# Harry Potter Books (Spoiler Alert--Enter at your own risk!)



## 4Katie

Does anyone know why J.K. Rowling has such an aversion to ebooks? I'm dying to read the Harry Potter series again, but can't deal with those big hardback books due to arthritis. When I read on my Kindle, I'm reading words on a page, just like a book. Why does she think it's so different?


----------



## Kathy

She will not allow ebooks. Wish she would, but she just doesn't think it is right.


----------



## rho

I keep clicking on the I want this book on Kindle - I figure that if enough people do it enough times the publisher will put tons of pressure on her and she will have to give in --  hey the publishers want to make more money from sales even if she doesn't


----------



## Forster

Kathy said:


> She will not allow ebooks. Wish she would, but she just doesn't think it is right.


The ironic thing is her books are probably some of the most pirated out there. She might as well allow ebooks so those who won't pirate have a legitimate way to both read the e-versions and compensate her for them.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

The pitiful excuses she has given are:

a)  She doesn't want them pirated ... waaay too late for that
b)  She wants kids to have the experience of holding an actual book in their hands ... So how many kids does she think own e-readers?  Just put it out for Sony and Kindle and that pretty much solves that problem.

I love the potter series, but in the last few years, I've lost a lot of respect for JKR as a person, especially after her lawsuit against The Lexicon.


----------



## Leslie

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> I love the potter series, but in the last few years, I've lost a lot of respect for JKR as a person, especially after her lawsuit against The Lexicon.


Yes, she really came across as a bully in that situation. I also got annoyed with her and the whole "Dumbledore is gay" debacle.

L


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Leslie said:


> Yes, she really came across as a bully in that situation. I also got annoyed with her and the whole "Dumbledore is gay" debacle.
> 
> L


It added absolutely nothing to the character. Kids think it's neat to ask that question, and too many people answer "yes" without thinking. It recently happened to a friend of my GS and now it's all over the place that he's gay. He's only 11 years old.

This is an adult issue and has no place in children's literature ... even though many adults read and love Harry.


----------



## LisaW.

Leslie said:


> Yes, she really came across as a bully in that situation. I also got annoyed with her and the whole "Dumbledore is gay" debacle.
> L


I totally agree. I understand that these are her characters and creations, and she knows much more about them than the reader does (and she has the right to do whatever she wants with them). However, there was no scene or reference that made anyone even question if Dumbledore was gay or not. So why did she have to make a point of it after the series was completed? It does not matter.

What's truly sad is that now future generations will be reading this amazing series of books about a boy wizard; and they may unconsciously (or consciously) look for scenes that acknowledge that Dumbledore is gay. When it shouldn't matter or have any bearing on the story.

And if JKR has come out and said things about her characters that never were acknowledged in her books, what's to stop other authors from doing the same thing? Some readers are going to feel betrayed if the authors start changing their perceptions of the characters they love.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

LisaW. said:


> What's truly sad is that now future generations will be reading this amazing series of books about a boy wizard; and they may unconsciously (or consciously) look for scenes that acknowledge that Dumbledore is gay. When it shouldn't matter or have any bearing on the story.


The HP forum I frequented for three years picked apart every single sentence of every single book. Not one of the kids or adults ever even hinted that they found anything that remotely suggested that Dumbledore was gay. They do, however, follow Dumbledore's philosophy of life in their own lives.



> And if JKR has come out and said things about her characters that never were acknowledged in her books, what's to stop other authors from doing the same thing? Some readers are going to feel betrayed if the authors start changing their perceptions of the characters they love.


She also contradicted herself several times after the release of Book 7. That's why I don't allow anything that she says after Book 7 to be used as cannon in my HP book club. She doesn't seem to be able to keep track of things, which is why she used The Lexicon when she forgot timelines, etc., and then turned around in court and accused Steve Van DerArk of sloppy work.

She even forgot to mention Ron's eye color in the books until "alert readers" brought it up. I would hate for anyone to put my work under such intense scrutiny, but if you're going to be a mega-bucks author, you owe it to your readers to be scrupulous in your writing.


----------



## Leslie

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> The HP forum I frequented for three years picked apart every single sentence of every single book. Not one of the kids or adults ever even hinted that they found anything that remotely suggested that Dumbledore was gay. They do, however, follow Dumbledore's philosophy of life in their own lives.


To be honest, all of the teachers seemed sort of asexual. There was no mention of any of them being married, having partners, having children, etc. All the parents followed very traditional roles -- getting married, having children, sending them to school -- and the teachers were...teachers, who didn't seem to have any life outside of school. I have no problem with any of this because it's a pretty traditional formula in children's literature. That's why making Dumbledore gay, after the fact --and as you said, Gertie, when there was absolutely no evidence to support that -- bugged me so much. It was cheap trick. It made me feel like she had been reading HP slash/fanfic and thought she could tap into that group of readers, or something.

L


----------



## robertlc

All the Potter books have already been scanned into the PDF format.


----------



## mlewis78

The gay Dumbledore theory only came up when someone asked her a question about his love life at the event at Carnegie Hall.  Didn't bother me at all.  The book doesn't give it away one way or the other.  It's what her concept of him was when she wrote it but she didn't feel any need to put that into the book -- that's just fine with me.  The media picked it up and ran away with it.

I wasn't pleased with the lawsuit and I wanted to buy the printed Lexicon myself.  Also hate that she won't allow ebooks.  There are so many adults reading her work.


----------



## Vegas_Asian

I didn't know she had a lawsuit issue with Lexicon. Used to lurk there once upon a time. Still disappointed she doesn't allow her series to be released in ebook format. seen them online. They aren't hard to find for download, but I prefer to hope she changes her mind before I dl.


----------



## Leslie

Vegas_Asian said:


> I didn't know she had a lawsuit issue with Lexicon. Used to lurk there once upon a time. Still disappointed she doesn't allow her series to be released in ebook format. seen them online. They aren't hard to find for download, but I prefer to hope she changes her mind before I dl.


If you can type G-O-O-G-L-E, you can find the HP books online. It's not hard and you don't even need to know what a torrent is.

What she did to that poor Lexicon librarian was shameful. Her lawyer hammered the guy on the witness stand like he was a murderer or something. Reduced him to tears. I lost a ton of respect for her after that incident.

L


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Leslie said:


> What she did to that poor Lexicon librarian was shameful. Her lawyer hammered the guy on the witness stand like he was a murderer or something. Reduced him to tears. I lost a ton of respect for her after that incident.
> 
> L


On top of which, she demanded pre-approval of his current book.



mlewis78 said:


> I wasn't pleased with the lawsuit and I wanted to buy the printed Lexicon myself.


Here it is. They settled the suit. It's greatly reduced in content because of her demands.



I bought two copies. One for myself and one I gave as a prize to the winner of my HP tri-wizard tournament. (Gryffindor won, but Slytherin won the house cup)


----------



## Scheherazade

Rowling has all but run me off from the series with her attitude toward several things. She's proven she cares more about her silly paper fetish than the people who are feeding it by buying her books. It's one thing to refuse to write on anything but paper, but she even blogged that book 7 (I think) was late to the publisher because she had to run around London all day looking for paper and none of the stores she went to had it. Then there was the interview that made me think she doesn't even enjoy what she's doing where she said she has to get herself drunk to even want to sit down and write to which everyone applauded her for being a real person... but is that really something we want a children's writer promoting in an interview?

Then there's the whole thing about her aversion to fantasy, making it sound like a genre she wants nothing to do with and considers herself better than. But even on this she's flip-flopped, saying in one interview that she loved the Narnia books as a child and would pick them up again in a second if one was in the room with her, then later saying she never finished Narnia or Lord of the Rings and lambasting them for their contrived fantasy plots and how she wrote the Harry Potter books to subvert the fantasy genre. This statement was again after her saying that she didn't even realize she was writing a fantasy book... so she was trying to subvert a genre that it apparently never even occurred to her that she was writing about. I guess the centaurs, unicorns, phoenixes, talking hats, moving photos, wizards, trolls, magic wands, gnomes, flying cars, giants, owls delivering mail, etc, etc, etc, didn't tip her off.

I absolutely loved the Harry Potter books. I have to admit hearing about all the


Spoiler



deaths


 in her last book made me not buy it and I put off reading it, but her stance on electronic books and then researching it more and finding out all these other things has just really turned me off of her period. I might buy that last book, but only if she releases it for the Kindle. I don't even feel like it's worth pirating her stuff even though that's what she's driving otherwise honest people to do who would buy all of her books for second and third times if only she allowed them to. I haven't pirated a book yet and I'm not going to start just because of her.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Sheherezade, where did you read all those things about JKR?  I've read a lot of her interviews, but never anything like that.


----------



## Scheherazade

I'll see if I can find them again and post quotes. (edit: I found them) Okay, it was getting drunk to sleep at night, not to write, but was a side effect of said writing. Got a bit mixed up there, but still... smoking and drinking aren't something you want a beloved children's fantasy writer to joke about doing in an interview with Time.

The following are from the Time article at http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1083935-2,00.html in which the writer of the article says that the fantasy genre is "an idealized, romanticized, pseudofeudal world, where knights and ladies morris-dance to Greensleeves."

"Goblet--oh, my God. That was the period where I was chewing Nicorette. And then I started smoking again, but I didn't stop the Nicorette. And I swear on my children's lives, I was going to bed at night and having palpitations and having to get up and drink some wine to put myself into a sufficient stupor."

"The most popular living fantasy writer in the world doesn't even especially like fantasy novels. It wasn't until after Sorcerer's Stone was published that it even occurred to her that she had written one. "That's the honest truth," she says. "You know, the unicorns were in there. There was the castle, God knows. But I really had not thought that that's what I was doing. And I think maybe the reason that it didn't occur to me is that I'm not a huge fan of fantasy." Rowling has never finished The Lord of the Rings. She hasn't even read all of C.S. Lewis' Narnia novels, which her books get compared to a lot. There's something about Lewis' sentimentality about children that gets on her nerves. "There comes a point where Susan, who was the older girl, is lost to Narnia because she becomes interested in lipstick. She's become irreligious basically because she found sex," Rowling says. "I have a big problem with that."

"I was trying to subvert the genre," Rowling explains bluntly. "Harry goes off into this magical world, and is it any better than the world he's left? Only because he meets nicer people. Magic does not make his world better significantly. The relationships make his world better. Magic in many ways complicates his life."

I couldn't find the actual blog again, but this is a reaction to her paper blog http://www.writerswrite.com/wblog.php?wblog=512061 where fans sent her deluges of paper so her next book wouldn't be late as well.

Oh, and did I mention her fans somehow got it in their minds that TERRY PRATCHETT stole Unseen University from Hogwarts despite the fact his books were published years before hers? Needless to say after months of harassing and even threatening emails and not so well wishers on the street he got pretty irked and then he saw this Times article.  He lambasted the _writer of the article_ for his uneducated musings on the fantasy genre and Rowling took it as an attack against her that started a bit of a war going back and forth, which of course her community called him a bitter old man over. One of the leading writers of fantasy still alive today and they treated him like that.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4732385.stm This is the original news story. The media made it out to be him attacking her and it was turned around on him saying things like that he "complained that the status of Harry Potter author JK Rowling is being elevated "at the expense of other writers"."

http://www.wizardnews.com/story.20050802.html This is his open letter in response to the attacks against him based on people taking the article as an attack on her.


----------



## VictoriaP

Scheherazade said:


> ...how she wrote the Harry Potter books to subvert the fantasy genre. This statement was again after her saying that she didn't even realize she was writing a fantasy book... so she was trying to subvert a genre that it apparently never even occurred to her that she was writing about. I guess the centaurs, unicorns, phoenixes, talking hats, moving photos, wizards, trolls, magic wands, gnomes, flying cars, giants, owls delivering mail, etc, etc, etc, didn't tip her off.


ROFLMAO!

Her "silly paper fetish" doesn't even make sense when you think about it--she's let them make audiobooks of her stuff.

And you're not missing anything by not reading the last book. The first three were fabulous, from there they became bloated and lost all the charm she'd created in the earlier books. When I go reread them, I get to Goblet of Fire & nearly always stop because she takes a story she could have told in 300 pages & drags it out along fairly predictable lines for eons.

It's obnoxious of me, but I'll admit I'm tempted to take pirated copies of her stuff just to spite her & her errant nonsense about ebooks. I've paid for hardcovers of the whole HP series, and if she's not interested in taking my money to replicate them on my Kindle, I can't say I see much reason to wait for her to change her mind. But there are enough other, better written books in that genre to legally read that it's not been worth my time to even bother tracking them down.


----------



## CS

Leslie said:


> If you can type G-O-O-G-L-E, you can find the HP books online. It's not hard and you don't even need to know what a torrent is.


It is ridiculously simple. As an experiment, I wanted to see how easily they were to find. Five minutes later, they were all on my drive and I had the first one already converted to Kindle format. I didn't put it on the Kindle or do anything else with it after like that. Like I said, it was just an experiment and I'm happy to wait for the legal versions. But if Rowling doesn't support e-books because she's concerned about piracy, she's an idiot.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked

VictoriaP said:


> And you're not missing anything by not reading the last book. The first three were fabulous, from there they became bloated and lost all the charm she'd created in the earlier books.


Agreed.

Edit: In retrospect, I'd amend my comment: The first three were great, thereafter they were merely very good. It's probably something to do with the newness of the series wearing off.

