Harry Potter article in NY Times tod

[alicia5270]

Original Yahoo! HPFG Header:
No: HPFGUIDX C6733
From: alicia5270
Subject: Re: Harry Potter article in NY Times tod
Reply To: [Yahoo! #6730] Re: Harry Potter article in NY Times tod
Date: 8/12/00 8:26 pm  (ET)

Newbie-With-A-Rant Alert.....

>>"Most critics think if you don't have to wade through a book with a
dictionary and a thesaurus at your side, it's not literature."

I couldn't agree more with that statement. Just for example:

Being an avid reader since the womb, I've read countless books
this summer, the most anticipated and enjoyable of these being, of
course, GoF. Some have been classics; others have been satires and
outrageous parodies, found while blowing the dust off shelves at the
local library. It really doesn't matter-- as long as the novel's main
attraction isn't its pictures, I'll give it a shot.

Being a high school student, every summer is cursed with that dreadful
assignment known as Summer Reading.

(Just as a reference, Summer Reading is an archaic assignment, usually
consisting of answering dreary questions about even drearier books, a
concept dreamed up in the late Middle Ages by sadistic English teachers
who obviously had their corsets laced too tightly or weren't stuffing the
fronts of their pants enough to feel sufficiently proud. The historical
accuracy of the above statement cannot be vouched for, as History is
definitely not my best subject.)

My assigned reading includes "Huck Finn" and "A Separate Peace". I enjoyed
"HF", but I can say with complete certainty that "A Separate Peace"
is the absolute WORST book I've ever read. You couldn't pay me to give
it another go. The prose is ponderous; the subject matter is gloomy;
and the book as a whole is depressing to the point of dulling the reader
into a Plath-esque state of apathy and misanthropy. Excuse me while I
find the closest oven.....

However, this book is supposed to be giving me A New Appreciation and
View of Literature, or that's what the summary on the inside jacket tells
me. Well, I've certainly got a new View of something, and that's that
most authors of Good Literature were in desperate need of some Prozac.

I don't know where some of these critics are coming from-- maybe they've
been reading too much Knowles and Fitzgerald, but the average person can
get more of an appreciation of literature from something as engaging
and enjoyable as J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter" series than from some
Classic Novel that's only read by disgruntled soon-to-be sophomores.

The sheer fervor caused by the books should point to this-- look at
the amount of listservs on the Internet, and the numerous subjects
discussed. I certainly can't recall even seeing any of the books so
touted by critics sparking such enthusiasm. I myself have managed to
improve my literary analysis skills- something very useful in projects
such as Dreary Summer Reading- just by engaging in in-depth discussion
of the finer points of the series, and my writing style has improved
greatly thanks to that wonderful commodity known as Fan Fiction. The
only thing I've ever gotten out of reading Orwell and Knowles was a
renewed desire to jump off the Chrylser Building.

Speaking strictly as a newcomer, I'd like to say that I'm not always this
caustic about everything. Occasionally, my personality is inspired to
rise to the level of slightly enjoyable. :) I'd also like to apologize
to all of the English teachers on this list, and assure them that no
English teachers were harmed in the construction of this rant.

Also, I was greatly amused to read Dave Barry (aka My Idol)'s take on
the books. Sometimes the beginning-chapter Potter formula does get a
bit superfluous, but rest assured that it's always entertaining.

But you already knew that.

Signing off,

Alicia/Sue "Runs With Chapstick" Spinnet
(Sue on the PoU list)