Deimos
Elite
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- Messages
- 4,885
Dollars to donuts I bet her real animus was toward the author.
Dollars to donuts I bet her real animus was toward the author.I linked a "stupidest things people have said" thread on the previous page, but it's from twenty years ago, so we could start a new one, though Radaghast appears to be amenable to a fairly loose definition of the subject? I'll give one of mine; does this fit?
Some years ago I was looking through the books at a rummage sale, chatting casually with a woman next to me, who must have mentioned something about not finding much of collectible or reading interest. I said "I saw a first printing Lord of the Rings paperback set over there". She gave me a look, and replied "Hobbits spouting pithy witticisms isn't my idea of good reading".
That needed a long answer, or none. I decided on none.
Probably a wise move. But maybe she was looking for something like this:That needed a long answer, or none. I decided on none.
I doubt she had any knowledge at all about the author; if she had any such animus, I'm sure I would have heard it from her. My impression was that she preferred "realist" novels -- whatever that may mean.Dollars to donuts I bet her real animus was toward the author.
(I would say Snape is the only truly multifaceted character in the series)
I read HP and the Philosopher's Stone about 10 years ago.Agreement... though even that 'layer' is rather shallow.
I like Potter too, but well... there really is no comparison.
We may be seeing a bit of TROO with regard to the matter..! (Or just a convenient excuse for not wanting to tackle it...it takes a bit of work to read something of a little bit of depth.)
HEY..!! He's right up there in 'mindless reading', similar to the 'mindless movies' like Godzilla I watch as background material.What. A. Slog.
I did read all the HP books eventually.HEY..!! He's right up there in 'mindless reading', similar to the 'mindless movies' like Godzilla I watch as background material.
Which by the way, reminds me I've never read Harry Potter twice... or even intended to.
I do confess to having the DVDs to put on as background stuff as a breather from the more in depth "Night of the Lepus" or "Attack of the 60 Foot Woman."
(Actually, I think potter is a little bit better than those, but we must not be hasty.)
I read the books, at least some of them twice, and didn't find them to be a slog. Then again, time can change one's perception of things. I remember reading and liking the Shannara books as a teen. Decades later I reread the first two and was shocked at how badly written they are. I think, compared to the Shannara books, the HP series is a masterpiece.I did read all the HP books eventually.
The first one was a slog because Rowling's writing was so bad.
As is true with most activities, with time you either get better or worse.
She got better, but it was pretty much "two steps forward, one step back"; that is, her writing was still uneven.
So if it no longer was a solid slog, it was still "sloggy".
By the last book she had improved a bit more, but not enough for me to ever consider re-reading any of the HP books.
Still, some characters were memorable if only because of their eccentricities. I liked professor McGonagall.
I especially liked Luna Lovegood...can't recall hardly anything about her, but I can remember that at the time whilst reading her scenes, that I liked her, and thought her a rather astute person, and a deeper character than the other "yutes" (including HP) .
Neither did I really... though not the best writing, the material was in some ways engaging.didn't find them to be a slog.
I liked them too. Actually, very much. Read many of them...but somewhere in the later additive works I lost interest. (At first years ago, I considered doing a "Dictionary of Shannara" work of my own.)reading and liking the Shannara books.
So true...time indeed changes us.I read the books, at least some of them twice, and didn't find them to be a slog. Then again, time can change one's perception of things. I remember reading and liking the Shannara books. I reread the first two and was shocked at how badly written they are. I think, compared to the Shannara books, the HP series is a masterpiece.
Whoever came up with the name "Scottie McMullet" deserves the "Barbara Cartland Bodice-Ripper Blue-Ribbon" award. 😄
"It's an ill wind that blows no one any good" as The Gaffer says. (Or if he didn't, it's likely he would have 😉)I have no knowledge or experience of the Shannara books, but as I had stated previously I quite liked the HP books.
The first few are admittedly poorer writing than the later books, but I rather enjoyed them all. There are actually quite a few threads and details that weave through the entirety of the book series if one looks closely, as well as some lovely symbolism (especially in love being the strongest magic and there being things worse than death). I can also agree with some other folks that there are quite a few memorable characters. Looking objectively at the writing, it is certainly not on par with the Professor, but then again few fiction writers are (barring his contemporaries such as C.S. Lewis).
Also it can be said that the HP books managed to reignite the youth's passion for reading and helped an entire (my own) generation of kids get into reading fiction again.
I'm going to assume you realize that's a fake cover.Whoever came up with the name "Scottie McMullet" deserves the "Barbara Cartland Bodice-Ripper Blue-Ribbon" award. 😄
Narnia Books... I still like them all.**Speaking of Narnia, that's another series of books of which my perception has changed over time. The only one that still stands up for me is the first (published) one.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Are you happy to accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Are you happy to accept cookies and these technologies?