Kiddiefic reply, Moaning Myrtle
Tabouli
tabouli at unite.com.au
Sat Sep 1 16:32:59 UTC 2001
No: HPFGUIDX 25328
bbennett:
> I don't refuse to identify the HP books as solely for children
because I have patronizing ideas about children's literature.
Well sure, the patronising view of children's books is not universal (and probably less common among adult HP fans for obvious reasons), but if you cast your eye over non-fan induced commentary on HP on the Web, or ask around people who *haven't* read the books, I guarantee that patronisation of children's literature as a genre is alive and well and widespread. The amount of people from all creeds and walks who hear of my liking for HP and sneer "... but aren't those *children's* books?"...
> My point remains this - I believe a well-written children's book should
be fully *comprehensible* at the average young reader's level. If
this criteria is not met, I don't think the book can be classified as
strictly children's lit, and I don't believe Harry Potter meets this
criteria.(...) Many people on this list have agreed
that they believe some of the more complicated plot aspects of Harry
Potter will not be fully understood until the reader is older, and I
think we can expect the complexity of the series will increase as the
books progress. There are other points that can be debated (...), but I see them as
secondary to the "yes or no - is this book completely understandable
by a young reader?" question.
"Completely understandable" is a pretty exacting criterion. A child by no means has to completely understand a book to enjoy or appreciate it.
I would wager that there are plenty of levels of meaning in millions of books, regardless of target audience, which many an adult misses or does not totally understand. Understanding has easily as much to do with general knowledge, personality, personal experiences, analytical ability, reading style and hundreds of other factors as it has with age. My brother picked up a lot of the double entendres in The Simpsons in his early teens which my father didn't because he was doing the "patronising assumption about cartoons" bit and wasn't looking for them. "Tom's Midnight Garden" (lovely book) is based around a very complicated time-travelling plot which was too confusing for my 11 year old cousin (who I would probably describe as as "average young reader") to grasp, and is definitely classed as children's fiction.
If children miss the Christian allegory central to the Narnia books, which they well might if they didn't grow up in a Christian country/household (I *was* brought up going to Sunday school, and I didn't see them until they were pointed out to me at 11 or so, whereupon I was very embarrassed to have missed something so obvious), does this make them "adult fiction"?
Hagridd:
> I don't know how it got there, but for the record, the Pensieve is not
my undesired plot device, just Moaning Myrtle.
I'd keep a low profile when David (Moaning Myrtle's greatest fan) gets back to the list...
Tabouli.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
More information about the HPforGrownups
archive