[HPforGrownups] Rowling used to be consice

[Janette]

No: HPFGUIDX 169715

On 6/3/07, Deb <readzalot at shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>    I have started re-reading the series, and two-thirds of the way
> through the Philosopher's Stone, it struck me how much Rowling packed
> into that little book.  The whole scene of what happened going down
> the trap door took only 16 pages!
>    Although I enjoy the detail of the later books, I can see how some
> folks suggest that some of her later books could have used a good
> editor.
>    I teach at an elementary school, and I try to read several books
> at this level every year. I am struck by how far and above the Harry
> Potter books are in quality, compared with other children's books.
> Deb R, aka readzalot


montims:
IMO, PS was a children's book,  It is not so much that she was concise -
more that she was using vocabulary, and grammar, suitable for under-10s to
read and understand.  As she continued through the books, the writing became
more dense, and more challenging for her readership, who was aging together
with Harry...


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]