Mike (the Paladin)’s review of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (Harry Potter, #1) > Likes and Comments

Comments (showing 1-9 of 9) (9 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Rickey (new)

Rickey I think it would be interesting to take a survey to see how many people don't know what the "Philosopher's Stone" is or a "Paladin" also. I'm guessing more than you think.

Mike (the Paladin) That's soooooo depressing... :)

message 3: by Sath (new)

Sath Oh wow, I was sitting here wondering what your comment about 'philosopher's stone' meant, and then I just noticed only now that they've changed the name. That's crazy. Didn't a similar thing happen with Philip Pulman's books?

I completely agree with you tho Mike, the cool thing about the books is that the characters mature through each one, but not just the characters.. the writing matures, and the depth of the story, and the dark parts grow in the plot, thats the most impressive thing about the series!

Mike (the Paladin) The great thing I've noticed (and it came on me after several readings) is that these books are some of the most "re-read-able" books I've ever read. C.S.Lewis once observed that a children's book that could only be enjoyed by children was no good at all. He also said that he couldn't imagine reading a book he truly enjoyed only once.

These books are I am more and more convinced over the years something fairly special and that Rowling has accomplished something fairly wonderful.

I keep picturing someone who read the books first as a child coming on them years later in an attic or something, sitting down and getting reabsorbed all over again.

I originally rated them 4 stars and later realized they were much better than that. I still need to "re-review" the later ones.

message 5: by Nahtan (new)

Nahtan Resarf Isn't it called the sorceress stone in america.
I don't see why you need two different names for the same book, its just strange.

Mike (the Paladin) No the Philosopher's Stone is a mythological object or material that was sought for by alchemists in ages past (Nicolas Flamel was a real person and magician and alchemist who lived in the 1300s and into the 1400s). The book was named by J.K Rowling "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone". For American release the publishers retitled it "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" the implication (or assumption by the publishers) being that Americans are to ignorant to know what the Philosopher's Stone was/is.

Of course that may have been born out.

But it still bothers me.

message 7: by [deleted user] (new)

No, the philosophers stone didnt translate in other languages so they changed it for the other languages, not america

Mike (the Paladin) Well that's a relief though I still don't see why it wasn't left the same for all English editions.

message 9: by Leslie (new)

Leslie I think that it WAS changed here because they thought either that Americans were either too stupid or would be put off by the word "Philosopher." Even if it was changed in other languages because it doesn't translate, that wouldn't be a logical reason for it to be changed in American English. (I've heard that they made other "translations" as well, though I forget what.)

back to top