/B000BNPG1O/ref=pd_sim_b_3). Both of these companion books go into the history, folklore, and mythology on which lots of the things in HP were based. Reading a section or two of these companion books at the beginning of lunch has provided us w/ some great discussion topics. So, besides enjoying the HP books, we've also had fun discovering all the historical & mythological links w/in the books.

My fil (who is one of the smartest people I've ever met) thoroughly enjoyed the books too, esp. all the Greek & Latin roots.

The series is two-thumbs up at our house. :001_smile:

Hmm, that's an interesting idea. So, there is a good mythology/history/fokelore connection?

[Sarah CB]

Here's a page talking about what makes a classic:
http://classiclit.about.com/od/forbeginners/a/aa_whatisclass.htm

One thing that I think makes a classic is the grappling with a universal theme. You can grapple with the themes in Harry Potter. There is enough in it to have some pretty rousing literary debates related to theme, character motivation and character development. The whole redemption and sacrifice theme is something I've spent a lot of time thinking about. I definitely think that Harry Potter is an artistic expression of truth and love.

One thing I look at with lit is whether there was any growth in the character and whether that growth was believable or came across as false. I love how the characters in HP grew and developed over the series - I think there were a lot of life lessons in there and it was very interesting to look at their motives, actions, and ephiphanies.

We don't know yet if HP will stand the test of time - I'd be willing to wager that it will. I look at the relationships between the characters and how those relationships grew and developed, I look at the universal truths told through the story and I would be very surprised if people weren't interested in reading HP 100 years from now.

Another point in the above article is that classics make connections to other works of literature and wow - HP does that through the whole series. I loved the references to other lit and I really loved deciphering the meaning of the spells - it added a whole new realm of understanding for me.

HP is a classic because it's possible to really analyze the characters motives and growth, the themes, and the symbolism. "Twaddle" doesn't go beyond the surface - HP does.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

many, many books that are considered classics, or great books.

I for one don't care if a book is on every classic book list there is, if it's a boring, dated read. Putting on my flame resistant suit here, because truthfully, I think a lot of the whole twaddle vs non-twaddle, "my second grader reads only the classics", no-series-books-will-enter-my-home-and-pollute-my-child's-pure-brain nonsense is really just elitist snobbery.

I always get a chuckle out of the frequent "what are you reading?" threads here, because I notice that nobody ever admits that they are reading some bosom-heaving romance novel, or trashy best seller. Everyone claims to be reading Moby Dick, or some similar, high brow novel. But I can't believe that out of the hundreds on the board, nobody is reading Heaving Bosoms of Lust, or some such book!

I loved the Harry Potter books. I don't consider them twaddle. DS has not read them, because he hasn't wanted to. I'd certainly let him if he wanted.

Of course, I also enjoy reading the occasional "chick lit" book, and various other materials that would not make the "great conversations, great books" lists.
MIchelle T

LOL, one of our members WRITES (and successfully makes her living selling) Heaving Bosoms of Lust books! :D

On the other hand, I find my "potato chip books" so inconsequential that I don't mention them. My guilty pleasure is Grace Livingston Hill books. Bad writing and all, they are "comfort food" for me. But I sure don't list Crimson Roses on my list of books recently read, KWIM? They just aren't worth mentioning.

But, dang if I'm not tempted to put Heaving Bosoms of Lust on the reading roll call! :lol::lol:

[Stacy in NJ]

many, many books that are considered classics, or great books.

I for one don't care if a book is on every classic book list there is, if it's a boring, dated read. Putting on my flame resistant suit here, because truthfully, I think a lot of the whole twaddle vs non-twaddle, "my second grader reads only the classics", no-series-books-will-enter-my-home-and-pollute-my-child's-pure-brain nonsense is really just elitist snobbery.

I always get a chuckle out of the frequent "what are you reading?" threads here, because I notice that nobody ever admits that they are reading some bosom-heaving romance novel, or trashy best seller. Everyone claims to be reading Moby Dick, or some similar, high brow novel. But I can't believe that out of the hundreds on the board, nobody is reading Heaving Bosoms of Lust, or some such book!

I loved the Harry Potter books. I don't consider them twaddle. DS has not read them, because he hasn't wanted to. I'd certainly let him if he wanted.

