On 7/25/05, Warren Ockrassa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > They are fun books and encouraging children to read is always a good > > thing but in what possible sense have they raised any bar? > > Have you read them?
Yep. > The arc of storytelling isn't the only thing that > develops; the depth of writing and of issues tackled by Rowling has > also increased from novel to novel. I don't know of any other > children's series that matures along with its readers. It's true the books have matured; whilst still not exactly subtle Rowling has toned down the broader, most childish elements. However there's no way the books have matured with their readers, rather they have moved from the 9-10 level to the 11-12 year old level. Any one who has kept pace with Harry in years as they have read the books will have far out matured the book. > There's a huge > crossover into adult readership at least partly because of that. Why would that explain the crossover? Why would adults start reading a book for ten years olds on the off chance the series will become for seventeen years olds? > And, of course, the books are simply, strictly *better* than most of > what passes for kids' titles out there. They really aren't. You could walk into the children's department of a bookshop and quite easily pick up a better book. You could pick up a worse book too but that's not the point. > I'd ask, rather, in what way you believe the books to be like every > other children's title out there. I don't believe they are like every other children's title out there. They are a mix of familiar elements from two strands of children's literature - boarding school and fantasy - that in terms of quality sit somewhere in the middle of the field. Martin _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