Mike


----------



## Gertie Kindle

jmiked said:


> Agreed.
> 
> Mike


Disagreed.


----------



## PJ

How can someone say they are apposed to ebooks because they think children should have the experience of holding a book, as if you would give a child a Kindle <humph>, and then turn around and make movies of the books? They most certainly watch movies and are quite likely to choose the movie over the book. What a load of manure.


----------



## Vegas_Asian

PJ said:


> How can someone say they are apposed to ebooks because they think children should have the experience of holding a book, as if you would give a child a Kindle <humph>, and then turn around and make movies of the books? They most certainly watch movies and are quite likely to choose the movie over the book. What a load of manure.


good point. Its true. know people like that. (the same people that call me to fill in the gaps of the movie they don't understand)


----------



## Scheherazade

I failed to mention the bit where she said she's read and re-read and will continue to re-read the CS Lewis books if given the chance, long before she decided to say she's never even finished the series in the interview I posted above.

Here are just a few of the bits where she's contradicted herself.  It just feels like she's doing her best to make it seem like Harry Potter wasn't inspired by anything and she did it all on her own.  There's no shame in a writer being inspired and if I'm lucky enough to be as famous as her I will still give credit where it's due, not just when I'm a rising star but when I reach the top as well.

From The Electronic Telegraph on July 25, 1998.  "She loved C. S. Lewis and E. Nesbit, but was not such a fan of Roald Dahl. As for the Enid Blyton books, Rowling says she read them all, but was never tempted to go back to them, whereas she would read and re-read Lewis. "Even now, if I was in a room with one of the Narnia books I would pick it up like a shot and re-read it."

From an interview in 1997 with The Sunday Times she admits it was fantasy even after just the first book.  "It had to be a boarding school to sustain the fantasy," Rowling says. "He had to go somewhere that's an enclosed world to have his adventures. Kids are incredibly powerless because everything is determined for them, so a rich fantasy life in which they do have power is almost inevitable.

Another with The Glasgow Herald in 1997.  "Yes. Absolutely. Kids are so powerless, however happy they are. The idea that we could have a child who escapes from the confines of the adult world and goes somewhere where he has power, both literally and metaphorically, really appealed to me. "It's a traditional theme: the idea of the foundling and the mysterious hidden destiny, but this concept of breaking out is a common fantasy for kids."

This from The Australian in 1998  "Fantasy is not my favourite genre. Although I love C. S. Lewis, I have a problem with his imitators." At 33, Rowling still re-reads The Chronicles of Narnia, famous for The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (she likes The Voyage of the Dawn Treader best), along with other childhood favourites, E. Nesbit, Paul Gallico and Noel Streatfield. "I try to do what they did in the sense of getting a good story and telling it as well as possible," she says. "There was nothing slapdash about the way they wrote."

Rowling, who studied French and classics at Exeter University ("My parents thought I was going to be a bilingual secretary"), calls Lewis a genius. "He was a very learned man and created a very rich mythology of his own."  "Number one, I think he was a genius and I don't think I am. His world was a different place you were going through into another dimension. For me, in the Harry books it is not a different world, it's simply a world we can't see: we're muggles, it's right under our noses."


----------



## Leslie

I am really really glad that I read the books (and listened to the CDs) and just let it end there. I never got into any of the HP fandom stuff, never read any HP slash, didn't get into any author interviews (well, mostly...with a few exceptions). For me, that's a good thing. I can just let the books be in my memory as I read them.

L


----------



## Scheherazade

I wish I had done that Leslie!  In fact, I had done that until I heard about the ebook thing and the researcher in me took over.  I was never into the whole fandom thing, but I read and bought all her books, even got some at midnight releases, and saw all the movies etc... but yeah, as much as I love them she's really soured me to them now.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Scheherazade said:


> I wish I had done that Leslie! In fact, I had done that until I heard about the ebook thing and the researcher in me took over. I was never into the whole fandom thing, but I read and bought all her books, even got some at midnight releases, and saw all the movies etc... but yeah, as much as I love them she's really soured me to them now.


I love the books, I love the movies, I collect the collectibles ... JKR doesn't matter.


----------



## jpmorgan49

I agree, I loved all the books and I love the movies but I too have lost respect for Rowling.  I'm wondering if the 7 Harry Potter books were all she had in her.  I also enjoyed the Twilight series books and Meyer came back and wrote the Host, which was even a better book than the Twilight series.  She's proved to be shes not just a one series wonder... 
jp


----------



## mlewis78

I loved book 7.  Also, she certainly has read C.S. Lewis.  I didn't start reading the HP series until just before book 7 was released, so I was able to read one right after the other.  I read the first 6 in paperback and the 7th in hardcover.

I didn't even know that the Lexicon eventually was published.  I will buy one.  Thanks for letting us know.


----------



## pidgeon92

I loved the books, and I don't really care about the author's odd habits. We all have our little fetishes.


----------



## MAGreen

I love the Harry Potter books. I am happier with the first 3, but all of them are wonderful stories. I would buy then in an instant if they became available on Kindle. I really don't care at all for the author, other than to wonder if she will continue to write.


----------



## koolmnbv

Can someone explain The Lexicon to me and what happened?? I didn't know any of this until I joined this board. We own most of the Harry Potter hardcover books and I noticed they were not on Kindle but I thought it was just for the same reasons alot of books have not been kindled yet. Just delays. 

Now I know (since I joined here) all the fuss she has put up but I had no idea she took another writer/book to court. If someone gets a minute could you update me briefly on that fiasco.


----------



## Leslie

In a nutshell (and from memory)...a librarian from (I believe) Michigan, Steven Vander Ark, started a website which was basically an encyclopedia of the Harry Potter books. I never visited the website but apparently he had dates, timelines, definitions, genealogies...you name it. If it had to do with HP, it was there. JKR visited the site, said she used it at times to refresh her memory on certain facts, and gave it a thumbs up seal of approval. All was fine until Vander Ark decided to put the content together as a book. I think a publisher approached him with an offer, if I remember correctly. When JKR got wind of that, she sued him for copyright infringement. The case went to trial and I guess you could say the outcome was a draw. The book did get published but there were lots of restrictions on what could and could not be included.

L


----------



## koolmnbv

Leslie said:


> In a nutshell (and from memory)...a librarian from (I believe) Michigan, Steven Vander Ark, started a website which was basically an encyclopedia of the Harry Potter books. I never visited the website but apparently he had dates, timelines, definitions, genealogies...you name it. If it had to do with HP, it was there. JKR visited the site, said she used it at times to refresh her memory on certain facts, and gave it a thumbs up seal of approval. All was fine until Vander Ark decided to put the content together as a book. I think a publisher approached him with an offer, if I remember correctly. When JKR got wind of that, she sued him for copyright infringement. The case went to trial and I guess you could say the outcome was a draw. The book did get published but there were lots of restrictions on what could and could not be included.
> 
> L


Thanks for the info Leslie. Basically She flipped out after he tried to turn it into a HP encyclopedia. I am glad he still got to make his book at least partially.


----------



## Leslie

koolmnbv said:


> Thanks for the info Leslie. Basically She flipped out after he tried to turn it into a HP encyclopedia. I am glad he still got to make his book at least partially.


My cynical take on it is that she flipped out when she realized he might make some money. As long it was a non-revenue generating labor-of-love website, she was fine with it. But, when the potential of actually making a few bucks from the project came into the picture, she was all over him like slime on a pond.

L


----------



## koolmnbv

Of course, it was fine with her as long as no one else profited and she could still benefit from time to time.

In one way I can see an author trying to stop someone even if it seems harmless because if one person wants to create a HP type book then whats to stop another 10 ppl,100 ppl etc. 

On the other hand she should have absolutely no complaints over the amount of money she has generated by HP books. I am sure his book would not have taken anything away from her success or riches. 

And if she was fine with the website and all the information it contained beforehand then she should be fine with it no matter what format he decided to produce it in. But as we all know she has an "issue" with works being made in different formats.


----------



## Leslie

koolmnbv said:


> And if she was fine with the website and all the information it contained beforehand then she should be fine with it no matter what format he decided to produce it in. But as we all know she has an "issue" with works being made in different formats.


Very true. Good point.

L


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Just read this thread this morning. Dumbledore's gay?  

I somehow missed this....must not be as much of a HP fanatic as some, though I have all the books and enjoyed them all.

Betsy


----------



## Ann in Arlington

There was an interview with JKR shortly after book 7 was published and, in discussing her view/impressions/thoughts about various characters she said something like "I always thought of Dumbledore has having lost a great friend and loved one in his life when <what's his name> turned on him/died". I'm sure someone can find the exact quote. She didn't, to my recollection, flat out say, "yeah, he's gay", but she certainly left the door open for that conclusion and many people ran with it.

Mind you. . .I'm not as close a follower as many, so I may completely wrong. . . .I guess I just never considered it an issue one way or the other.

Though I wish, in her epilogue, one of the 'first years' going to Hogwarts had been his cousin Dudley's kid. . . . .


----------



## MamaProfCrash

Dumbledore's sexuality was revealed after book 7 was released. It was one of the more silly statements I have heard. As someone pointed out in the thread, none of the teachers were married or had kids, that we knew of. 

Somehow or another Dumbledore's relationship with the evil Wizard who came before Voldemort (I am forgetting his name, Grindenwal maybe?) was a gay relationship. She claims that in book 7 when she discussed Dumbledore wand whats his face she leaves appropriate hints that they were dating. If she did, everyone missed it, including the Gay community. (rolls her eyes)

The magical realm was the most vanilla of realms. I know of no single parents (maybe Seamus but I think his Dad was a muggle and I don't think he took off after he found out his new wife was a witch), no divorced families, and no gay kids or adults. I don't really think that there were any gay adults but she can claim Dumbledore if she wants. I think she did that more because she realized that she had left the gay/lesbian/bi-sexual community and she had no problem with that community. Making one of the more complicated heros of the book gay probably made up for that omission in her mind.

I am fine with her world being so vanilla. It is a series of books for kids. I am fine with skipping the dirtier aspects of the real world (divorce, single parents, teenage mothers). Let the ten year olds read and enjoy the books without needing to ask a ton of questions. 

I don't think that anyone was ready for Harry to blow up the way that it did. I think that JKR has gone over board in trying to protect her franchise and she has alienated some of her fans for doing what she has done. I think her stance on e-books is silly. If you are so focused on paper and wanting kids to experience your books then you don't let them get made into movies. Last I checked Lego Harry Potter was not made of paper. She has sold the brand into every other format but the e-book. It is silly.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

Dudley's Kid being a wizard or witch would be awesome. By book 7 you could see that Dudley had figured out that Harry was not evil and there was nothing wrong with being a wizard. I thought that was a nice touch.


----------



## MAGreen

If she had been smart about the whole Lexicon thing, she would have collaborated on it and gotten a share of it. He may have done the work, but it was based on her work. Many HP fans would love to have a HP encyclopedia that JKR had a hand in.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

koolmnbv said:


> And if she was fine with the website and all the information it contained beforehand then she should be fine with it no matter what format he decided to produce it in. But as we all know she has an "issue" with works being made in different formats.


What really ticked me off was after praising Steve's site to the skies, she got up on the stand and claimed the site was sloppy and inaccurate. As far as I'm concerned, it's the go-to site whenever I want any Potter information. Want to know about a potion or a spell or whatever, go right there and get the info with a citation back to the book.



Ann in Arlington said:


> There was an interview with JKR shortly after book 7 was published and, in discussing her view/impressions/thoughts about various characters she said something like "I always thought of Dumbledore has having lost a great friend and loved one in his life when <what's his name> turned on him/died". I'm sure someone can find the exact quote. She didn't, to my recollection, flat out say, "yeah, he's gay", but she certainly left the door open for that conclusion and many people ran with it.
> 
> Mind you. . .I'm not as close a follower as many, so I may completely wrong. . . .I guess I just never considered it an issue one way or the other.


She was talking to a group of kids at a type of kids' press conference. One of them asked if Dumbledore was gay and she said yes, she had always thought of him as gay.



> Though I wish, in her epilogue, one of the 'first years' going to Hogwarts had been his cousin Dudley's kid. . . . .


In another interview, she talked about someone who didn't do magic until late in life. That was an issue that was never resolved.



MAGreen said:


> If she had been smart about the whole Lexicon thing, she would have collaborated on it and gotten a share of it. He may have done the work, but it was based on her work. Many HP fans would love to have a HP encyclopedia that JKR had a hand in.


JKR had announced that she would be doing an encyclopedia, profits to go to charity, but not for another five years. Then RDR Publishing approached Steve about The Lexicon with a very limited press run (10,000 copies, I believe).

Many of us would have bought both, especially since there are five years in between publications, but now I'm thinking she'll probably piggy-back off Steve's hard work. That was probably her original plan and he one-upped her. It could be why she went after him with unprecedented vengeance.

A lot of the kids who don't know anything about legal contracts cited the fact that Steve had a hold harmless agreement with the publisher in case of a law suit. They said that was proof that he knew he was infringing on her copyright. Baloney, and I don't mean Oscar Meyer.


----------



## Forster

I've lost a lot of respect for JKR.  I don't suspect we will ever see another major work out of her, why should she, she is set for life and then some.  Her books while all very, very good, were IMO not unusually so, meaning there are lots of books every bit as good as hers but for whatever reason didn't benefit from the media hype of a poor single mother making it big, ect., etc.