Of course, I also enjoy reading the occasional "chick lit" book, and various other materials that would not make the "great conversations, great books" lists.
MIchelle T

:lol:

I've read the complete Ender series by Orson Scott Card. My twaddle. :D

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Hmm, that's an interesting idea. So, there is a good mythology/history/fokelore connection?

Well, yes, Rowling has a degree(s?) in classics and French lit from the University of Exeter.

[Lolly]

to the extreme!

[Stacia]

Hmm, that's an interesting idea. So, there is a good mythology/history/fokelore connection?

I think you can take a peek inside the books on amazon. But, just to give you an idea, here are some of the various things that are mentioned in the books:

Banshee (talks about the folklore of a banshee in Irish tradition, where they are not evil creatures, though they are terrifying)
Basilisk (which was apparently first written about by Pliny the Elder)
Forbidden Forest (forests have often been associated with risk & it includes references from Roman writings, info about dangers of walking in the woods in medieval & early modern Europe, etc...)
Phoenix (bird from ancient Greek & Egyptian mythology)
Alchemy (name comes from Arabic al-kimia, meaning the transformation of metals; evidence of alchemy in ancient Greece, Egypt, China, and India)
Which 'fantastic beasts' come from legend? (Red Cap, Ramora, Hippocampus, Salamander, etc...)

Etc....

It has been fascinating for me to read these books, as well as interesting for the dc. Just last week, we read a section about crystal balls (part of a much older tradition of scrying). When I read the word 'scrying', my dd piped up to say that scrying is done in the Eragon books. So, we've defintely learned a lot, made a lot of connections, and had a great time.

Don't know if that exactly answers your question or not, but I hope it helps. :001_smile:

[fivetails]

I always get a chuckle out of the frequent "what are you reading?" threads here, because I notice that nobody ever admits that they are reading some bosom-heaving romance novel, or trashy best seller. Everyone claims to be reading Moby Dick, or some similar, high brow novel. But I can't believe that out of the hundreds on the board, nobody is reading Heaving Bosoms of Lust, or some such book!

I will! I admit completely to reading a LOT of those "Harlequin Intrigue" books - y'know, the purple ones? (They're just about always purple in cover) ....there's about twenty of them behind me on the shelf. ;)

(I've never read Moby Dick..all I know is it's about a whale. Or something)

[Mom to Aly]

NO!!!!!!!!!!! Not twaddle! As they progress, they become harder, the content becomes more mature, but there is never anything inappropriate (sex, language, etc.). Never any bloody scenes, although people do die.

They are beautiful, emotional, well thought out, beautifully written, and I think they will be seen as classics later on, as they are beginning to be seen now.

Many see the Narnia books as great literature because they are Christian--I am not Christian and have loved them since I was young. If HP was written as a Christian allegory, I think they would have a lot less criticism than they do now. So many Christians I know who criticize them have never read them and are very wrong on what they think of them, acting as if they are anti-Christian, or something, which is completely untrue!! There is a definite right and wrong, strong sense of morality, etc., throughout the books.

I have read them all, and did not want to at first, just because of all the hype--did not start until the 5th one had just come out. Now I am grateful I have--I think they are beautiful, wonderful books, not to be missed! I cannot say enough good about them.

[Michelle in MO]

I always get a chuckle out of the frequent "what are you reading?" threads here, because I notice that nobody ever admits that they are reading some bosom-heaving romance novel, or trashy best seller. Everyone claims to be reading Moby Dick, or some similar, high brow novel. But I can't believe that out of the hundreds on the board, nobody is reading Heaving Bosoms of Lust, or some such book!

rep you for it, but I'm out for the day! You gave me a real good chuckle here!

Yes, I've got some "twaddle" in my nightstand; mindless reading--not Harlequin, and the last time I looked for Heaving Bosoms of Lust it was checked out! :tongue_smilie:

My current substantial reading is David McCollough's The Path Between the Seas, which is taking me forever to read because I just don't have as much time to read as I used to. Then I pick up the twaddle, to help me fall asleep. ;)

[PinkInTheBlue]

I know there are a few hard and fast rules that make classics be classics but there seems to me to be a rule that says books have to be a certain age before anyone will take them seriously. They are much like a bottle of wine or an artist. It looks to me like true classics snobs require a book to be at least 40 or 50 years old and often the author dead to even be considered. :)

I am reading and enjoying Jane Austen's books right now but I also LOVE to read some HP, Christopher Paolini, Stephanie Meyer, etc. I'm actually taking a break in reading Mansfield Park to read Mysterious Benedict Society. I'm enjoying it but I definitely don't find it any more advance than HP.

