Oh my goodness, what book are THEY reading?

[ariston3344]

No: HPFGUIDX 106846


Tammy Rizzo wrote:

> In the NY Times today (I subscribe to the email highlights, not the
> paper itself), in the Arts section, is this article, 'Harry Potter,
> Market Wiz', translated from a french article published over there 
> last month. Here is the link (it might require a free registration
> for you to read it):
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/18/opinion/18YOCA.html?th

squeakinby <squeakinby at t...> replied:

> Thanks for pointing that out!  Boy, it was my laugh of the day. 
> One at first thinks he didn't read the books but of course, he
> must have because he got the names right.

ariston3344:

I actually suspect that he didn't read all of the books, or at least 
that he didn't read them very carefully.  In fact, he might have 
only read the beginning of GoF and then OotP.  This might explain 
why he mistakently believes that:

a) Percy is unintelligent;
b) Cedric is weak;
c) there is a competition among "schools" to win the "Goblet of 
Fire"; and 
d) Dumbledore "constantly" is at loggerheads with the government.

I don't see how you could believe (a), (b), or (d) if you had read 
books 1-4 in their entirety.  And (c) is simply incorrect.  Schools 
vie (through their champions) for the Triwizard Cup, not for the 
Goblet of Fire.  (Nobody ever "wins" the Goblet of Fire -- it just 
chooses the school champions.)

This wouldn't be the first time a reviewer has failed to pay careful 
attention to (and probably failed to really understand) what he or 
she was reviewing, but I'm afraid it probably won't be the last, 
either...

-ariston