Websites such as the Lexicon helped fuel the hype and entrench the fandom and IMO JKR benefited handsomely from such sites.  It irks me to no end that she went to such lengths to bite the hand that fed her.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

She did have a great back story. It took a while for the books to really take hold. I am thinking it was somewhere around the third book that people started talking about her and the series.

Were I think she is different then many authors of children's/young adult literature is that she developed a world with very well defined characters. She allowed her kids to age and face many of the problems that come with aging. She did deal with some pretty big issues, racism, discrimination, peer pressure, and death. She dealt with these issues in a way that did not hide them but did not make them overwhelming to younger kids. 

I have tried reading some of the newer series that are compared to Harry Potter and I just don't find them as well defined or as pleasurable. Some have massive agendas that are clearly defined (Golden Compass anyone) and most are just not written in a manner that treats the kids as if they are intelligent enough to read the books. They dumb down the language or the scenarios. 

I don't know that I would compare Harry to Narnia. I think that Narnia is in a different league. I know that I would not compare Harry and the Lord of the Rings. Totally different league. Then again, Harry is meant to be read by 10 year olds and there are not to many 10 year olds that would really get the Lord of the Rings. And I actually think that Harry has better character development then Lord of the Rings.


----------



## Chad Winters

ProfCrash said:


> I have tried reading some of the newer series that are compared to Harry Potter and I just don't find them as well defined or as pleasurable. Some have massive agendas that are clearly defined (Golden Compass anyone) and most are just not written in a manner that treats the kids as if they are intelligent enough to read the books. They dumb down the language or the scenarios.


I think Pullman's series is much older, I remember reading it many years ago....

And yes...he had more agenda than story


----------



## MamaProfCrash

I read the first book and was seriously offended. I am a Catholic who disagrees with the Church on a fair amount and I was offended by the book. I never made it to the second book because the first was just so offensive. Bleech. 

I don't know how old it is, only that it was recommended to folks who liked Harry.


----------



## CS

ProfCrash said:


> I read the first book and was seriously offended. I am a Catholic who disagrees with the Church on a fair amount and I was offended by the book. I never made it to the second book because the first was just so offensive. Bleech.
> 
> I don't know how old it is, only that it was recommended to folks who liked Harry.


I assume you mean the Golden Compass books, and not Harry?


----------



## MamaProfCrash

CS said:


> I assume you mean the Golden Compass books, and not Harry?


Yup. Loved Harry and have been thinking bad thoughts. I want to re-read them but I am not holding those thick, thick books again.

All I know is that JKR is losing out on a lot of money.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

I wasn't offended by the Golden Compass.   . .just thought it didn't have much plot going for it.  Got to the end and thought. . . .now, why in the world would I want to read any more of this?  My son thought the same thing, as did my brother who read it when the movie came out.  We pretty much all thought it was only o.k.

Interestingly, the book was given to my son as a graduation gift when he finished 8th grade.  The teachers gave a book to each child in the class. . . .they were thoughtful too, they picked books they thought the kids would enjoy and every kid got a different book.  It was a 'fantasy' which is what he liked so that was a good pick. . . but, if they thought about it, or had ever read the book, they'd probably NOT have chosen it for a boy from a Catholic family.   OTOH he graduated 8th grade in 1997 so it was well before the movie came out; at that time it wasn't so much on people's radar as being a book that potentially "bashed" the Church.  

Whatever. . . .


----------



## kathygnome

Given that she allowed one of the titles to be changed for the US market and they've been edited to remove items deemed too British, if it's for artistic reasons I'd have to consider her more than a bit of a hypocrite.


----------



## Forster

I read the Golden Compass quite a long time ago based on the recommendation of one of my cousin's wife who was a schoolteacher.  

Any subtle bashing of the Catholic Church went right over my head at the time.  I don't usually look for deeper plot meanings in most of the books I read.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

The Catholic bashing in Golden Compass was not subtle. At least, I caught it without knowing it was there and I normally have to go looking for religious allegory in most works. I can see it in Narnia now that I know what to look for but totally missed it as a kid.


----------



## mlewis78

ProfCrash said:


> The Catholic bashing in Golden Compass was not subtle. At least, I caught it without knowing it was there and I normally have to go looking for religious allegory in most works. I can see it in Narnia now that I know what to look for but totally missed it as a kid.


Narnia has Catholic bashing? I read Golden Compass and if it were not for what I read about the Catholic aspect in advance, I never would have noticed. I didn't find the book offensive at all. It didn't compare with HP for me though.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

No but Narnia has tons of Catholic allegories in it. My point was that I tend to miss the religious aspcts of boks and authors but I was able to see them very clearly and easily in Golden Compass.


----------



## Forster

ProfCrash said:


> The Catholic bashing in Golden Compass was not subtle. At least, I caught it without knowing it was there and I normally have to go looking for religious allegory in most works. I can see it in Narnia now that I know what to look for but totally missed it as a kid.


Well I still missed it, lol. IIRC I got the "evil" church thing, I just never tied it to a particular religion. And yes I was raised Catholic though I've pretty much reverted to a C & E practitioner as of late.


----------



## Scheherazade

ProfCrash said:


> Some have massive agendas that are clearly defined (Golden Compass anyone) and most are just not written in a manner that treats the kids as if they are intelligent enough to read the books.


Don't even get me started on The Golden Compass series, that needs to be a whole nother thread! >< I'd praise and support every bone headed move JKR has made before floating even an ounce of support toward Philip Pullman.



kathygnome said:


> Given that she allowed one of the titles to be changed for the US market and they've been edited to remove items deemed too British, if it's for artistic reasons I'd have to consider her more than a bit of a hypocrite.


And wow... I'd never thought of that. That's a great point. Oh, and welcome to the boards!


----------



## danfan

kathygnome said:


> Given that she allowed one of the titles to be changed for the US market and they've been edited to remove items deemed too British, if it's for artistic reasons I'd have to consider her more than a bit of a hypocrite.


I didn't know the US versions had been edited; I am surprised & disappointed that she allowed that. I thought the only differences were covers of some and the title of #1. I might consider re-reading to find out. I have UK & US copies of most of them - 3 copies of Order of the Phoenix LOL - 2 UK (one children's cover, one adult) and the US HC.

This weekend, I gave all my HP books to my daughter; well all accept one limited edition, but yup, all my first eds and other specials are now on her bookcase. I figured I will never re-read them as HC, but will if they come out as Kindle eds. I loved 1-6 but hated, _hated_ #7 so I wouldn't bother with that one.


----------



## jpmorgan49

Forster said:


> Well I still missed it, lol. IIRC I got the "evil" church thing, I just never tied it to a particular religion. And yes I was raised Catholic though I've pretty much reverted to a C & E practitioner as of late.


Excuse my ignorance, but what is a C&E practitioner?
jp


----------



## Forster

jpmorgan49 said:


> Excuse my ignorance, but what is a C&E practitioner?
> jp


I'm one of those people who crowd up the pews during Christmas and Easter, lol.


----------



## Chad Winters

a Chreester!!


----------



## jpmorgan49

Ahhhhhh, OK!!  
jp


----------



## mwvickers

ProfCrash said:


> No but Narnia has tons of Catholic allegories in it.


Not trying to be argumentative, so don't take it that way, please, but I believe what you saw were symbols of what Lewis would call "mere Christianity." I think this mainly because Lewis was Anglican, not Catholic.


----------



## Rasputina

I tried to read both of these series mentioned and couldn't get into either of them. I do enjoy the Harry Potter movies but I don't think JKR is a great author. I think her writing in general is pretty mediocre. My daughter was the perfect age when the series started and has followed the books as they each came out and really enjoyed them. Although I think she only read the last couple because she felt compelled to finish the story out to it's conclusion. We never stood in line at midnight or preordered the books. She saved those experiences for video game releases LOL. 

As far as Pullman, she and I both tried to read the series but just wasn't compelled by the storyline and neither of us could muster any interest in the movie. Tried to watch it once, since we do have all the cable movie channels and hey it's free at that point but I turned it off even before the part I'd stopped in the book.


----------



## Leslie

My son read the first HP book when he was 11...same age as Harry. It was birthday gift from my sister. He started raving about the book so I read it, then we got the audio book for my daughter, since she was reading well enough to read the book yet (but was mature enough for the story). From that, the whole series became a family affair and we eagerly waited for each book in the series, went to a few of the midnight release parties, and so on. My son grew up with Harry, more or less in real time.  It was fun. But, if I hadn't gotten so involved through my children, I'm not sure I would have paid as much attention. Who knows if I would have even read them? I probably would have, just due to all the publicity.

As for the British English vs. American, I think they did less of that in the later books, only because they were being published simultaneously and on such a massive scale. Aside from the title of the first book, one thing I do remember is that Dumbledore's favorite candy had a different name for the UK vs. the US. I can't remember exactly, but they were lemon sours or lemon bits or something in the US and a different name in the UK.

L


----------



## danfan

Leslie said:


> As for the British English vs. American, I think they did less of that in the later books, only because they were being published simultaneously and on such a massive scale. Aside from the title of the first book, one thing I do remember is that Dumbledore's favorite candy had a different name for the UK vs. the US. I can't remember exactly, but they were lemon sours or lemon bits or something in the US and a different name in the UK.
> 
> L


LOL I don't know what they are in the US books but in the British books they are sherbet lemons..... Mmmmm haven't had one of them since I was a child!


----------



## Gertie Kindle

danfan said:


> LOL I don't know what they are in the US books but in the British books they are sherbet lemons..... Mmmmm haven't had one of them since I was a child!


Lemon drops in the U.S. version.


----------



## Leslie

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Lemon drops in the U.S. version.


I knew the folks here would know. 

L


----------



## danfan

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Lemon drops in the U.S. version.


LOL thanks Gertie. That saves me plunging through the other books to check!

Confusing too because I am pretty sure in England there are 2 sweets with those names - one sherbet lemon and a totally different lemon drops.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

danfan said:


> LOL thanks Gertie. That saves me plunging through the other books to check!
> 
> Confusing too because I am pretty sure in England there are 2 sweets with those names - one sherbet lemon and a totally different lemon drops.


And in the movie, McGonagall uses sherbet lemon as the password to Albus' office.


----------



## KindleKay (aka #1652)

Interesting.  I never knew how easy it was to find Harry .pdf books...


----------



## Neekeebee

Forster said:


> Well I still missed it, lol. IIRC I got the "evil" church thing, I just never tied it to a particular religion. And yes I was raised Catholic though I've pretty much reverted to a C & E practitioner as of late.


I read the first two books of Pullman's series and thoroughly enjoyed them, not noticing the religious stuff enough for it to bother me. Maybe b/c I'm not Catholic. But then, I ran out and got Book 3 on release date and suddenly I noticed it _every_where! I had the hardest time finishing the book (took about 2 years). My sister was a fan of books 1 and 2 too, but after my review of book 3 (I lent it to her after reading the first 1/2 of it), she didn't even bother reading it.

N


----------



## Scheherazade

That was his evil plan, make it hardly noticeable in the first couple books to try to hook you and then flat out


Spoiler



kill God


 from what I understand in the last book. Remember demons are your friends! And I was offended as a Lutheran so it's not just the Catholics!


----------



## AFS_NZ_IT

mwvickers said:


> Not trying to be argumentative, so don't take it that way, please, but I believe what you saw were symbols of what Lewis would call "mere Christianity." I think this mainly because Lewis was Anglican, not Catholic.


From what I understood Lewis was trying to make the bible teachings more child friendly. In The Magicians Nephew it relates to the garden of Eden and taking the forbidden fruit.

I never "got" the religious references either. But I listened to the podcast from Father Roderick (sp?) and really enjoyed it. I am not religious in the least and so it was very interesting to hear the similarities from a priest. He has also done comparisons for other books too.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked

Scheherazade said:


> That was his evil plan, make it hardly noticeable in the first couple books to try to hook you and then flat out
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> kill God
> 
> 
> from what I understand in the last book. Remember demons are your friends! And I was offended as a Lutheran so it's not just the Catholics!


Please, let's not go off-topic for a religious discussion!

Mike


----------



## MamaProfCrash

Christianity is more accurate. Growing up as a Catholic all the discussion I heard was focused on Catholicism and I have gotten used to discussing his works in that manner. My bad. Either way, they were great books and I never felt like religion was the central focus of the books until someone pointed them out.

It is interesting that JKR avoided all discussion of religion in the Harry Potter books. Can anyone think of people even discussing going to Church or Temple or anything along those lines?


----------



## mwvickers

AFS_NZ_IT said:


> From what I understood Lewis was trying to make the bible teachings more child friendly. In The Magicians Nephew it relates to the garden of Eden and taking the forbidden fruit.
> 
> I never "got" the religious references either. But I listened to the podcast from Father Roderick (sp?) and really enjoyed it. I am not religious in the least and so it was very interesting to hear the similarities from a priest. He has also done comparisons for other books too.


You're correct. That was part of it.

He did the same for adults in his Christian non-fiction as well.

Interestingly, Tolkien was continually frustrated by Lewis' delving into theological matters and basically asked Tolkien why he didn't just leave it to the theologians. Lewis' response basically said something like, "Until the theologians can explain Christianity in a way than can be understood by all, I'll have to do try to do it." LOL


----------



## mwvickers

jmiked said:


> Please, let's not go off-topic for a religious discussion!
> 
> Mike


We are off topic from HP, but as far as the _His Dark Materials _ series is concerned, everyone is right on topic. Even Pullman himself has admitted as much as everyone here is saying.