I just love to read. That's what makes a book qualify in my category! :)

[Niffercoo]

I think you might change your mind by the time you finish the last book.

Agree completely.

I was reading the 7th book when I was at a very challenging time in my relationship with God. I don't want to give any plot details away, but it was enough that sometimes I had to put HP7 down because I was crying so much because some things Harry was struggling with mirrored the struggles I faced with my Christian walk.

[Pencil Pusher]

I have read them all, and did not want to at first, just because of all the hype--did not start until the 5th one had just come out. Now I am grateful I have--I think they are beautiful, wonderful books, not to be missed! I cannot say enough good about them.

Yep, that was my biggest obstacle, too. I'm very anti-hype. :001_huh: :lol:

[LauraGB]

No, definitely not twaddle. Classic literature? No. Classic story? You bet. HP is by far the most popular, most loved story all our family shares together. (We each have our own favs, but HP is the one we all can discuss together, and do A LOT). Rowling is a fantastic story teller, her characters are deep and well developed and she has a magic all her own when her pen hits the paper. Our family has all laughed and cried and cheered and gasped with the characters over the years. IMO, she's no literary genius, but her stories are remarkable. They are always our "go to" books when we run out of things to read and they are just as good the 4th, 5th or 6th time around as they were the 1st.

[Unicorn]

I love these books. They are well written, don't speak down to the audience, and are just such a fun time to read. I haven't known a child to get caught up in the magic or witchcraft of the book. It is more the great descriptions, funny characters and situations, and of course the fantastical creatures. Also, most kids I know are just so proud they read a book so big, often times so quickly. Harry Potter is a classic of our time and I hope you will allow your kids to enjoy.


:iagree: :iagree:

[Kalah]

Not twaddle say I but also not everyone's cup of tea. I personally have loved every one of them.

[Sandra in FL]

we've been through the Ramona series, Little House, Narnia, Lord of the Rings to name a few. Both 12 yr. old and 9 year old have read all the books, and the 6 year old has listened to them all on audio cds. We've had lots of interesting discussion on them and it's been almost like a book club. They are my favorites after Pride and Prejudice and The Trumpet of the Swan (this is a sentimental favorite since I have a child with missing fingers).

I think that eventually they'll be seen as classic children literature of this age. I especially enjoyed the last book in which all the loose ends from the other books are tied. There's a bit of Greek/Latin roots thrown in throughout the books. Did you know that Ms. Rowling majored in the Classics in university? Below is a link to her commencement speech at Harvard. I found it an interesting read about her background and how she went back to doing the thing she loved doing most.

http://harvardmagazine.com/go/jkrowling.html

Blessings,
Sandra

BTW, from someone who's read all the Hardy Boys and Nancy Drew books, HP is much more sophisticated and interesting than HB and ND.

[Peek a Boo]

I vote "not twaddle", but then, I can't stand
many, many books that are considered classics, or great books.

I for one don't care if a book is on every classic book list there is, if it's a boring, dated read. Putting on my flame resistant suit here, because truthfully, I think a lot of the whole twaddle vs non-twaddle, "my second grader reads only the classics", no-series-books-will-enter-my-home-and-pollute-my-child's-pure-brain nonsense is really just elitist snobbery.


This is where I am too.

I have found that reading HP leads to kids wanting to read more FANTASY, which almost always includes magical witchy stuff, but i haven't seen it leading to kids wanting to PRACTICE sorcery. I don't care for fantasy myself. That's probably why i liked HP tho: it's a more practical, earthy-kind of fantasy ;) Narnia and LOTR never really clicked w/ me, but my oldest loves them.

I agree w/ Aubrey's assessment from a religious POV.
As a Christian, I noted the difference in "witchcraft" from a Biblical perspective: in HP, being a witch/wizard is a physical characteristic you are born with, NOT A CHOICE. You can't learn to be a witch or wizard --you simply are or are not one. Biblically, being a witch is a choice against God. In HP, you can no more choose to be a witch or wizard than you can to have brown eyes or a physical deformity. in both scripture and HP, however, you CAN control how you act.

Hogwarts is a school FOR witches and wizards, kinda like the Winston School in Dallas is a school FOR the gifted special needs students: The Winston School doesn't TEACH you to be a special needs kid or a gifted kid: it works w/ what you already are.

