HP as children's book & how are they marketed?

[bbennett at joymail.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 22321

First off, I'm really enjoying this discussion - this is a great 
topic! I do want to clarify something, though. My original post was 
in no way meant to insinuate I think kids shouldn't read Harry 
Potter, that they can't get anything out of it, or that they 
shouldn't be challenged by reading. My points were meant to back up 
my thought that these are categorically adult books and not 
childrens' or young adult books. OK, on with the post... :*)

Allison wrote:

<I really don't think the HP books fit into any one particular 
category, be it children's or YA or adults.  JKR said she wrote them 
as something she would want to read, and they're placed in children's 
mainly because the main characters are young.>

I think you're right, Allison. I think they're considered childrens' 
books because the lead characters are children. But how about when 
the lead characters are 17 and 18?

<I'm 16, and I love the books.  I'm trying to get my friends hooked, 
but it's hard work because they all think they're children's books 
(another reason they shouldn't be classified as such - it detracts 
from a large group of possible readers). >

I agree, Allison, and this is my biggest frustration, I think - 
what's wrong with childrens' books? As I said before, a well written 
childrens' book must have the same elements as a well written adults' 
book, PLUS it must be clear and consise enough to be understood by 
the desired reading audience. If you ask me, a lot of adult writers 
could learn a lot by reading good childrens' literature.

< I discovered the joys of HP from my grandmother, who had PoA in her 
car.  I picked it up and started reading it out of boredom. >

I wonder how many people read HP because it was recommended to them 
by an adult and not the other way around? Although an 11 year old 
friend suggested I read PS/SS, I'm the one who pushed HP on my adult 
friends.

<I think younger kids can enjoy the books, but they won't get as much 
out of it as an adult.  They can enjoy the books more at face value - 
an exciting tale of a boy with magical powers who fights evil.  But 
it's the adults and more perceptive children (I probably could've had 
fairly good grasp of the finer points at age 9 or so) who can 
appreciate the morality issues, the battle between good and evil and 
just what separates the two.  But kids can still enjoy the books - I 
had a job at a day school with kids going into kindergarten or older 
for a few weeks this summer, and several of the kids had read and 
enjoyed the HP books.>

Yes! Kids can definitely enjoy the books, and it delights me to no 
end that the HP books have stimulated an interest in reading among 
children. I feel your comment about children not getting as much out 
of the books (especially as they progress; I think GoF is more 
complicated than PS/SS) point toward the argument that they're really 
adult fiction. Childrens' book can be stimulating and challenging, 
but they are written to be understood by children (keep in mind I'm 
talking about how children are classified in the literary world - I 
think aged up to 12 fit in this, but I'm not positive).  The HP books 
are more complex than this.

<Plus, children's books are just some of the best books out there.  I 
come from a family of voracious readers, and was always encouraged to 
read pretty much whatever I wanted, but I chose to stay with 
children's books because they were and are just better.  I did and 
still do read "adult" books, but I find I don't get the same joy out 
of them as I do from rereading an HP book for the tenth time, or any 
other of my childhood favorites (which are still my favorites 
period). >

More evidence as to why the NY Times list people are WRONG.

Amy wrote:
> However, I'm not sure what the problem is.  My only concerns about 
> kids reading beyond their level are 
> 
> (a) they'll get discouraged and give up on reading, 
> (b) they'll be scared/overwhelmed/introduced to aspects of life 
that they aren't developmentally ready for, and 
> (c) there's a lot of it that they just won't get.
 
> For (a), maybe your friend can say otherwise, but I am not seeing 
this happen with HP, nor hearing about this from elementary school 
teachers or parents of young children. >

Amy, I agree with a lot of what you say, and again, I wasn't saying I 
don't think kids shouldn't read the books; I don't think they're 
categorically childrens' books. I agree that I don't think kids will 
get so discouraged they'll give up on reading, and I don't think my 
friend thinks that either; her point was that by rushing into Potter, 
they may be skipping more developmentally appropriate books, 
especially when you consider how long it may take a younger reader to 
get through a Potter book (two friends, both 11, now see me in a 
whole new light since I told them I read GoF in 2 days :*).

<For (b), parents and others who know the kid well will have to judge 
whether he/she is ready for it. >

Yes, but they may not know the books. A friend has been reading all 
the books to his 7 year old. When I finished GoF, I hit they phone, 
and called to tell him it gets quite serious, and that he might want 
to read ahead before reading aloud to Daniel. He ended up editing 
parts of the book. Later, he told me he never would have thought "a 
kids' book would be so scary", and he thanked me for the heads up. 
Because the lead characters are children, he assumed it was a 
childrens' book.

> I have friends who have read their kids 1-3 but are holding off on 
4. I know one little girl whose parents read her SS when she was 6, 
and regretted it; she was scared.  The next year, they tried again 
and she loved it and has motored through the rest (again, having them 
read to her).>

I love JKR's daughter's reaction. JKR was concerned she'd be upset 
about Cedric, but as long as Harry was ok, she was cool with it :)

> Concern (c) is not really a concern for me.  These books work on 
many levels.  There are lots of books that I read when I was "too 
young," but still enjoyed, and re-read as an adult to much deeper 
understanding.  I read _Animal Farm_ when I was 11, for heaven's 
sake, and I hadn't a clue who Trotsky was. >

Again, I'm not saying at all that more advanced books can't be read 
and enjoyed, or that kids can't get a lot out of it. I've no doubt a 
lot of 11 year olds could read Animal Farm and find it entertaining, 
but that doesn't make it a childrens' book (I know you weren't saying 
it is, Amy). Books written for children are written to be understood 
by children. I still think the Potter books are adult novels that can 
be enjoyed by all ages, and not childrens' novels that are enjoyed by 
all ages. The subplots simply get too complex to be classified as 
childrens' novels. 
 
> On the flip side, I'm still getting new things out of Beatrix 
Potter and Ezra Jack Keats (I'm 33).  And I reread _The Secret 
Garden_ almost every year.>

The Secret Garden is wonderful! I re-read that a lot myself. And have 
you read Holes? 

> I also wonder which list they put young adult books on.  Or don't 
> teenagers read enough for any of their books to make the best-
seller list?

The Young Adult category ranges from 13-16/17, but there aren't a lot 
of YA books sold, outside of the series-type stuff. This is because 
by the time most kids hit middle/high school, they've moved on to 
reading adult fiction.

OK, question: 

I said in an earlier post that I think the HP books are marketed to 
children, but the more I look around, the more I think maybe that's 
not so. The kids' merchandise, for example, seems to be an 
afterthought; the really cool stuff seems to be targeted at us. JKR 
said she wrote the book for herself. Are we (adults) actually the 
target market?

I'll shut up now :)

B