I don't think anyone here has intended on getting into an offensive religious discussion at all.


----------



## mwvickers

ProfCrash said:


> Christianity is more accurate. Growing up as a Catholic all the discussion I heard was focused on Catholicism and I have gotten used to discussing his works in that manner. My bad. Either way, they were great books and I never felt like religion was the central focus of the books until someone pointed them out.


Makes sense.

And you're right, Lewis didn't want it be "blatant," so to speak.



> It is interesting that JKR avoided all discussion of religion in the Harry Potter books. Can anyone think of people even discussing going to Church or Temple or anything along those lines?


None that I can recall. Not blatantly anyway.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

I don't think the discussion has been offensive at all. Just a discussion of religion in fantasy books that are often compared to Harry Potter. (shrugs)


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Good discussion, here!  I'm learning a lot.

I find it interesting that some are disturbed by the modification of the Potter books for the US Market.  As far as I can tell, this has been done with other books, too, Also, books have edits made to the author's original artistic vision for all sorts of reasons....I don't find it hypocritical.  (Of course, having been known to make quilts specifically for a specific show, or on commission, I supposed I haven't been true to my vision as an artist.  )

Betsy


----------



## Rhiathame

ProfCrash said:


> I don't think the discussion has been offensive at all. Just a discussion of religion in fantasy books that are often compared to Harry Potter. (shrugs)


Many fantasy books address religion in one form or another. Some are very open about it, others are more subtle. Some are anti-established religion others are live and let live. In many cases we take from them what we will. I read the Dark Materials books and I did not find them offensive in the way they addressed religion, but I have read other books where I was a bit taken aback.


----------



## MAGreen

There is an interesting book called God, the Devil, and Harry Potter. It was written in defense of the Harry Potter series after the backlash of the religious sector that tried to ban it in schools. 

I don't believe any of it, but it is interesting what some people get out of a story. It'a all about your point of view and your beliefs.


----------



## Scheherazade

I definitey didn't intend this to devolve into any sort of religious discussion anymore than it already had been and don't quite see how my post swerved it more in that direction than any had before.  Maybe my spoiler tag just highlighted mine for some reason!  

And I don't think it was necessarily people upset that they modified the books for a US market.  More so it was people pointing out that one of JKR's continued reasons for not putting them in ebook form was that she didn't want to jeopardize the integrity of her work by doing so.  Therefore why would she let the integrity of her work be compromised by editing it for US audiences, making it into movies, and allowing audio books.  It was more the hypocrisy in her attitude than the changes themselves.  Though I always disliked the changes, we're not that stupid... I read Jasper Fforde and Terry Pratchett just fine with all the British colloquialisms firmly intact.

As for the "religious sector" banning Harry Potter and anything else like it... well even as a pretty devout Christian myself I think that's silly and overboard.  There's certainly things I can see parents not wanting their children to be opened up to, but there seems to be a backlash against anything fantastic anymore.  It's the same argument with violence and video games and everything else... just raise your kids right and things will be okay.

I grew up watching violent and fantastic cartoons, played video games all my life, read fantasy books, went to Renaissance Faires, was literally given syringes (no needles of course!) by my allergy doctor to use as bath toys... I've never killed anyone, never done drugs, never smoked anything (not even a single puff on a cigarette), never gone on some mad spree thinking people are goblins and must be destroyed, I haven't jumped off a bridge because I thought I was immortal (though I did fall out of a tree once), nor have I otherwise harmed myself or others either physically or mentally despite all these things that would show up as red flags now to concerned children's groups.


----------



## Cindergayle

I would also like to see the Harry Potter books available on Kindle. Maybe it will happen sometime.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Two weeks from today I'll be going to the new movie.  Wish I could go to the midnight release.  Oh, well, first movie in the morning.


----------



## koolmnbv

I read the Narnia books along time ago back in 3rd or 4th grade. I can't remember any religious references but I was also pretty young. I will have to re read these.


----------



## MAGreen

I read them in 5th grade and I didn't see it either. Even as I read them now, I don't see it. Then again, even though I have read the bible and spent time learning about Christianity, I don't see it the way believers do. 

ETA: Let me rephrase that, I do see it when I am looking for it, but as I just read and enjoy the story, it doesn't come across as a religious story.


----------



## jrector

Who knows why Rowling does what she does.


----------



## MAGreen

Her therapist?


----------



## rho

jpmorgan49 said:


> I agree, I loved all the books and I love the movies but I too have lost respect for Rowling. I'm wondering if the 7 Harry Potter books were all she had in her.


that is why I think if we all keep bombarding the publishers with "I want this book on Kindle" we may win - the publishers want more money and if they don't see it coming from new books they may push the issue with her and win....


----------



## Chad Winters

yes, at some point the light should come on and they should realize that NOT letting people buy their books is not good business sense.

"No, we don't want your money, go buy someone else's book please."


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Chad Winters (#102) said:


> "No, we don't want your money, go buy someone else's book please."


More like: "No, I don't want your money; if you want to read my book you'll have to steal it."


----------



## MamaProfCrash

Ann in Arlington said:


> More like: "No, I don't want your money; if you want to read my book you'll have to steal it."


Yup that is about right.


----------



## intinst

Abbie Hoffman's  Steal This Book, comes to mind, it is almost as if they would prefer that you did steal it rather than allow it to be obtained legally.


----------



## Meemo

intinst said:


> Abbie Hoffman's Steal This Book, comes to mind, it is almost as if they would prefer that you did steal it rather than allow it to be obtained legally.


Exactly - authors/publishers who refuse to offer authorized e-versions of their books ensure that they receive NO revenue from downloads of their books. If they make legal copies available, they'll at least get the proceeds from downloads by those of us who'll only download legitimate e-versions. This is especially confusing from those authors who KNOW there are pirated versions of their books out there already. I just don't get it.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

Meemo said:


> Exactly - authors/publishers who refuse to offer authorized e-versions of their books ensure that they receive NO revenue from downloads of their books. If they make legal copies available, they'll at least get the proceeds from downloads by those of us who'll only download legitimate e-versions. This is especially confusing from those authors who KNOW there are pirated versions of their books out there already. I just don't get it.


Nor do I. Let me see, I have a chance to make some more money off people who have already bought all of my books by making them available legally as e-books. Or I could complain that an e-book is not made of paper and not make them available for the -book reader. Now I am going to complain that people are illegally downloading my book as an e-book because I refuse to make it available for them.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Scheherazade said:


> And I don't think it was necessarily people upset that they modified the books for a US market. More so it was people pointing out that one of JKR's continued reasons for not putting them in ebook form was that she didn't want to jeopardize the integrity of her work by doing so. Therefore why would she let the integrity of her work be compromised by editing it for US audiences, making it into movies, and allowing audio books. It was more the hypocrisy in her attitude than the changes themselves. Though I always disliked the changes, we're not that stupid... I read Jasper Fforde and Terry Pratchett just fine with all the British colloquialisms firmly intact.


No, I don't have problems with British English either, but then I've read a lot of it. (I saw an interview yesterday where Michell Pfieffer told her British costar, appropriate to the scene they were discussing, that he could slap her fanny as much as he liked. When he turned red, she realized that didn't mean the same thing in Britain it does here--


Spoiler



apparently the British "fanny" is on the front of a woman.


)

As for JKR, <shrug>, I know very few people who are completely consistent. I expect sometime her books will be in an e-book format. Ultimately, it's her right, whether I like it or not. I'm still going to see the movie when it comes out, yay!

Betsy


----------



## Chad Winters

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> apparently the British "fanny" is on the front of a woman.
> 
> 
> )
> 
> Betsy


So...where is it? Now I'm curious!


----------



## Thumper

Chad Winters (#102) said:


> So...where is it? Now I'm curious!


In British slang, the fanny =


Spoiler



general crotch area of a female


----------



## Forster

Chad Winters (#102) said:


> So...where is it? Now I'm curious!


LOL, to the Brits it's referring to ummm the


Spoiler



genitalia


 which IMO makes her misspeak all the funnier.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

To bring this back on topic, at least that's a term JKR did not have to Americanize.  It might be in her follow up Harry Potter novel, "Harry Potter and the Curse of the Golden Bedpan."

Betsy


----------



## Magpie

ProfCrash said:


> I don't think that anyone was ready for Harry to
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> blow up
> 
> 
> the way that it did.


 I'm still reading the series. I didn't know that Harry


Spoiler



blew up


?  Maybe someone should post a spoiler alert?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

lindsaygator said:


> I'm still reading the series. I didn't know that Harry
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> blew up
> 
> 
> ?  Maybe someone should post a spoiler alert?


I think ProfCrash is referring to the explosion of the Harry Potter phenomenon, not something that happened in the actual book. No one expected it to be the phenomenon it is...

Betsy


----------



## Magpie

Ohhh


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Which one are you on, Magpie?

Betsy


----------



## Magpie

Well, I'm only on the first one. I'm really enjoying it though. I'm glad Harry doesn't really blow up.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Ahhh, now you're making me want to read the first one again!

Betsy


----------



## Magpie

Should I read the short stories that seem to fit in with the series?


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Magpie said:


> Should I read the short stories that seem to fit in with the series?


If you mean Tales of Beedle the Bard, wait until you finish the series. The books go fast. JKR writes very simply.


----------



## Magpie

Thanks


----------



## danfan

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Good discussion, here! I'm learning a lot.
> 
> I find it interesting that some are disturbed by the modification of the Potter books for the US Market. As far as I can tell, this has been done with other books, too, Also, books have edits made to the author's original artistic vision for all sorts of reasons....I don't find it hypocritical. (Of course, having been known to make quilts specifically for a specific show, or on commission, I supposed I haven't been true to my vision as an artist. )
> 
> Betsy


I don't think it's quite the same as changing a functional product for regional trends though. I've never liked changes to original books/files based on what a market won't like - I think keeping the original content broadens the minds of others, plus I personally _want_ to read it as it was originally intended. I wouldn't usually deem it to be hypocritical so much as unappealing. That said, I think for JKR it seems hypocritical because she's so adamant about books being "real" books, and to be read only as "real" books for, I assume, sentiment & tradition, and in that sense it seems odd she'd allow changes to how they are written. 
Movies do it too - often movies with happy endings are changed to less-happy for UK audiences LOL; for example, one ending everyone gets married and has 6 kids. UK ending, someone dies and you leave the cinema crying. Morbid lot.

I can see if there is a LOT of original slang in a book then it can get difficult. I am reading _Lord of the Flies_ with my son and he keeps asking what does something mean. That is kept very original, I think.



Betsy the Quilter said:


> No, I don't have problems with British English either, but then I've read a lot of it. (I saw an interview yesterday where Michell Pfieffer told her British costar, appropriate to the scene they were discussing, that he could slap her fanny as much as he liked. When he turned red, she realized that didn't mean the same thing in Britain it does here--
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> apparently the British "fanny" is on the front of a woman.
> 
> 
> )
> 
> Betsy


LOL There are many British words too that don't translate well over here. When I first moved to USA, I got glared at for saying "Look at that poor tramp." (Tramp in UK = homeless person), and after 6 years I still get caught out when I go outside to smoke a ***. "Fanny pack" still makes me howl laughing though.

I have noticed that Stephen King uses a lot of British English in his (US versions) of books. Often I have jumped up and shoved a book in my (American) husband's face shouting "Look! Look! See, I'm not the only one who says it!"


----------



## Gertie Kindle

danfan said:


> I don't think it's quite the same as changing a functional product for regional trends though. I've never liked changes to original books/files based on what a market won't like - I think keeping the original content broadens the minds of others, plus I personally _want_ to read it as it was originally intended. I wouldn't usually deem it to be hypocritical so much as unappealing. That said, I think for JKR it seems hypocritical because she's so adamant about books being "real" books, and to be read only as "real" books for, I assume, sentiment & tradition, and in that sense it seems odd she'd allow changes to how they are written.


She also said that she wants to rewrite the books. IMHO ... _that's_ hypocritical.


----------



## Scheherazade

If it's the only story she has in her then of course she'd want to rewrite the books.  Makes me wonder about all those early claims that she lifted the idea from somewhere else and that maybe she really doesn't have anymore books in her.  She really did hit a pretty lucky spot where there just wasn't that sort of book to be had, now there's several more.  She may get people to buy into another series but they're not invested in it yet, so I think she realizes it needs to be really good or she may lose her audience.


----------



## alcina

I'm really bummed that these aren't on Kindle.  We own at least two of each of the series, and some titles we own three, and I'd add the K version too.

Shame I'm totally computer challenged or I'd try to find an alternative LOL


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

I don't quite see that thinking one can improve on one's own work while wanting to keep control over it is necessarily hypocritical,   although I haven't read exactly what JKR has said on either topic, only what has been said here.  I guess while I would LOVE to have HP books on Kindle, I'm not mad at JKR for her stand, even though I don't agree with it.  I've gotten so much pleasure from the books (and the movies) I can wait...the optimist in me believes they will be on Kindle eventually.    Just my two cents in what is a VERY interesting discussion!

Betsy


----------



## mlewis78

I've only heard that she wasn't going to write any more HP books and that she would write her next book for adults.  It is only here in this thread that I'm hearing that she wanted to rewrite the books.  She does intend to write an encyclopedia, but it wasn't her next project and she said it may be years from now before it is published.  

