The book was highly mediocre. Even worse than the other five.

I enjoyed the first five for the most part, but Harry Potter isn't great literature.

What was the point of that post other than to make yourself an enemy of millions, billions of people.

before I say it, lets get something straight . . .

<----------- HIPOCRIT

now . . .

My mother said, if you ain't got nothing nice to say about somebody, don't say anything. Right now I ain't got anything nice to say about you, so I am not going to say anything, except that you didn't have anything nice to say about Harry Potter and the HBP, so you shouldn't have said anything, especially in its thread. Same goes with models, and everything else on this forum for that matter.

Eh? We're free to express ourselves on this forum. People do it all the time. "Eww, she's ugly," "I hate her personality," "Meh... KoRn are shit," etc., etc.

As far as Harry Potter goes, there is legitimate criticism to be made, but then, I don't think they were ever intended to be nearly as deep and profound as many people have made them out to be. A lot of fans (the people over at www.mugglenet.com are a good example) blindly worship Rowling; they'll except any shit she throws at them as a literary masterpiece.

The fact is, Rowling's work is not nearly as good it's made out to be. It's entertainment. It's fun and addicting, but that doesn't mean it's going to mean jack shit 20 years from now. Really great literature, books like Moby-Dick and The Red Badge Of Courage, have real depth; multiple layers of meaning and statement. On the surface they're adventure stories, like Harry Potter; but if you dig deeper into a really great book like these or another, there's a lot of other things to be found in those books -- be it some kind of philosophical exploration (like Moby-Dick), or whatever else, it means something more important than just some stupid story about a teenager.

Harry Potter isn't very original, either. It's a pretty generic concept -- the little average joe finding out he's "the chosen one" to defeat the super epitome-of-pure-evil villain. And of course, his eventual victory has nothing to do with being stronger than the evil guy, but is instead some cheesy cliche crap about "love."

Rowling's books were a big part of my childhood; I've read them all several times, apart from Half-Ass Prince. I suspect I'll even re-read them before the next one comes out, but they must be kept in perspective; they are NOT great meaningful literature.

In your opinion.

To some they may be just what you feel they're not.

GreedyGrandpa, your actions are highly preplexing.

You have changed so much in just one year.

GreedyGrandpa, your actions are highly preplexing.

You have changed so much in just one year.

How so?

I found this on an anti-Harry Potter forum I've used.

Harry Potter and the Childish Adult

By A.S. BYATT

What is the secret of the explosive and worldwide success of the Harry Potter books? Why do they satisfy children and

Eh? We're free to express ourselves on this forum. People do it all the time. "Eww, she's ugly," "I hate her personality," "Meh... KoRn are shit," etc., etc.

As far as Harry Potter goes, there is legitimate criticism to be made, but then, I don't think they were ever intended to be nearly as deep and profound as many people have made them out to be. A lot of fans (the people over at www.mugglenet.com are a good example) blindly worship Rowling; they'll except any shit she throws at them as a literary masterpiece.

The fact is, Rowling's work is not nearly as good it's made out to be. It's entertainment. It's fun and addicting, but that doesn't mean it's going to mean jack shit 20 years from now. Really great literature, books like Moby-Dick and The Red Badge Of Courage, have real depth; multiple layers of meaning and statement. On the surface they're adventure stories, like Harry Potter; but if you dig deeper into a really great book like these or another, there's a lot of other things to be found in those books -- be it some kind of philosophical exploration (like Moby-Dick), or whatever else, it means something more important than just some stupid story about a teenager.

Harry Potter isn't very original, either. It's a pretty generic concept -- the little average joe finding out he's "the chosen one" to defeat the super epitome-of-pure-evil villain. And of course, his eventual victory has nothing to do with being stronger than the evil guy, but is instead some cheesy cliche crap about "love."

Rowling's books were a big part of my childhood; I've read them all several times, apart from Half-Ass Prince. I suspect I'll even re-read them before the next one comes out, but they must be kept in perspective; they are NOT great meaningful literature.

Boy if this is not the most articulate, well written bull shit I have ever read. . . What idiot would even attempt to compare Moby-Dick with Harry Potter? Over course MD is a better peice of lit, nobody is going to disagree with you. The question here is, what is your point and what are you defending with this rambling of nonsence?

You musn't forget, despite all its accolades by adults, this is a kids series, designed by Rowling to teach simple moral lessons, as generic and clicheic as they may be. This is why the bulk of Mugglenet's readers are children, perhaps, say 70%, and although some of them may be a little enthusiastic, it is an insult to say anybody at mugglenet blindy worships the HP universe. Most of mugglenets readers, myself included, visit that site to study the nuances and wonderful details that we are all so very addicted to. Even you, perhaps, may find something on the site that you would enjoy reading. The people at mugglenet are fans of a popular form of entertainment that, although may be childish and not very "deep" as you would call it, an important part of our culture and soceity.

It is this ingenious of the writing that we celebrate, a simple, generic concept of an average joe defeating a super villain not because of super strength or intelligence, but of heart, concioues, and the daily moral concepts parents struggle to teach their children. This is why we read Harry Potter, for the classic tale of good vs evil, not for the deep philosophical exploration the average western civiliaztion child is not going to read, now, or 20 years from now. 20 years from now, when the Harry Potter series, will be know as one of the greatest childrens classics of all time, while Moby Dick will be just another book people had to read cause it was a requirment in High School. In twenty years, the average young adult from 25 to 35 will be able to tell you what happened in the HP books, but could care less what happened in Moby Dick. You cannot put these books in the same category, and woe on you and whoever else try's to compare MD and HP.

