David’s answer to “Is it worth the read? What did you like and dislike about it the most?” > Likes and Comments
26 likes · Like
Do people praise Harry Potter as something original? I've read all books the series consists of. I have to admit they were entertaining, but consist of nothing that hadn't been created before.
I am not going to comment on your opinion on Le Guin's books but on Rowling's. I don't really think that you can call the Harry Potter series awesome. Yes, it is entertaining, but that's just about it. They are good books, but for kids under 13. It's just that Rowing tries to put so many twist and tries to picture Harry as something other than a brave idiot and that he is the world's only chance for survival and not an ordinary boy that it loses common sense midway. Like why the hell harry, Ron and Hermione are able to figure out all the things that were happening in the school and a 150 year old Dumbledore couldn't? And what struggles? Everything Harry does is driven by luck and ex-machina silver platter. Everything he accomplishes is done by luck, his friends and luck. He doesn't do anything exceptional. He is a normal kid that has no ambitions and has luck. I mean the only time we've seen him practise a charm outside of class is the Patronos one.
David, you are on point to comment the metaphysical nature of her work. Ursula has such a discerning perception on writing style and the breadth of its substance, it is too bad wise lore weavers like her rare; evermore so, that few have the insight to understand the metaphors and envelope the story on a spiritually personal level.
LeGuin's review explains why I had no interest in reading more than the first, which I had to force myself to finish. I'd add to her comment that it was yet one more (and rather tiresome) example of the British obsession with social class and distinctions that Freud called "the narcissism of minor differences."
Oh, gosh, I didn't know about this comment on Harry Potter by Le Guin. It's so on point, I can't even. Makes me respecting her even more.
I find Harry Potter really derivative, both of UKL's earthsea and especially Roald Dahl. The Harry Potter series is great but not something I find myself wanting to return to. The events and characters don't really have much greater meaning and the language is just pragmatic. It's fun and I like it but it is silly to compare these two books. Earthsea is a beautiful work of literary metaphysics, while harry potter is just like reading a movie. the works had totally different goals. thinking of them as similar just because of the fantasy genre is a mistake. UKL's comments are fair, actually, especially since the interviewer seems to set up the question to either dis harry potter or crown rowling as the new LeGuin. It's like saying, what's better, dante's inferno or hellboy? there is definitely a connection in the content but not in the form
While I agree with her comment regarding school novels, entertainment is a plus. I recently read Wizard of Earthsea and while I appreciated what it did stylistically and sons of the themes, I found the voice very off-putting and disengaged. I’ll take entertainment over it any day.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Piotr
(new)
Feb 24, 2015 01:49PM
Do people praise Harry Potter as something original? I've read all books the series consists of. I have to admit they were entertaining, but consist of nothing that hadn't been created before.
reply
|
flag
I am not going to comment on your opinion on Le Guin's books but on Rowling's. I don't really think that you can call the Harry Potter series awesome. Yes, it is entertaining, but that's just about it. They are good books, but for kids under 13. It's just that Rowing tries to put so many twist and tries to picture Harry as something other than a brave idiot and that he is the world's only chance for survival and not an ordinary boy that it loses common sense midway. Like why the hell harry, Ron and Hermione are able to figure out all the things that were happening in the school and a 150 year old Dumbledore couldn't? And what struggles? Everything Harry does is driven by luck and ex-machina silver platter. Everything he accomplishes is done by luck, his friends and luck. He doesn't do anything exceptional. He is a normal kid that has no ambitions and has luck. I mean the only time we've seen him practise a charm outside of class is the Patronos one.
David, you are on point to comment the metaphysical nature of her work. Ursula has such a discerning perception on writing style and the breadth of its substance, it is too bad wise lore weavers like her rare; evermore so, that few have the insight to understand the metaphors and envelope the story on a spiritually personal level.
LeGuin's review explains why I had no interest in reading more than the first, which I had to force myself to finish. I'd add to her comment that it was yet one more (and rather tiresome) example of the British obsession with social class and distinctions that Freud called "the narcissism of minor differences."
Oh, gosh, I didn't know about this comment on Harry Potter by Le Guin. It's so on point, I can't even. Makes me respecting her even more.
I find Harry Potter really derivative, both of UKL's earthsea and especially Roald Dahl. The Harry Potter series is great but not something I find myself wanting to return to. The events and characters don't really have much greater meaning and the language is just pragmatic. It's fun and I like it but it is silly to compare these two books. Earthsea is a beautiful work of literary metaphysics, while harry potter is just like reading a movie. the works had totally different goals. thinking of them as similar just because of the fantasy genre is a mistake. UKL's comments are fair, actually, especially since the interviewer seems to set up the question to either dis harry potter or crown rowling as the new LeGuin. It's like saying, what's better, dante's inferno or hellboy? there is definitely a connection in the content but not in the form
While I agree with her comment regarding school novels, entertainment is a plus. I recently read Wizard of Earthsea and while I appreciated what it did stylistically and sons of the themes, I found the voice very off-putting and disengaged. I’ll take entertainment over it any day.