I'm wondering what the source is of her saying that she wanted to rewrite the HP series (or have I misread something? -- I'm watching a movie as I read here -- bad habit of mine).


----------



## MamaProfCrash

If I were her, I wouldn't write anything else. Leave well enough alone.


----------



## MonaSW

Scheherazade said:


> If it's the only story she has in her then of course she'd want to rewrite the books.


Rewriting usually only spoils what you have already written. An example is the re-done Star Wars movies - I can't watch the first three on TV anymore because scenes George Lucas added are jarring. I'm so disappointed.


----------



## Scheherazade

Yep, all Star Wars has been ruined for me especially after the last trilogy (1-3).  And yeah, rewriting the Harry Potter books would probably make them horrible, but I guarantee she'd get a huge wave of people rebuying them for very little work and no need for originality or creativity on her part... then again she could get the same results by just publishing the bloody things on the Kindle!


----------



## Ann in Arlington

I agree 100% with Betsy. They're good books. They're good _stories_. Eventually they'll be available electronically. I'll buy 'em again when Kindlized. Meantime, I'll read 'em on paper if I feel the urge. No big deal one way or the other.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

When JKR said that she wanted to rewrite the books, I assumed she meant that, like most creative people, she wasn't completely satisfied with what she's done. She's just second guessing herself.

After the release of Book 7 she announced the encyclopedia, but said it would be at least five years before she wrote it. I would like for her to write _Hogwarts; A History_.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> After the release of Book 7 she announced the encyclopedia, but said it would be at least five years before she wrote it. I would like for her to write _Hogwarts; A History_.


Yes! It's such a critical part of the series. I'd TOTALLY buy it.


----------



## Anju 

I would buy on kindle, I do have all the books in paper, two in HB and the others PB.  I agree with earlier posters the first 3 or 4 were the best, I think she tried to get more creative later instead of staying with her fun story.


----------



## mlewis78

I liked each book more and more as the series progressed.  The first one was good enough for me to continue to the next, but it was more obviously a children's book.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

mlewis78 said:


> I liked each book more and more as the series progressed. The first one was good enough for me to continue to the next, but it was more obviously a children's book.


When I was reading the first one, I kept saying to myself, why am I liking this children's book? Never could answer my own question, but I liked each book better than the last.


----------



## jpmorgan49

I agree, my daughters kept trying to get me to read them.  I'm not a Fantasy buff so kept putting them off.  I finally gave in and read Book 1, it had me after the first page.  I've loved them all and the movies too.  To get even I had to talk my daughter into reading the Twilight series.  I got here back she'll liked that also.
jp


----------



## mlewis78

Her writing style is amazing.  She made me laugh out loud a lot too.  I had not read a fantasy novel since Lord of the Rings some 30 years ago!

I had 3 friends at work who talked me into buying the first book when the 6th was just out in hardcover.  I put it off for two years and then read it in July 2007.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

mlewis78 said:


> Her writing style is amazing. She made me laugh out loud a lot too. I had not read a fantasy novel since Lord of the Rings some 30 years ago!
> 
> I had 3 friends at work who talked me into buying the first book when the 6th was just out in hardcover. I put it off for two years and then read it in July 2007.


Half the people at my work read the series, too. I know millions of kids read the books, but many of the adults I know have read them, too. Are you a stranger at a party? Just find someone who loves Potter and you've got a conversation going.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked

"Any book published for children that adults cannot enjoy is likely to be a pretty poor book. And if some adult books cannot be enjoyed or understood by children, there are plenty of adults who cannot enjoy or understand them either.
-Alexei Panshin"


Mike


----------



## 4Katie

> yes, at some point the light should come on and they should realize that NOT letting people buy their books is not good business sense.


Exactly! I own all seven books in hardback - and here I am, willing to buy all seven books again, but she won't let me!


----------



## JimJ

I just got done re-reading all 7 books.  My poor Kindle has been neglected for nearly 2 months because of it.  It was worth it though, the books are amazing.  I've decided that DH is my favorite, followed closely by OOTP and POA.  I've decided that I'm going to make re-reading the series a yearly tradition with me.  Hopefully I'll be able to read them on my Kindle before too long.

I've also recently re-watched all the movies and decided that GOF is my favorite.  It's not without it's flaws but I think it's the only one that managed to find the right balance between cutting too much out and leaving in too much. The first 2 are my least favorite, even though they're the most faithful.  They're just horribly paced and seem to drag on forever.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

JimJ said:


> I just got done re-reading all 7 books. My poor Kindle has been neglected for nearly 2 months because of it. It was worth it though, the books are amazing. I've decided that DH is my favorite, followed closely by OOTP and POA. I've decided that I'm going to make re-reading the series a yearly tradition with me. Hopefully I'll be able to read them on my Kindle before too long.


I lead a Potter book club at my GS's school, so I got to reread the first one again last year. This year I'll be doing two clubs; 1st years and 2nd years. That's how I'll be able to read them all again. Too much fun.



> I've also recently re-watched all the movies and decided that GOF is my favorite. It's not without it's flaws but I think it's the only one that managed to find the right balance between cutting too much out and leaving in too much. The first 2 are my least favorite, even though they're the most faithful. They're just horribly paced and seem to drag on forever.


I think GoF was great because the book had a lot of action in it, so the movie was bound to be good. PoA was my favorite book (until I read HBP & DH), but I hated the movie. All that time symbolism and the shrunken heads among other flaws. I still watch it, but I only half pay attention. SS/PS is my favorite of the movies just because it brought everything to life.

They are reissuing the DVDs, but unfortunately, I don't think they are making them EE. Too bad. If they did, I would buy them again.


----------



## 4Katie

Gertie - I'm so jealous. What fun! I worked in an elementary school when HP was new. It was so much fun seeing the kids get so excited about the books!

btw, in this thread I think you should change your name to 'Turn to Page 394'!


----------



## Gertie Kindle

4Katie said:


> Gertie - I'm so jealous. What fun! I worked in an elementary school when HP was new. It was so much fun seeing the kids get so excited about the books!
> 
> btw, in this thread I think you should change your name to 'Turn to Page 394'!


Of course ... the best line in all five of the movies. Every time I hear it, I want to run to my bookshelves and turn all of them to page 394. I'm only using "390" because that's my member number. Had I only waited a day to join.


----------



## 4Katie

My favorite Snape quote is when he catches Lupin and Harry walking the halls late at night - "Well, well, Lupin. Out for a little walk... in the moonlight are we?" Classic Snape!


----------



## Gertie Kindle

4Katie said:


> My favorite Snape quote is when he catches Lupin and Harry walking the halls late at night - "Well, well, Lupin. Out for a little walk... in the moonlight are we?" Classic Snape!


I love Rickman. He is the perfect Snape. The master of the spoken elipse.

I can't wait to see him in The Lightning Struck Tower scene <sob> and The Flight of the Prince <goosebumps>.


----------



## JimJ

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> I love Rickman. He is the perfect Snape. The master of the spoken elipse.
> 
> I can't wait to see him in The Lightning Struck Tower scene <sob> and The Flight of the Prince <goosebumps>.


Both should be great. What I really can't wait to see is The Prince's Tale but of course it'll be over two years before we get to see that. Ever since reading Deathly Hallows, Snape has become one of my favorite characters and Rickman is just excellent in the role. Loved him as the judge in Sweeney Todd also.

What do you think about the fact that they're splitting DH into two movies?


----------



## Gertie Kindle

JimJ said:


> Both should be great. What I really can't wait to see is The Prince's Tale but of course it'll be over two years before we get to see that. Ever since reading Deathly Hallows, Snape has become one of my favorite characters and Rickman is just excellent in the role. Loved him as the judge in Sweeney Todd also.


Yes, that scene will be in DH-II. Another one that ripped my heart out. It's why JKR kept saying that the color of Harry's eyes was so important.


Spoiler



Snape died looking into Lily's eyes.


 Oh, I'm going to be bawling at that one.



> What do you think about the fact that they're splitting DH into two movies?


I'm glad they are. I don't want to wait, but I want the last one to be done right. The fans have been after them to split the movies since GoF. At least Potterfans had enough influence to get them to make some changes in the cemetery scene.


----------



## KindleKay (aka #1652)

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Of course ... the best line in all five of the movies. Every time I hear it, I want to run to my bookshelves and turn all of them to page 394. I'm only using "390" because that's my member number. Had I only waited a day to join.


Forgive me dear Kindleboarders. I have read and loved all Harry books and anxiously await to have them legally purchased on Kindle...however, I am in the dark over the "turn to page 394" reference. Please enlighten this in the dark Potter fan!!!


----------



## JimJ

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Yes, that scene will be in DH-II. Another one that ripped my heart out. It's why JKR kept saying that the color of Harry's eyes was so important.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Snape died looking into Lily's eyes.
> 
> 
> Oh, I'm going to be bawling at that one.
> 
> I'm glad they are. I don't want to wait, but I want the last one to be done right. The fans have been after them to split the movies since GoF. At least Potterfans had enough influence to get them to make some changes in the cemetery scene.


I don't know, the fans seem pretty split on the issue. There's a 27 page thread on MuggleNet debating whether it's a good idea or not. I think it is in theory but I'm worried about how it will work in practice. I'm not sure you can take DH, which is one story, with a beginning, middle and end, and split it into two movies that will have to stand on their own to some extent, since they're being released six months apart. I guess we'll see. I'm glad the book will be more faithfully adapted but I just hope it doesn't come at the expense of the quality of the movies.


----------



## mlewis78

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Of course ... the best line in all five of the movies. Every time I hear it, I want to run to my bookshelves and turn all of them to page 394. I'm only using "390" because that's my member number. Had I only waited a day to join.


What is the best line? (I'm confused.)


----------



## Aravis60

Reading this thread has made me decide to get out my HP books to read next. I haven't read them since DH came out.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

KindleKay (aka #1652) said:


> Forgive me dear Kindleboarders. I have read and loved all Harry books and anxiously await to have them legally purchased on Kindle...however, I am in the dark over the "turn to page 394" reference. Please enlighten this in the dark Potter fan!!!


The line was in the PoA movie, not the book. It's when Snape takes over Lupin's class and tells them to "Turn to page 394" because he's trying to out Lupin as a werewolf.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

mlewis78 said:


> What is the best line? (I'm confused.)


Turn to Page 394.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

JimJ said:


> I don't know, the fans seem pretty split on the issue. There's a 27 page thread on MuggleNet debating whether it's a good idea or not. I think it is in theory but I'm worried about how it will work in practice. I'm not sure you can take DH, which is one story, with a beginning, middle and end, and split it into two movies that will have to stand on their own to some extent, since they're being released six months apart. I guess we'll see. I'm glad the book will be more faithfully adapted but I just hope it doesn't come at the expense of the quality of the movies.


In the end, half of us will be right and half of us will be wrong. I haven't read exactly where they will be splitting the movie, but Dobby will be in both halves. The last I heard, it was going to be split after they escape from Xeno Lovegood's house.


----------



## mlewis78

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Turn to Page 394.


Thanks.


----------



## marianneg

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Turn to Page 394.


Actually, it's "Turn to page three hundred and ninety-four," and you can just hear the teeth grinding harder with each sylable. Classic Snape! I also can't wait for the Prince's Tale - it gave me chills just reading it!


----------



## JimJ

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> In the end, half of us will be right and half of us will be wrong. I haven't read exactly where they will be splitting the movie, but Dobby will be in both halves. The last I heard, it was going to be split after they escape from Xeno Lovegood's house.


Where did you hear that Dobby would be in both movies? That worries me. I'm REALLY hoping they don't split up the Malfoy Manor scene. It's a great scene and I'd hate to see it split over two movies. The director, David Yates, has said that it will end on a cliffhanger. If that's the case, I hope they end it as


Spoiler



the trio is being captured by the Snatchers


. My ideal ending for DH 1 would be


Spoiler



Dobby's funeral


 but that's not really a cliffhanger, so I'm not holding my breath for it.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

My ideal would be that they stop making the movies and just let people read the books. Sorry, I am cranky about the movies. The first one was good and the rest have been horrible. They leave out 90% of the character development and the important interactions at Hogwarts. They are in such a rush to get to the action they ignore all the other elements that made the books so wonderful.

Bleeech


----------



## MAGreen

ProfCrash said:


> My ideal would be that they stop making the movies and just let people read the books. Sorry, I am cranky about the movies. The first one was good and the rest have been horrible. They leave out 90% of the character development and the important interactions at Hogwarts. They are in such a rush to get to the action they ignore all the other elements that made the books so wonderful.
> 
> Bleeech


I kind of agree, I like the movies as an addition to the books. I was so sad that they left Dobby out of the last one. The last couple movies didn't really stand alone, since they would have been very hard to follow without having read the books. I like have the book acted out for me to see, but some of it I think I like my own version in my head better!


----------



## Gertie Kindle

JimJ said:


> Where did you hear that Dobby would be in both movies? That worries me. I'm REALLY hoping they don't split up the Malfoy Manor scene. It's a great scene and I'd hate to see it split over two movies. The director, David Yates, has said that it will end on a cliffhanger. If that's the case, I hope they end it as
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> the trio is being captured by the Snatchers
> 
> 
> . My ideal ending for DH 1 would be
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Dobby's funeral
> 
> 
> but that's not really a cliffhanger, so I'm not holding my breath for it.


