Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (Harry Potter, #1) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone discussion


521 views
Did anyone else feel this book isn't a good start to a great series?

Comments Showing 51-63 of 63 (63 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1 2 next »
dateUp arrow    newest »

Jerri I agree. I think the 1st book was elementary, I suspect because the intended readership was children. But as the saga grew so did the age of its readers and consequently the sophistication of the successive books.


Georgie When I first got into Harry 7/8 I did like the book but I didn't go back to re-read it (like I did a million times with all the others) until I was about 12 or so. And when I did reread it I didn't have any problem with it. I actually thought it was great because of how condensed it was compared to all the other books. In a way, the first book is quite episodic while at the same time moving forward. That just seemed brilliant to me at the time.

I reread all the books 10 months ago and the first book impressed me the least, what I had thought was so amazing when I was 12 irritated me. Nothing seemed fleshed out enough, I felt like I was getting the bare bones of the story.


Sαmαnthα I just finished the first one about a week ago and I thought it was a great start to the series.


Sarah:) My sister and i LOVE the series and have both read all of them.


Christine Yeah, I do feel like the content of this book wasn't very exciting in comparison to the 7th. Yet, I do understand that the first was the first and it needs be weaker in order for the series to actually progress and change. I feel like each book got progressively better (besides the Goblet of Fire, I feel like that was kind of an unconnected plot, though the subevents were important. I kind of felt like it could have been a great stand alone book that wouldn't really be part of any series).


message 56: by Jameelah (new) - added it

Jameelah L Exactly Marie


Christine Jameelah wrote: "Exactly Marie"

Thank you! :)


message 58: by Rachel (last edited Nov 15, 2011 06:55AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Rachel I actually love that the books become more mature both in terms of content and writing style as the series progresses. It seems to mirror Harry's mindset and maturity level, which is brilliant and part of what makes the series so special.

And as for things not being fleshed out in Book 1, it takes a bit of close reading and the knowledge that you get from the later books to understand what's going on in the background. If you read into the scenes, there's a lot more going on than you'd notice before reading the rest of the series.


Christine Rachel wrote: "I actually love that the books become more mature both in terms of content and writing style as the series progresses. It seems to mirror Harry's mindset and maturity level, which is brilliant and ..."

You make a really good point. I saw that in the movies where you had to know things that happened later, but I haven't reread the series yet. I do like how they become better and better in content every time, but still I think it could have had a different theme. The whole Sorcerer's Stone thing was kind of weak.


message 60: by Eric (new) - rated it 3 stars

Eric Priuska It wasn't until PoA (HP3) that I really got why everyone one loved this series so much. Every book got better, as JK became a better writer.

I'm hoping that my first book is a stonger start to my series than HP1, but I'm willing to bet that 10 years from now, I'll look back and realize how much I still had to learn as a writer.

JK is such a genius in world development, and looking back HP1 offers so much depth to the series. It may have been a rocky start, but it created an incredible experience, and I'm so glad she got started!


Rachel Marie wrote: "You make a really good point. I saw that in the movies where you had to know things that happened later, but I haven't reread the series yet. I do like how they become better and better in content every time, but still I think it could have had a different theme. The whole Sorcerer's Stone thing was kind of weak. "

It does seem like the Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone plot was a bit alienated from the rest of the series. Every other main plot was a recurring theme throughout the later books. I like the concept, and I love the book, but I do wish that the Stone would have played some part later on, even if it was nothing major.


Christine Rachel wrote: "Marie wrote: "You make a really good point. I saw that in the movies where you had to know things that happened later, but I haven't reread the series yet. I do like how they become better and bett..."

Agreed.


message 63: by Ruby (new) - rated it 5 stars

Ruby Definitely. I thought it was the best at the time, of course, but compared to the other ones, it's not as great. The writing isn't as amazing, extreme, and detailed. I don't know...


« previous 1 2 next »
back to top