Mediocre? I think not . . .

GreedyGrandpa, your actions are highly preplexing.

You have changed so much in just one year.

How so?

I won't go around digging up your old posts.

But, you went 180-degrees.

I mean, last year, you were defending Harry Potter as some great lit or something.

Not that it's bad anyway.

It's just that I never thought that it's possible for a HP fan to become a HP hater.

Anyway, +1 to you for being a HP hater.

god damn who was the half blood prince again?

Snape.

Boy if this is not the most articulate, well written bull shit I have ever read. . . What idiot would even attempt to compare Moby-Dick with Harry Potter? Over course MD is a better peice of lit, nobody is going to disagree with you. The question here is, what is your point and what are you defending with this rambling of nonsence?

That's clear enough. I was using Moby-Dick as an example...the books are completely different, no SHIT. I wasn't "comparing" anything. The point wasn't that Moby-Dick is better, that would be comparing apples to oranges. The point was that Harry Potter is severely overrated. Observe how the idiots over at mugglenet honestly believe that Rowling is the literary genius of our time -- that her books will stand the test of time as some of the greatest ever written.

You musn't forget, despite all its accolades by adults, this is a kids series, designed by Rowling to teach simple moral lessons, as generic and clicheic as they may be.

If you hadn't been so hellbent on tearing my post to pieces you might've realized this is exactly my point. They are simple children's books, and yet they've gained an audience and a reputation they're not worthy of.

The people at mugglenet are fans of a popular form of entertainment that, although may be childish and not very "deep" as you would call it, an important part of our culture and soceity.

In other words, they're into it because it's a fad.

Boy if this is not the most articulate, well written bull shit I have ever read. . . What idiot would even attempt to compare Moby-Dick with Harry Potter? Over course MD is a better peice of lit, nobody is going to disagree with you. The question here is, what is your point and what are you defending with this rambling of nonsence?

That's clear enough. I was using Moby-Dick as an example...the books are completely different, no SHIT. I wasn't "comparing" anything. The point wasn't that Moby-Dick is better, that would be comparing apples to oranges. The point was that Harry Potter is severely overrated. Observe how the idiots over at mugglenet honestly believe that Rowling is the literary genius of our time -- that her books will stand the test of time as some of the greatest ever written.

A few years ago, I read a news article that a literary professor in Japan is interested in turning HP into a literature that pupils can study at his university.

Uhh.... *ahem*

I have a theory! I have a theory that Harry is one of Voldemort's Horcruxes. Makes good sense. And JK threatened to kill off Harry in the last book, so why not?

That theory has become very popular across all of the various Harry Potter message boards, actually.

And?

I was merely stating a simple fact. Many, many, many people believe the same thing you do about Harry being a Horcrux.

I think if Harry is a horcrux, it wasn't intentional and Voldemort hasn't entirely realized it yet, otherwise why would he want him dead?

And Brenna, perhaps I'm reading a lot of what you say wrong but you need to take a breather.

I think if Harry is a horcrux, it wasn't intentional and Voldemort hasn't entirely realized it yet, otherwise why would he want him dead?

And Brenna, perhaps I'm reading a lot of what you say wrong but you need to take a breather.

I guess you were misreading how I type (that's what the absence of emotion in words does...), because I simply wanted to switch the topic to something people could talk about relating to the content of the book. The argument about its lack of literary value was a good one, but pointless. Sorry if I sounded ''mean''(?) or something.

Just to let you and everyone else know, if I make a comment that is less than positive (i.e. sassy or complaining about photoshopping techniques, or believing the claim that so-and-so has had such-and-such done), I would really appreciate it if people did not step in to tell me to "take a breather", or to inform me that I am ''like a thorn in the forum's side''. Rarely what I say is so disruptive or negative to warrant the kind of hassling you guys feel you mush dish out. Sorry about the sassy comment to GreedyGrandpa.

Anyway...

Good point about him wanting to kill Harry... That pretty much completely eradicated that theory... XP

Hmm.... I guess I just don't like the corny, flimsy idea of Harry's mother's love guarding him from Voldemort's attack, and his powers being transferred thusly, etc. There's gotta be something more. That's just how JK rolls!

Mmmmhmmm ... very much pointless, and very aggrevating, nothing gets me worked up more than somebody coming on to a thread to bash the topic in question, its like you wanna start a fight.

In anycase, I have a hard time beleiving Harry is a Horcrux considering a fancy bit of magic is supposedly supposed to be done for something to be made a Horcrux. I wouldn't be surprised however, cause it is possible. I was thinking about how it could have possibly happened:

Voldermort may have harnessed his soul after killing James and Lily(killing another tears the soul apart), but I very much doubt he transfered them to a Horcrux or planned to in the immediate future. Once he performed the fateful Killing Curse, it seems plausable that the peices of his souls he had harnessed were released and saught the nearest host, but then I would have to say Harry's crib might also be a Horcrux as well

You never know though, and I wouldn't do the smallest of double takes if it turns out Harry was.