I heard it on Mugglenet. The guy who voices Dobby did an interview where he said he would be in both movies. I don't think they'll split Malfoy Manor. That would just kill that segment.

I think they'll go ahead with splitting it when the snatchers come after the trio at Lovegood's. That's where we find out about the Deathly Hallows and it's a good note to end on.


----------



## imon32red

ProfCrash said:


> My ideal would be that they stop making the movies and just let people read the books. Sorry, I am cranky about the movies. The first one was good and the rest have been horrible. They leave out 90% of the character development and the important interactions at Hogwarts. They are in such a rush to get to the action they ignore all the other elements that made the books so wonderful.
> 
> Bleeech


I agree. The first movie was great and had a magical feel to it. The second one was alright but it only gets worse as the series goes on.


----------



## Andra

I liked the movies in my head better too. It took about four tries on the first movie before I admitted that it was a good movie because some of the stuff didn't match the pictures in my head. (and since I had just reread the book, the pictures were pretty vivid)
I think I watched 1-4 and quit watching. Although that could partly be due to the fact that I didn't really like _Order of the Phoenox_ - and it's one that I got at a midnight release and went home and read straight through. I was mad for weeks that


Spoiler



Sirius was killed just when he and Harry were getting to know each other.


I'll probably end up watching all of the movies eventually. I also plan to snap them up the minute JRK comes to her senses and makes them available electronically. I've gotten too spoiled with my Kindles to carry around even the paperback copies of the Harry Potter books


----------



## luvmy4brats

The only movie I was disappointed in was Goblet of Fire. It was my favorite book and I reread it right before going to see the movie. I now know better and do the reread AFTER watching the movie.

As it gets closer, there's a part of me that does NOT want to go see this movie. I'm so afraid they'll mess it up. (plus, I don't know how I'm going to handle the end.) I was originally planning on the Midnight release, but now that it's coming out on a Wed, I seriously doubt that will happen.

I'll forever be grateful for the movies because I got interested in the books after seeing the first movie.


----------



## Anju 

I did not like the first 3 movies, so don't even bother, I'd much rather read the story.  Unfortunately I have too many good books on my kindle to pick up the papers ones for awhile.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Got my ticket for the 11:45am showing on Wednesday.  I'll report when I get back.


----------



## 4Katie

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Got my ticket for the 11:45am showing on Wednesday. I'll report when I get back.


Cool! I can't wait to hear what you think about it! We'll probably wait a week or so.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

I won't see it 'til we get back from Finland.

Betsy


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I won't see it 'til we get back from Finland.
> 
> Betsy


Didn't know you were going to Finland. Have a great trip.



4Katie said:


> Cool! I can't wait to hear what you think about it! We'll probably wait a week or so.


I'm excited about it. Seems like it's been forever since the last movie ... two years. I'm hoping some of the kids from my Potter Book Club will be able to join me.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

marianner said:


> Actually, it's "Turn to page three hundred and ninety-four," and you can just hear the teeth grinding harder with each sylable. Classic Snape! I also can't wait for the Prince's Tale - it gave me chills just reading it!


And he says it several times! Watched it just last night on the ABCFamily marathon (which continues today, I think). Thought of this thread when I heard it!

Betsy


----------



## jpmorgan49

My wife and I are going on Thursday.  Can't wait!!!
jp


----------



## Gertie Kindle

jpmorgan49 said:


> My wife and I are going on Thursday. Can't wait!!!
> jp


If no one else has done it, I'll start a new thread for the movie when I get back ... if I can see through my tears. I wish someone else was playing Dumbledore. I can't stand Michael Gambon. He brings absolutely nothing to the character. Richard Harris was marginally better. Sean Connery would have been perfect. But then he's perfect anyway.


----------



## Aravis60

I'm going on the 20th. My friend from work and I have gone to see all of them together, and that was when we would both be free. Can't  break the tradition. I started re-reading the books in anticipation of the movie too. I don't know how far I will get before we actually go. It takes so much longer to read DTBs for me now because I prefer reading on my kindle.


----------



## Sariy

DH, 2DD and I are going Wed @12:45.  And I really wish she would e-book them because I so want to re-read the book before going, but with 2 moves since it came out I can't find the DTB.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

I don't read the books before I see the movie anymore.  I stopped after PoA.  That way I can watch the movie and enjoy it separately, then read the book after to fill in the blanks.

I've been watching ABC Family all weekend.  The previews look good.  I just found out that every Monday afternoon, my local theater has been showing the first five movies for free, just to get everyone in the mood.  Not that I haven't got them all, but I would love to see them on the big screen again.


----------



## luvmy4brats

Hubby has a huge proposal he's been working on that's due Friday. I have no idea when we'll be able to go see the movie. The original plan was the 12:01 showing, but it looks like that won't happen now. We may not get to go see it until SUNDAY!


----------



## Gertie Kindle

luvmy4brats said:


> Hubby has a huge proposal he's been working on that's due Friday. I have no idea when we'll be able to go see the movie. The original plan was the 12:01 showing, but it looks like that won't happen now. We may not get to go see it until SUNDAY!


Goodness, am I going to be the first to see it? Anyone going to the midnight showing?


----------



## luvmy4brats

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Goodness, am I going to be the first to see it? Anyone going to the midnight showing?


Well, I COULD sneak out of the house and go see it by myself


----------



## Gertie Kindle

luvmy4brats said:


> Well, I COULD sneak out of the house and go see it by myself


Yes, but sneaking back in would be the problem. Your BRAT's would ground you for life. 

I just watched part of the Spinner's End scene. Unfortunately, it was in French and the guy who dubs Snape's voice is pitiful. Anyway, instead of Narcissa asking the questions, Bella does it. Much more menacing.

I read a few more things from people who attended the premiere in Sweden, but I won't post them here. I'll start a spoiler thread on Wednesday unless someone else goes earlier than me.


----------



## luvmy4brats

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Yes, but sneaking back in would be the problem. Your BRAT's would ground you for life.
> 
> I just watched part of the Spinner's End scene. Unfortunately, it was in French and the guy who dubs Snape's voice is pitiful. Anyway, instead of Narcissa asking the questions, Bella does it. Much more menacing.
> 
> I read a few more things from people who attended the premiere in Sweden, but I won't post them here. I'll start a spoiler thread on Wednesday unless someone else goes earlier than me.


I know, I'll go to work Tuesday night! Heehee. I work across the street from the mall. I'll be done around 11 or so and then go over to the movie with plenty of time to spare.

I work nights so the kids are very used to me coming home late...It wouldn't be weird at all...except for the fact I don't work Tuesday nights, but they never remember that. Only hubby would notice. He might be upset, so I better not. I could take the kids Wed morning (there's a 10:10 showing), but then he would miss out. <sigh> choices, choices.

Oh, I'll be in serious trouble if I don't see it before the spoiler thread goes up. I will have to stay away from the boards until I see it. i just can't stay out of those threads. So if I disappear for awhile, you all know why. Bellatrix asking the questions? OOHH..can't wait to see that (that actress is DEAD ON!)

You and I share the same views on Michael Gambon. <sigh> Watching Goblet of Fire now. YUCK!


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Warning ... U-No-Poo has been left out.  I'm glad to know about that ahead of time.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

I'm really looking forward to seeing how Tom Felton handles the newer, badder Draco.  From the previews, it looks like he's got it.  

The trailers make me cry, so I'm bringing plenty of Kleenex.


----------



## Sariy

I have seen no trailers!  I'm so proud of myself.  Even when we went to see Twilight I closed my eyes, stuck my fingers in my ears and hummed!


----------



## 4Katie

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Warning ... U-No-Poo has been left out. I'm glad to know about that ahead of time.


U-No-Poo

I'm very anxious to go, but we'll wait a week or so for things to die down. Also, I live near an iMax theater, and we're hoping to see it there!


----------



## MamaProfCrash

U-No-Poo was one of the Wesley Twins products they were selling at their store. I think all we ever saw was a sign for it.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Sariy said:


> I have seen no trailers! I'm so proud of myself. Even when we went to see Twilight I closed my eyes, stuck my fingers in my ears and hummed!


You're so strong.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

ProfCrash said:


> U-No-Poo was one of the Wesley Twins products they were selling at their store. I think all we ever saw was a sign for it.


Why are you worrying about
You-Know-Who
You should be worrying about
U-No-Poo
The constipation sensation
that's gripping the nation!


----------



## 4Katie

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Why are you worrying about
> You-Know-Who
> You should be worrying about
> U-No-Poo
> The constipation sensation
> that's gripping the nation!


lol - A Weasley twin classic!


----------



## mlewis78

I think I'm going to see it the weekend after next with two friends.  One of them is away this week, and they both work M-F, so it's gotta be a weekend.  I might be tempted to go ahead and see it on my own on a weekday.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

mlewis78 said:


> I think I'm going to see it the weekend after next with two friends. One of them is away this week, and they both work M-F, so it's gotta be a weekend. I might be tempted to go ahead and see it on my own on a weekday.


I did that for GoF. I promised my cousin and his daughter I would go with them to the IMAX showing, which opened a day later. So I went opening day on my own. Couldn't wait.


----------



## Amsee

Kathy said:


> She will not allow ebooks. Wish she would, but she just doesn't think it is right.


Maybe she has her reasons why, but I really don't know why..


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

I have Wednesday night tickets and Saturday afteroon tickets. I did not brave Tuesday at Midnight becuase I wake for work at 5 am and its 2 1/2 hours long. In our theater all but one of the midnight shows are sold out and they are playing it in 16 theaters. (I'm in Allentown PA). 

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## luvmy4brats

'Harry Potter' countdown: Michael Gambon sees 'no point' in reading Rowling's books

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2009/07/harry-potter-countdown-michael-gambon.html

He says Ralph Fiennes and Alan Rickman haven't read the books either. Well, at least those two have been able to channel their characters! (I was stunned to read they haven't, they are so dead on)


----------



## Gertie Kindle

luvmy4brats said:


> 'Harry Potter' countdown: Michael Gambon sees 'no point' in reading Rowling's books
> 
> http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2009/07/harry-potter-countdown-michael-gambon.html


I remember the original interview where he said that. He says all he needs is the script and he never tries to get into the character. He just plays himself. Gak.



> He says Ralph Fiennes and Alan Rickman haven't read the books either. Well, at least those two have been able to channel their characters! (I was stunned to read they haven't, they are so dead on).


Both are actors that get into their characters no matter what they play. AR did have the benefit of coaching by JKR early on. She gave him the scoop on what she planned for Snape. I think I read that he was the only one she wanted to play Severus. DH spoiler follows.



Spoiler



I may sniff a sniffle or two over Dumbledore (sobbed through the whole scene in the book through the funeral), but I'm going to be absolutely devastated at Snape's death scene.


----------



## luvmy4brats

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> I remember the original interview where he said that. He says all he needs is the script and he never tries to get into the character. He just plays himself. Gak.


He thinks Dumbledore should be a little scary? UGH!

I was watching a behind the scenes this morning and Helena Bonham Carter is another one that is just so dead on. She is perfect.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

luvmy4brats said:


> He thinks Dumbledore should be a little scary? UGH!
> 
> I was watching a behind the scenes this morning and Helena Bonham Carter is another one that is just so dead on. She is perfect.


I have never liked HBC, but she is definitely the perfect Bella. I am so looking forward to this movie.

Did you know that Bill Nighy is going to play Scrimgeor in the next one? Another great choice. Why oh why couldn't they get Albus right?


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

HBC will be my next clue for the Literary Trivia challenge, if someone ove there does get it.  

Ed Patterson


----------



## Toby

This thursday night, 8:00 PM, JK Rowlings will be on TV, in the east coast time slot. Something about her writing the last few chapters of Harry Potter.


----------



## JimJ

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> I have never liked HBC, but she is definitely the perfect Bella. I am so looking forward to this movie.
> 
> Did you know that Bill Nighy is going to play Scrimgeor in the next one? Another great choice. Why oh why couldn't they get Albus right?


I love HBC. I always saw her as Bellatrix. Bill Nighy as Scrimgeour is perfect but it doesn't make much sense to introduce him in DH considering


Spoiler



he dies near the very beginning.


. Would've been more excited about his casting if he were cast for HBP.

As for Gambon, I agree with him that Dumbledore should be scary, but ONLY when facing evil. He's the only one Voldemort ever feared after all. He should not be scary to Harry. I hate it when he screams at Harry in GOF when Harry's name is selected, that was the worst Dumbledore moment by far.


----------



## Anne

Toby said:


> This thursday night, 8:00 PM, JK Rowlings will be on TV, in the east coast time slot. Something about her writing the last few chapters of Harry Potter.


I saw the ad for the show the other night. I have my DVR all set to tape it.


----------



## MAGreen

JimJ said:


> I love HBC. I always saw her as Bellatrix. Bill Nighy as Scrimgeour is perfect but it doesn't make much sense to introduce him in DH considering
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> he dies near the very beginning.
> 
> 
> . Would've been more excited about his casting if he were cast for HBP.
> 
> As for Gambon, I agree with him that Dumbledore should be scary, but ONLY when facing evil. He's the only one Voldemort ever feared after all. He should not be scary to Harry. I hate it when he screams at Harry in GOF when Harry's name is selected, that was the worst Dumbledore moment by far.


