biggest SPOILER _ Children's Books?

[caspenzoe]

No: HPFGUIDX 109852

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jcb54me" <ejblack at r...> wrote:
> Steve/asian_lovr2:
> > JKRowling did not write these as children's books. She wrote the 
> >story for herself, and wrote it the way it came to her. She never 
> >took her original vision and in any way adapted it for children. 
> (snip)
> >It was the Publishing company's marketing department who decided 
> >the books could best be marketed to children. 
> 
>    Absolutely!  Consider Lord of the Rings.  It begins with what 
> might be considered a children's tale (The Hobbit) and then 
develops 
> into a major mythic saga.  But, because Hobbit came first, LOTR 
was 
> at first considered a children's or at most a teenage set of 
books  
> by the publishers.
> 
> Jeanette

I really have to take issue with the whole debate about whether the 
HP books are written for children/are children's literature or not. 
I think it's a false issue for the following reasons:

1. Of course JKR wrote them as they came to her - that's what 
artists do;

2. However, they couldn't, particularly the first one, have been 
sold to any publisher without a target audience - in this case, 
children - whether the first book was published word for word as JKR 
originally wrote it (I seriosuly doubt it) or not;

3. In addidtion, the far greater length of the more recent books, 
indicates (to me at least) that JKR was given a lot more leeway by 
her publisher(s) as the books became more and more popular, and, by 
implication a lot less in the first volumes; in other words, I 
believe there was likely a lot of editing and cutting at the 
beginning of the series;

4. Nevertheless, the fact that editing is part of the process all 
books go through on the way to the publisher doesn't make any 
literature any less the author's creation;

5. All great art/literature works on more than one level, and 
sometimes on many levels (adult and child, literal and symbolic, 
etc.) - one might even say that the more levels a work of art 
succeeds in, the greater the art;

6. Therefore, while the books may mature somewhat as Harry does, 
they are and will remain "children's" as well as "adults'" books; in 
fact, were they to lose their ability to communicate directly to 
children, their artistic quality would decline substantially - 
diminishing JKR's accomplishment - something none of us would like 
to see happen.

Therefore, with all due respect to Steve, I think his interpretation 
of JKR's comments is far too literal. I worry that Steve and some 
others here - Hans comes to mind (again - with all due respect - I 
read and enjoy both their posts - lot's of inspiration there!) - 
perhaps all of us at some point - are in real danger of becoming   
addled HP fundamentalists. In other words, yes there is genuine 
artistry behind the books and yes there is liberal symbolism of 
various kinds - but the notion that these somehow confine JKR to any 
sort of rigid formula (such as Hermione and Ron must be beheaded) or 
level is simply absurd, and flies in the face of everything that 
makes great literature great. 

My two knuts - just don't think it works that way! 

Caspen