There's a book called "What's a Christian to do with Harry Potter" by Connie Neal that gives a nice overview of the controversy, and how to respect EACH view as a Christian.

another point: there's a difference between "twaddle" and "geared for a specific age." I still like reading many kids' picture books --that doesn't make them twaddle, but it might not count for my summer reading parameters either, lol. There are plenty of higher level reading/lit courses that delve into analyzing children's lit. My own "comfort lit" is the Dick Francis series. Horses, formulaic writing, but fun anyway ;)

When my oldest was....10?... we used the first HP book as a unit study. We went through chapter by chapter and pulled TONS of pretty good vocabulary from it. It lends itself well to geography, mapwork, art projects, discussion, science, sentence structure analysis, and history/folklore studies. We're getting ready to start in on another unit of the Hogwarts Summer Correspondence School that ...Mamalynx?...mentioned once a couple years ago. Lotsa fun and I can make it as detailed as I want to!
http://www.geocities.com/dandjsmama/Hogwarts_SCS.html?1117356907590

HP is probably the first fictional book my dh ever read completely voluntarily. He got stuck listening to us read it as a read aloud and started reading it on his own when i took some time off.

good luck deciding where you wanna go w/ lit!

[Jami]

I find L'Engle's comment puzzling, considering the theme of the books. "Nothing beneath them"? I guess I assumed she was Christian. ?? (Perhaps not... I shall google.)

ETA: Ok, I see she was an Episcopalian Universalist. So I remain puzzled.


Well I think she made that comment after the first or second book, so it's possible that she would have to retract that after reading the full series. I think many critics made that rush to judgment, rather than waiting for the story to be fully told.

Edit--and now I see others have already said this. There seems to be a consensus. :)

[Kathy in MD]

Yep, that was my biggest obstacle, too. I'm very anti-hype. :001_huh: :lol:

Luckily we 1st heard about them when someone in a ski resort was reading the first book to his child. As we were living in Germany at the time, we hadn't heard any of the hype.

[Jami]

Yep, that was my biggest obstacle, too. I'm very anti-hype. :001_huh: :lol:


This was my issue too. I really don't like fads. :001_smile: But I thought I'd better join the party when the 7th was coming out so the whole ending wasn't spoiled for me. I read 1-6 over a few weeks time and was ready for 7 on the day it came out.

[mcconnellboys]

NO!!!! I'd class the series as a new classic!

[Peela]

Nope, not twaddle, and probably got a lot of kids reading who might not have otherwise.
But, I am not puritan and don't believe that everything my kids read should be for their higher spiritual or educational benefit- its ok to read for fun. I do.
Its possibly an important cultural piece- references to Harry Potter will echo down the ages. Maybe, anyway :)

[Lizzie in Ma]

I didn't start reading them when they came out. I am not a big hype fan and it is more likely to make me shun something. But several years later I picked up the first one used and I was hooked.

I have been a sci fi and fantasy fan since I could read. I adore The Chronicles of Amber, my dear friends from Pern, and Marvin the Paranoid Android. I reveled then in Narnia and remain madly in love with the folks of Middle Earth.
The HP books may not have the stunning prose of Anne of Green Gables or LOTR but they DO have the heart. JK Rowling created characters that made me care about them from page one and THAT is the kid of book I am drawn to. My dd's have yet to read them and that is fine, they do get progressively darker as Harry gets older. But I am taking a stand. I love Harry Potter.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2029/2722469080_ae272d5b8b_o.gif

[TaraTheLiberator]

My honest opinion is that people put down the quality of Harry Potter because they are afraid of the content. I have read all seven books several times, and I find them fascinating. The language is not as complex as many of the great classics, but we don't live in a time when people speak and write like that anymore. The plot of Harry Potter is complex, the themes are timeless, and the message is moral: we do what's right because it's the right thing to do regardless of how difficult it is to make the right choice. Harry Potter is the classic tragic figure who is very nearly finished off several times by his flaws, which are laid plain and shown to be what they are.

I think that people take comfort in saying "they are poorly written" because it gives them a good excuse to keep their kids away from "witchcraft." I believe that, if a child's faith is so shaky that reading some books about a child wizard causes him to "lose" his faith, then he never really had any faith anyway. I also believe that faith that is never challenged by an alternative point of view is not faith but blind allegiance.

I believe that the Harry Potter books will be enduring and will, in the future, be regarded as classics.