I totally agree. I had wondered why he plays Dumbledore the way he does, but it's only half his fault, the director should have done something about him. He really doean't fit the part. He's angry far too much, Dumbledore was always a cheerful Grandfatherly character and the whole scary Dumbledore just ruins some scenes.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

ok, so I have not seen the movies so I don't know how far Dumbledore has gone down the scary path in the movies. That said, Dumbledore becomes more elusive and a bit scary tarting in GoF. He has to. He is the General guiding the actions of all of the people under him.

The character becomes a great deal more intense and everyone notices that. Harry is annoyed and angry with Dumbledore a fair amount in books 5 - 7. Dumbledore does not give him the info Harry wants quickly enough or in the depth that Harry wants. He is not as available as Harry or others want. He is much more confrontational. When Harry provides Dumbledore with information that Harry thinks is being ignored, Dumbledore becomes down right pissy.

An angry Dumbledore strikes me as an accurate portrayal. The kindly, Grandfather like Dumbledore exits the series the moment that Harry's name is drawn in the GoF.

Since people seem to be spoilering anything from book 6 and 7 even though the books have been out for ages...



Spoiler



Dumbledore's entire reason for allowing Harry to wander and do the things he does in the first three books is to prepare Harry for the role he will play in hunting Voldemort when the time comes. Dumbledore cares for Harry but uses Harry just like Dumbledore uses Sirius, Lupin, the Weasley's, and every other member of the Order of the Phoenix. Dumbledore understands that he is the leader of a movement that must succeed in order to rid the world of Voldemort. He places people were he needs them strategically and he uses them to their best effect. Dumbledore knows that these people are risking their lives. It helps that most of the people involved know that they are risking their lives, but it does not change the fact that Dumbledore is willing to risk the lives of a large number of people in order to achieve his end goal; killing Voldemort.

As such, Harry is another foot soldier in Dumbledore's army. One that Dumbledore loves and wants to protect but one that Dumbledore is training so that Harry can destroy Voldemort.

Which means that Dumbledore is not the nice, grandfatherly figure that we saw him as in the first books. He was able to play that role well. It helped him develop Harry and his friends and supporters skills. It helped him earn the trust of the vast majority of students at Hogwarts. It helped him maintain the trust of many of the original Order of the Phoenix. It helped him recruit new members of the Order of the Phoenix. It was a necessary part of putting together a force that could fight Voldemort.

Dumbledore is as calculating as Voldemort. In some ways, he is just as ruthless as Voldemort. The difference between the two is that Dumbledore would not use his Army to try and conquor or to take over the political system through force. Voldemort was willing to use his army to take over the government and force his world view on others. Dumbledore was morally right and I love the character for it but he was never the nice, grandfather figure that we initially saw him as.

We should have clued into that earlier. Harry did. He knew that Dumbledore let him figure out what the stone was, its location, some of its defenses, and run around the school violating all the rules. Dumbledore gives Harry the invisibility cloak. Why? When Harry asks that question, Ron blows it off. Most of us blows it off. But Harry knows that Dumbledore was watching and knew what Harry was doing. Dumbledore intervenes when Harry spends too much time with the Mirror of Erised. Dumbledore could have stopped Harry. Instead, Dumbledore lets an 11 year old Wizard and his friends have free run of the castle. In the end, Dumbledore is late getting to the scene and Harry faces Voldemort on his own. Dumbledore's plan nearly backfired. He got lucky and Harry survived and grew more confident.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Prof, I always called Dumbledore the "master puppeteer."  I always thought when he said he trusted Snape, he meant that he trusted Snape to act in a certain way, and that would fall into his plans.  Yes, I agree completely with your analysis.  

The reason I use spoiler tags on some things is because not everyone has read the books.  A lot of people (maybe not on KB), have just seen the movies.  They may not know what is to happen.


----------



## 4Katie

> Prof, I always called Dumbledore the "master puppeteer." I always thought when he said he trusted Snape, he meant that he trusted Snape to act in a certain way, and that would fall into his plans.


VERY interesting! And it would explain a lot.


----------



## Greg Banks

While I don't disagree with referring to Dumbledore as the master puppeteer, I would say that Harry was the one who was more than just one of the puppets. After all, everything that was done was to put Harry in a position to do what he ultimately has to do. To use a football analogy, everyone else is the offensive line, and their jobs were to clear the way for the running back (Harry) to get to the goal line.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Greg Banks said:


> While I don't disagree with referring to Dumbledore as the master puppeteer, I would say that Harry was the one who was more than just one of the puppets. After all, everything that was done was to put Harry in a position to do what he ultimately has to do. To use a football analogy, everyone else is the offensive line, and their jobs were to clear the way for the running back (Harry) to get to the goal line.


I like your analogy. Yes, I agree with you in that sense.

Albus didn't tell Harry much of anything until Book 6. Before that, he manipulated Harry into doing things as much as he did everyone else. He made sure Harry had the invisibility cloak, but didn't tell him anything about it or how it could be of benefit. He most likely knew Harry was a parselmouth, but again, didn't help him understand or control it. He had Mrs. Figg watching over Harry, but never let him know. He never told Harry why he was avoiding him in Book 4. As powerful as Albus was, he could have found a way. Granted, there were certain things that Harry couldn't be told, but Albus definitely played his cards very close to the vest.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

Greg Banks said:


> While I don't disagree with referring to Dumbledore as the master puppeteer, I would say that Harry was the one who was more than just one of the puppets. After all, everything that was done was to put Harry in a position to do what he ultimately has to do. To use a football analogy, everyone else is the offensive line, and their jobs were to clear the way for the running back (Harry) to get to the goal line.


Harry was a more important part of the game but he was still a piece to be manipulated. In every military there are smaller guns that most everyone has, then there are the bigger bombs that are used strategically and with some frequency, then there are are biggest bombs that are only used when all else fails.

There were a lot of people whose job it was was to protect Harry and make sure he was in a position to do his job. Harry still had the specific job that he had to do.

In many ways, Harry was probably more manipulated then any other character in the book. Dumbledore is very careful in what he tells Harry and what he allows Harry to do. I think GoF is a great example of this. Dumbledore wanted Harry to be as prepared as possible for his battle with Voldemort but wanted to help Harry develop in as safe and controlled environment as Dumbledore could arrange. I am guessing that Dumbledore lobbied for the age limit, not to protect all the kids under 17 years old, but specifically to exclude the possibility that Harry would be able to enter.

Everyone else knew that their role was to protect Harry. PoA was all about protecting Harry from Sirius. Dumbledore allowed the demontors on school grounds for a reason. In OotP, Sirius and a band of Phoenix members get to the Ministry specifically to protect Harry.


Spoiler



In DH the decoys all knew what their job was. Make sure Harry got to The Burrow safely.


 Harry does not learn why he is so important until the end of OotP when Dumbledore, who knew all along, tells Harry. Then Dumbledore provides Harry with information that he is going to need without telling Harry directly what Harry needs to know.

I grew to really like the character of Dumbledore as the series progressed because I thought he was one of the most complex and well developed chracaters in the books.


----------



## 4Katie

Wow -  you guys have really thought about this. I'm learning a lot here - and wondering how much I'm missing. Now I want to join a book club to dissect every little thing!


----------



## MamaProfCrash

I love the Potter books. I am writing book 8 in my head.


Spoiler



Harry and the gang return to Hogwarts to finish their schooling. Harry is a bit confused by a school year without anyone trying to kill him. Things are normal and the kids all have a bit of difficulty adjusting to the normalcy



I don't mind using the spoilers. I just figure everyone on a site dedicated to an e-book reader would have read the books. Especially since they came out before most of us had Kindles and were used to reading DTB's. (grins)


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

I've read the series 4 times and listened to the audio book twice. (Due for another listen). From an author's point of view, the Rowling books are destined to be classics - that is outlasting their author and their century. The first four books might be good, but the last book is a masterwork of structural balance and character arc. It is built entirely on the dissolution of the structure of the first 6 books and is single threaded with a pulsating forward motion that few books have. And then, it encapsulates a dozen iconic moments, especially the one that the author imagined before she penned the first words of the first book.


Spoiler



I refer to Hagrid carrying Harry out of the forest.



Edward C. Patterson


----------



## Gertie Kindle

4Katie said:


> Wow - you guys have really thought about this. I'm learning a lot here - and wondering how much I'm missing. Now I want to join a book club to dissect every little thing!


I've been hanging out in the Potter forums since GoF. Lots of fun and great insights from some very young people.



ProfCrash said:


> I love the Potter books. I am writing book 8 in my head.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and the gang return to Hogwarts to finish their schooling. Harry is a bit confused by a school year without anyone trying to kill him. Things are normal and the kids all have a bit of difficulty adjusting to the normalcy


   

I always wanted her to do 200-250 page books featuring the adventures of Harry and Ron as aurors. Hermione being in the legal end of the _Law & Order: The World of Witchcraft and Wizardry_ series.



> I don't mind using the spoilers. I just figure everyone on a site dedicated to an e-book reader would have read the books. Especially since they came out before most of us had Kindles and were used to reading DTB's. (grins)


So true. We've probably all read the books numerous times. 



Edward C. Patterson said:


> I've read the series 4 times and listened to the audio book twice. (Due for another listen). From an author's point of view, the Rowling books are destined to be classics - that is outlasting their author and their century. The first four books might be good, but the last book is a masterwork of structural balance and character arc. It is built entirely on the dissolution of the structure of the first 6 books and is single threaded with a pulsating forward motion that few books have. And then, it encapsulates a dozen iconic moments, especially the one that the author imagined before she penned the first words of the first book.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I refer to Hagrid carrying Harry out of the forest.
> 
> 
> 
> Edward C. Patterson


Thanks, Ed. Your spoiler made me cry again. 

I can't wait until after the movie so I can read HBP again.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

Glad to move yer -  but I was so moved when JK Rowling during an interview said:


Spoiler



"I sat there in the train station, closed my eyes and saw Hagrid, the giant carrying Harry out of the woods. It was the defining moment for me."


 I said to myself, that's an author after my own heart. She had a vision to share, didn't know exactly how to share it and had a shifting age audience to share it with. I mean, HP is NOT a children's book. Although Grimm fairy tales take up the same theme and are just as non-juvenile, the theme of Harry Potter is, in the words of Miss Rowling:


Spoiler



DEATH


. The same theme that Tolkien picked. And what a way these master's of fantasy have to serve us up the dark Hollows as sweet inevitabilities, extensions of the process.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## jrector

I had no idea.


----------



## Greg Banks

> I mean, HP is NOT a children's book.


I would say that the first two are indeed children's books, especially the first one. But somehow she managed to masterfully allow the characters and the story to grow up with each book, anticipating that her readers would be growing up with the books as well. I don't know if you see many series where the stories themselves grow up with the characters.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Greg Banks said:


> I would say that the first two are indeed children's books, especially the first one. But somehow she managed to masterfully allow the characters and the story to grow up with each book, anticipating that her readers would be growing up with the books as well. I don't know if you see many series where the stories themselves grow up with the characters.


Yes, she did. Great story, fantastic writing. Even her writing matured throughout the series, but I don't mean that she became a better writer. She just wrote each book for an older audience.


----------



## docjered

As to JKR, I think she has a typical rags to riches mentality and her take on ebooks is just another example of this.

I often do not catch the obvious, so I guess I will just ask: Why all the blackouts on this particular thread?


----------



## Gertie Kindle

docjered said:


> As to JKR, I think she has a typical rags to riches mentality and her take on ebooks is just another example of this.
> 
> I often do not catch the obvious, so I guess I will just ask: Why all the blackouts on this particular thread?


It's possible that some people have only seen the movies and never read the books, so we don't want to spoil for them. There's no spoiler warning in the thread title. Overcautious, I'm sure. This is a forum of readers and probably everyone has read all the books.


----------



## Greg Banks

I was watching some of OoP last night, and it reminded me of a question I've always had about the story, which I guess I'll put in spoiler tags? Anyway...



Spoiler



Why does Sirius, upon his death, fall through this mysterious doorway where voices whisper to Harry from? I can understand his death, and can guess where the doorway goes, but usually you don't put a significant device like this door in a story without a reason, and as I recall, no one ever even explains what the doorway is. I always expected that this was a sign that we would somehow see Sirius again, but we never do.



It's the one thing that still nags at me about the Potter story.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

Since the movie has been shown and is on DVD and the book has been out forever, I am not spoilering anything.

Dumbledore always talked about Harry being protected by the most powerful and difficult to understand type of magic. Harry was protected by his mothers love. The portal that Sirius passes through is some how connected or emits the magical power of love. It is one of the magics that is kept hidden from the population because of the power of the magic.

If the Ministry was able to figure out how some of the more obscure types of magic work (prophecy, love, what ever the sucking brains are) then they could create an incredibly powerful weapon. Such a weapon, in the wrong hands, could be devastating. So the experimentation is hidden. The Ministry wants the power but wants to prevent other Ministries or members of the population from being able to channel that power.

The doorway is probably an attempt to connect people to past loved ones. Perhaps it is a larger version


Spoiler



of the stone created by the three brothers that allows a person to talk to the deceased. It could very well be that the idea for the portal comes from the Beadle (sp) stories. We know that there are imitation invisibility cloaks, probably based on the story. We know that people believed in the wand that Dumbledore eventually gained control of. Probably some folks even knew the Grindenwald had the wand and that Dumbledore had the wand. So it is not a stretch to think that someone thought that creating the effect of the rock would be a good idea, hence the portal.