Tara

[Tree House Academy]

Well, I don't follow a CM approach so I am not even all that clear on what twaddle is. If it means reading something fun because you enjoy it, then sure.

As for "witchcraft" - hahaha. I am a Christian through and through and I don't find Harry Potter to conflict with my views. It is a fantasy book. I don't think there is really a wizard world, a school named Hogwarts, magical creatures, patronus spells, and the like. It is like any other fantasy book. It gives you a glimpse into an imagined world. And honestly, Harry's character is just the "good" against "evil" and whether we admit it or not, we are all fighting the evil in this world we are raising our children in. To me Lord Voldemort is no more than the man who beheaded another man on a Greyhound bus - he is just symbolic of the evil that already flourishes in this modern world.

[kailuamom]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2029/2722469080_ae272d5b8b_o.gif


Oh, now that is so cool! Where did you find that??

[runningirl71]

My honest opinion is that people put down the quality of Harry Potter because they are afraid of the content. I have read all seven books several times, and I find them fascinating. The language is not as complex as many of the great classics, but we don't live in a time when people speak and write like that anymore. The plot of Harry Potter is complex, the themes are timeless, and the message is moral: we do what's right because it's the right thing to do regardless of how difficult it is to make the right choice. Harry Potter is the classic tragic figure who is very nearly finished off several times by his flaws, which are laid plain and shown to be what they are.

I think that people take comfort in saying "they are poorly written" because it gives them a good excuse to keep their kids away from "witchcraft." I believe that, if a child's faith is so shaky that reading some books about a child wizard causes him to "lose" his faith, then he never really had any faith anyway. I also believe that faith that is never challenged by an alternative point of view is not faith but blind allegiance.

I believe that the Harry Potter books will be enduring and will, in the future, be regarded as classics.

Tara

:iagree: Well said!

[Kathy in MD]

At least one poster stated that one difference between Narnia and HP was that the witches in Narnia were bad and in HP they were good. But that's not strictly true in HP. The witches choose to be good or bad, and often (usually) are a mixture good and bad, like all people. I think this makes it even more of a parallel to real life.

I used to love science fiction and thought the best showed one of two things. It either explored how humans would be affected by and react in a futuristic world or it took a current issue and placed it an unknown world so the reader could explore the issue with fewer hang-ups. Though going in the opposite direction on the time line, The Crucible is an excellent example of this last point. Not being able to directly attack the McCarthyites, Miller went into history to pull out a similar situation and show the results. It was an indirect attack he could get away with.

I think HP does something similar. Though the consequences weren't as dire for JK Rowlings as it could have been for Miller, by placing HP in a fantasy world she is able to show human characteristics and the good and evil they can do without directly attacking the reader. I've seen a lot of children's books that are a barely disguised lecture. HP gets the same message across without the turn off.

Thanks for this thread. It made me think about HP differently and the above paragraghs are the result.

[Kari C in SC]

I love these books. They are well written, don't speak down to the audience, and are just such a fun time to read. I haven't known a child to get caught up in the magic or witchcraft of the book. It is more the great descriptions, funny characters and situations, and of course the fantastical creatures. Also, most kids I know are just so proud they read a book so big, often times so quickly. Harry Potter is a classic of our time and I hope you will allow your kids to enjoy.

:iagree:

I think they are very well written. We started reading them when my ds was in 5th grade. I read 2 pages, he read a page and so on. He was amazed with himself for reading these books. I have read a lot of books in my homeschool and I think these books are some of the best written. There have been other "classics" that I just couldn't stand the writing. Yes, Harry Potter is a classic in our house - no doubt.

[Peek a Boo]

At least one poster stated that one difference between Narnia and HP was that the witches in Narnia were bad and in HP they were good. But that's not strictly true in HP. The witches choose to be good or bad, and often (usually) are a mixture good and bad, like all people. I think this makes it even more of a parallel to real life.

well, except that scripturally it doesn't matter whether a "witch/wizard" is good or not --it doesn't say that only the good witches may live ;) Thus my distinction in my first post.

[Katia]

No, these books are not twaddle. They are new classics: well planned, well written and much symbolism, with classic literary alchemy.

[Crissy]

I think a lot of the whole twaddle vs non-twaddle, "my second grader reads only the classics", no-series-books-will-enter-my-home-and-pollute-my-child's-pure-brain nonsense is really just elitist snobbery.


I think that's a silly statement. I don't filter my kids' free reading, but I know a great many parents who do. Their motivation isn't 'elitist snobbery'. They are simply making a choice to do what they believe is best for their children and their family. It's no more snobbish than choosing healthy foods for their diet and foregoing Doritos, Twinkies and Pepsi.

[Phred]

Forgive me if this subject has already been beaten into the ground...I did search the forum, but didn't really find an answer. We used to be anti-Potter, but the more we think about it, the less sense that stance makes to us. I know the books are huge and it would be a big step for ds9 to go from Hardy Boys to Harry Potter, but I am trying to steer him towards more quality literature now that he has established a love of reading.

I have seen one movie, but haven't ever looked at the books. What says the hive?:bigear:
Anything that gets the kids to read. There's nothing in the Harry Potter books that's at all harmful IMHO. Breathing under water is no more or less magical than walking on top of it. Again, IMO.

[lovelearnandlive]

I have read through the entire series multiple times. Right now I am reading book 5 to my husband (who won't pick up a novel to save his own life) just because I want him to experience the story.

Rowling is not the most poetic writer in the world. But she excels at setting up complex plots, full of mysteries, twists, and cliffhangers that keep you reading. She does a great job of injecting humor into her writing., She is quite witty. And for plot-driven stories, the characters do undergo a significant amount of development, maybe not within a single book, but from the first book to the last, at least the main characters have changed significantly.

As a Christian, I don't have a problem at all with these books. I agree that the magic and spells etc. are purely a plot device. The main themes of the book are deeply Christian: That it is our choices that make us who we are, and not our abilities; that faith itself is a choice, and a very defining one; and that love and the laying down of one's life to save others are the most powerful magic of all. These themes hit hard in the last book. I was blown away by the Christian parallels in the final book. The way she wove them into the story makes her a master story crafter, at least in my opinion.

I can't wait until my dds are old enough to read these stories with me. I look forward to many long discussions with them about choices, character, love, faith, trust, good vs. evil, and what the love of power can do to a person.

[CAMom]

Junie B. Jones, definate twaddel. I told him I won't count those toward our library's summer reading.



Really?;) My 12yo dd and I have a guilty pleasure...we check out a Junie book or two every few months from the library and she reads it aloud to me.

We howl with laughter! We love to see the world through Junie's eyes and I think it gives us a peek into the mind of a 6 year old.

Anyway, maybe you have to be older to appreciate them.:lol: I think my dd's read aloud voice helps, too. She is a scream reading Junie!

[Jlynn]

I see this thread is already packed with posts, and I have not read many of the others. But, I just have to add my 2cents in : ) My son is 9, but an older nine, if you know what I mean. Well, I got hooked on HP myself when he was little and enjoyed them thoroughly. Since the final book was coming out last summer I decided to go ahead and read them to him (though we did listen to the audio book for #5 -my personal least fav.). He loved them of course...and we were both so excited to get that last book. My husband was deployed at the time, and I just have the fondest memories of me and my son sitting up way past bedtime (my voice completely hoarse) reading that book. We finished it in less than a week.

These books aren't twaddle...they have deep character sketches, intricate plot development, wonderful vocabulary, and that familiar British wit that I love.

We are Christians and I was concerned about the subject matter when these books first hit the bestseller list - which is why I began reading them. I had no cause for that concern though...they're just wonderful adventure stories. I have to say my son would laugh at the idea of being interested in spells or witchcraft or anything like that. But, he does remember some of his Latin words better : )

Good luck!
Josie

[chaik76]

And then there's that unfortunate American retitling -- "Sorcerer's Stone."

Bah.

Honestly, I wouldn't read it for YEARS because I thought Rowling was an idiot calling it a "sorcerer's stone." PHILOSOPHER'S stone. Scholastic didn't figure the American public could handle a book with the word "Philosopher's" in the title.

Bah, again.
I actually had a friend get me the first book from England so I could have the correct title!!!

[chaik76]

Here's a promise: I for one will NEVER, ever claim to be reading Moby Dick. You can take that one to the bank. ;) And I just finished re-reading Outlander--that's right: I just RE-read it. And I'm nearly 40 and have read all of the Harry Potter books--twice. :001_smile: Life's too short to read nothing but Hemingway. (OK, IMHO, life's too short to read ANY Hemingway, but that's another thread entirely.)
I've read the Harry Potter series 11 times! (and may I dare admit that this thread has inspired me to go read it again...)

[Hannah C.]

The Harry Potter books are definitely not twaddle! They're certainly better written than Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew, and the plot is much, much better than any Nancy Drew plot. I've read all seven, as have at least two of my siblings and my dad. Many of my other siblings have either read or listened to several of the books. None of us have shown any interest in practicing witchcraft, though the books have probably encouraged some of us to read more fantasy.

LotR is definitely better quality than Harry Potter - but, then again, LotR is waaaay up there on the quality scale. I actually like the Harry Potter books a bit better than the Narnia books, story-wise - up to the last Narnia book, that is. The Last Battle beats any Harry Potter books any day!

[T Baer]

But what about Narnia or Lord of the Rings? Would you/do you steer away from those for the same reason? Do you see a difference between those and Potter? My kids all love Narnia and LOTR and it has not sparked any such interest.


With so much literature to choose from, as parents, we can pick and choose based on our beliefs and convictions. We have a DS 9 and we discuss some of our choices in why we allow and avoid certain books and movies. Homeschooling is not just about academics as I am sure y'all can agree.

[Brindee]

I'm not in the "Anything that gets the kids to read" camp! Sure, I want to help them find things that get them excited about reading! But NOT when it goes against our beliefs or practices!

I was at Barnes & Noble with my kids one day when a lady came into the area where we were. She was looking expressly for some morphing type books--they were scary books, and had vampires stuff in them, and other stuff (which some people don't mind. I'm just saying what was in the books). She said, "I hate these books! I don't like that my child wants to read scary, evil, morphing books. In fact, it's something I want them to stay away from! BUT, my child won't read anything good, so I'm getting these for him, because he's interested in them and will read them. So I figure, hey, ANYTHING TO GET THE CHILD TO READ!" She grabbed a couple of books and left.

I had problems with that, because she, herself, stated she wants her children staying away from those types of themes/stories. But she was willing to negate and go against her value system to get something that they would read! If these child KNOWS she will buy what they want, then they can hold out! I'd try finding something historical or sports in nature and see what would catch their attention, rather than going with whatever thing caught their fancy, even though I was totally against it!

:rant: Okay, I'm done with my rant! :tongue_smilie:


The thing I see different on this thread is that people said they see nothing wrong with it. In that case, it makes sense that you'd get Harry Potter or some other book you have no problems with! My above point was not meant for you. It's those that allow their children to read trashy things the parent doesn't want them to, just so they'll read......

[CleoQc]

Brindee,

I do get what you're saying. I've had my child stay away from some books, not many though because I don't believe in censuring to start with. I do believe some books should be read at a later age though, and that's how I deal with my son. I give himi a target age, at which I think he will be ready.

However, I did let my son read "Animorphs'. Awful series, I totally agree. But he enjoyed them. And he read them in his SECOND language. The library didn't keep them in French, so he *had* to read in English. Now that he's gotten over this hurdle, and acquired a lot of vocabulary, I can have him in Sonlight this year! 'Animorphs', as awful a series as it is, did make my son bilingual.

Each family has its own hurdles to overcome, and each child reacts differently when told what to read.

[Brindee]

Brindee,

I do get what you're saying. I've had my child stay away from some books, not many though because I don't believe in censuring to start with. I do believe some books should be read at a later age though, and that's how I deal with my son. I give himi a target age, at which I think he will be ready.

However, I did let my son read "Animorphs'. Awful series, I totally agree. But he enjoyed them. And he read them in his SECOND language. The library didn't keep them in French, so he *had* to read in English. Now that he's gotten over this hurdle, and acquired a lot of vocabulary, I can have him in Sonlight this year! 'Animorphs', as awful a series as it is, did make my son bilingual.

Each family has its own hurdles to overcome, and each child reacts differently when told what to read.Yep, see, that's why it's good to discuss these things on here. We get to see all sorts of sides and things we'd never think of otherwise, I think! Thanks Cleo! :001_smile:

Your post got me to thinking....I want to find something interesting, yet simple enough, for my ds17 to read in German or Spanish. Thanks for the idea!

[Peek a Boo]

I'm not in the "Anything that gets the kids to read" camp! Sure, I want to help them find things that get them excited about reading! But NOT when it goes against our beliefs or practices!....

i agree. There are plenty of books i either don't encourage my dc to read or would say nope to.

HP / Narnia/ LOTR just hasn't made that cut for us.