At least, that is my interpretation of events.


----------



## Greg Banks

You could be right. It does make sense, and it's a connection I never made before.

Ugh! I SO want to read these books again, but not my bulky print copies. I need to go find JKR and shake some sense into her!


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

I was always impressed by "the mother's love" bit as ultimately Mother's Love


Spoiler



saves his life - that mother being Narcisa Malfoy.



I'm heading out to see the movie now.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## RavenclawPrefect

It is not a secret I am a huge fan of these books. I want to shake people who dismiss them as "children's books" (not that anything is wrong with children's books) Anyone who has read the entire series knows these are so NOT written for children for all that they were published and targeted children as the reader. I have been a mod on a HP board since 2003 and the level of discussion and really looking at these books is phenomenal. You can go back to the first book and see things in place that won't come to play until the final book.

I would also recommend you check out the Harry Potter Lexicon (hp-lexicon.org) It is a fantastic resource for the books (and marginally the movies)

I am currently re-reading HBP again. I read it 3 times when it first came out and then tossed it down in disgust. It is holding up much better after several years of being ignored.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

I loved HBP when it first came out. Love it.

I can honestly say that I did not love DH. I actually think that it is a bit disjointed and cumbersome.


Spoiler



I thnk what I really disliked is that we don't spend enough time at Hogwarts. I know why we don't spend time at Hogwarts, Harry and his friends are not there. But it ignores the main location of the entire series for the vast majority of the book. We know little to nothing about what is happening to all of the secondary characters that we care about (Neville, Ginny, Cho) until the very end. I get that we needed to follow the horcruxes hunt. I like that it was not easy for Harry and the gang to find the horcruxes easily. I understand the decision but I still hate it. I wish she would write another book on what was happening at Hogwarts during the seventh year. I think I would find that much more enjoyable (albeit hard to read) then what we saw in DH. And I hated the epilogue. It was just there. Sort of tacked on to the end.



OK, I still think spoilers for books that have been out for ages is silly. Especially if we are trying to protect people who have seen the movies and not read the books. I might be in the minority but read the books. They are better then the movies any way. Perhaps I am becoming a crumudgen in my old age (grins). Since the board has decided that this is the Status Quo I will do it but I feel the occasional need to say that I think it is silly.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

I can tell you that there are people reading these threads who have just started the series.  We probably should put "spoiler alert" in the subject.  I can do that.  I still think the spoiler block for the later books is a nice considerate touch.  Everyone knows that you can read the blacked out text by putting the cursor over it, right?    And I've only read the series once.   

Betsy


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

IMHO, and IMNSHO, DH is the masterwork of the entire series . . . oh, h . . .I'm coming . . . Sorry. Got to leave. The Hogwarts Express is ready to drive me to the inema.  "Hold your nargles, I'm coming"  

Edward C. Potter . . . . . . . . . no that's not right it's . . . .


----------



## akpak

Greg Banks said:


> Ugh! I SO want to read these books again, but not my bulky print copies. I need to go find JKR and shake some sense into her!


For those of you who won't "pirate" her books (even though it is sooo easy to do so), consider this:
You paid for them. You have the DTB versions, and Fair Use doctrine *does* allow you to create "backup copies" of any copyrighted work you own.

Technically, it might only be legal if you made the copies yourself (ie cut up your books and scanned them, or typed them).

In my case, I feel I should have the right to only have to purchase ONE copy of something (be it book, movie or CD) and be able to consume said media in any format I choose. Alas, current copyright law is terrible. Therefore I have absolutely no problem "pirating" things I already own in other formats.

I AM NOT A LAWYER. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I can tell you that there are people reading these threads who have just started the series. We probably should put "spoiler alert" in the subject. I can do that. I still think the spoiler block for the later books is a nice considerate touch. Everyone knows that you can read the blacked out text by putting the cursor over it, right?  And I've only read the series once.
> 
> Betsy


See, that I can get behind. Thank you for working with the young curmudgeon. (grins)


----------



## marianneg

Greg Banks said:


> I was watching some of OoP last night, and it reminded me of a question I've always had about the story, which I guess I'll put in spoiler tags? Anyway...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Why does Sirius, upon his death, fall through this mysterious doorway where voices whisper to Harry from? I can understand his death, and can guess where the doorway goes, but usually you don't put a significant device like this door in a story without a reason, and as I recall, no one ever even explains what the doorway is. I always expected that this was a sign that we would somehow see Sirius again, but we never do.
> 
> 
> 
> It's the one thing that still nags at me about the Potter story.


I always figured that it was just another of the Ministry's experiments.


Spoiler



You know they were messing with time from that jar with the bird, wasn't it, that continually hatched and un-hatched? The portal was part of their experiments with death. Maybe they were hoping to learn how to bring people back.


----------



## KindleKay (aka #1652)

akjak said:


> For those of you who won't "pirate" her books (even though it is sooo easy to do so), consider this:
> You paid for them. You have the DTB versions, and Fair Use doctrine *does* allow you to create "backup copies" of any copyrighted work you own.
> 
> Technically, it might only be legal if you made the copies yourself (ie cut up your books and scanned them, or typed them).
> 
> In my case, I feel I should have the right to only have to purchase ONE copy of something (be it book, movie or CD) and be able to consume said media in any format I choose. Alas, current copyright law is terrible. Therefore I have absolutely no problem "pirating" things I already own in other formats.
> 
> I AM NOT A LAWYER. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

akjak said:


> You paid for them. You have the DTB versions, and Fair Use doctrine *does* allow you to create "backup copies" of any copyrighted work you own.


I have bought both the hardbacks and paperbacks. I know there are other people on KB that own paper copies and audio books. I've also bought a number of copies and given them away. As far as I'm concerned, JKR has gotten her monies worth from me. That won't stop me from legally buying the e-books as well if she ever comes to her senses.


----------



## KindleKay (aka #1652)

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> That won't stop me from legally buying the e-books as well if she ever comes to her senses.


Agreed! If she ever does release the books in eBook format, I will purchase them legally so that she will get her money from me.


----------



## Aravis60

marianner said:


> I always figured that it was just another of the Ministry's experiments.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> You know they were messing with time from that jar with the bird, wasn't it, that continually hatched and un-hatched? The portal was part of their experiments with death. Maybe they were hoping to learn how to bring people back.


This is what I thought too.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

Back . . . wonderful. Going again on Saturday. Already ticketed.

Edward C. Patteson


----------



## luvmy4brats

Won't go in the other thread yet. Just got off work and have decided I can't wait until I can see it with family. At the theater now. 

Gertie's fault. She gave a glowing review of Michael Gambon. This I must see.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

akjak said:


> For those of you who won't "pirate" her books (even though it is sooo easy to do so), consider this:
> You paid for them. You have the DTB versions, and Fair Use doctrine *does* allow you to create "backup copies" of any copyrighted work you own.
> 
> Technically, it might only be legal if you made the copies yourself (ie cut up your books and scanned them, or typed them).
> 
> In my case, I feel I should have the right to only have to purchase ONE copy of something (be it book, movie or CD) and be able to consume said media in any format I choose. Alas, current copyright law is terrible. Therefore I have absolutely no problem "pirating" things I already own in other formats.
> 
> I AM NOT A LAWYER. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.


I'm not a lawyer either, I'm a quilter.  But I do know that copyright law is extremely complicated, having read bunches as it pertains to what I do, and I'm not convinced that this is exactly right, at least as it pertains to books. I'd love to see a citation. 

At any rate, as a visual artist whose works and writings are copyrighted, I do appreciate the respect for copyright I see on these boards. 

Betsy


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Edward C. Patterson said:


> Back . . . wonderful. Going again on Saturday. Already ticketed.
> 
> Edward C. Patteson


Yes. wonderful. going again next week.


----------



## danfan

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> If no one else has done it, I'll start a new thread for the movie when I get back ... if I can see through my tears. I wish someone else was playing Dumbledore. I can't stand Michael Gambon. He brings absolutely nothing to the character. Richard Harris was marginally better. Sean Connery would have been perfect. But then he's perfect anyway.


I don't like Gambon much, either. I did like Richard Harris though & I'd hoped for Ian McKellan instead of Gambon, but I wondered if viewers would just think of Gandalf when they saw him.

Looking forward to seeing the film on Sunday. My kids are both at scout camps this week so I promised them I would wait. Hoping this is better than the last movie. I was so disappointed with that & have deliberately not re-read the book so I don't spend the whole film comparing like I did last time.


----------



## akpak

I think Gambon has the right look for Dumbledore, but he was never able to nail the "twinkle" that should be in Albus' eyes most of the time.

He was just too... Grave. Harris was far better but alas.


----------



## 4Katie

akjak said:


> I think Gambon has the right look for Dumbledore, but he was never able to nail the "twinkle" that should be in Albus' eyes most of the time.


Exactly! And he doesn't have the warmth that made be BELIEVE Dumbledore.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

4Katie said:


> Exactly! And he doesn't have the warmth that made be BELIEVE Dumbledore.


I agree, but have you seen the movie yet? Gambon finally got it. He really, really got it. He was magnificent in The Cave when Harry is force feeding him the potion. (chillbumps) I'm going to see it again next week.


----------



## r0b0d0c

Wow! this is the longest thread I've read in "The Book Corner" about a series of books that has never been available on the Kindle! 



Sure wish Ms. Rowling would reconsider! Mrs. r0b0d0c and I are reading our DTB copies to catch up before seeing the newest movie. This would be so much easier on our Kindles...


----------



## 4Katie

r0b0d0c said:


> Wow! this is the longest thread I've read in "The Book Corner" about a series of books that has never been available on the Kindle!


lol - Hadn't thought of that!



> Sure wish Ms. Rowling would reconsider! Mrs. r0b0d0c and I are reading our DTB copies to catch up before seeing the newest movie. This would be so much easier on our Kindles...


I'm a relative newbie here... what does DTB mean?


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

DTB=Dead Tree Book or Death of a Tree Book, a term that many traditional published authors hate as much as Indie authors hate the tern "self-published." It's funny, becuse DTB doesn;t really mean Traditionally Published, because most of the Indie authors have their books in both eBook and paperback. Heck, one excellent author on Kindleboards is about to have an audio book. However, because of the sensitivity of the word "Dead" a happy acronym has evolved, DTB. 

Edward C. Patterson
(I have 13 published DTBs)


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Edward C. Patterson said:


> DTB=Dead Tree Book or Death of a Tree Book, a term that many traditional published authors hate as much as Indie authors hate the tern "self-published." It's funny, becuse DTB doesn;t really mean Traditionally Published, because most of the Indie authors have their books in both eBook and paperback. Heck, one excellent author on Lindleboards is about to have an audio book. However, because of the sensitivity of the word "Dead" a happy acronym has evolved, DTB.
> 
> Edward C. Patterson
> (I have 13 published DTBs)


Yeah. . . .cause "DTB" could easily mean "Digital-Text Book".


----------



## danfan

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> I agree, but have you seen the movie yet? Gambon finally got it. He really, really got it. He was magnificent in The Cave when Harry is force feeding him the potion. (chillbumps) I'm going to see it again next week.


Oh I still haven't seen it! We bought tickets to see it yesterday but when we got to the theater, it was CLOSED due to a power outage!


----------



## RavenclawPrefect

I am reading Deathly Hallows again for the first time in about a year now. I am towards the end and let me tell you, the impact is still there even though I know how it all ends.


----------



## danfan

ravenclawprefect said:


> I am reading Deathly Hallows again for the first time in about a year now. I am towards the end and let me tell you, the impact is still there even though I know how it all ends.


That's the only book I disliked. Verrry disappointed. I re-read it and started writing notes to myself, on all the things I had a problem with, but I couldn't get past halfway on the second reading. Maybe I'll try again one day.


----------



## 4Katie

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> I agree, but have you seen the movie yet? Gambon finally got it. He really, really got it. He was magnificent in The Cave when Harry is force feeding him the potion. (chillbumps) I'm going to see it again next week.


I'm glad to hear that. There have been moments when he seemed to have that sparkle, but overall I've been disappointed.

Tomorrow night I'll see how he does in DH.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

4Katie said:


> I'm glad to hear that. There have been moments when he seemed to have that sparkle, but overall I've been disappointed.
> 
> Tomorrow night I'll see how he does in DH.


Gambon actually displayed depth and emotion. He didn't just speak the lines like he usually does. Hope you enjoy.


----------



## MamaProfCrash

danfan said:


> That's the only book I disliked. Verrry disappointed. I re-read it and started writing notes to myself, on all the things I had a problem with, but I couldn't get past halfway on the second reading. Maybe I'll try again one day.


The ending I liked. It was the first 3/4 of the book that seemed long and lacking to me.


----------



## koolmnbv

I posted in the other HP thread but i will say it here also. I really need to read this entire series. I have seen all the movies and I have read the 1st book A LONG time ago. But with the movies lately although I enjoy the newer ones I have left feeling more confused and with even more questions. I think if i read all the books in order that would help alot and then if I re-watch the movies I will understand alot more and can make proper judgements. 

I also want to do that same thing with the LoTR series.


----------



## 4Katie

koolmnbv said:


> I posted in the other HP thread but i will say it here also. I really need to read this entire series. I have seen all the movies and I have read the 1st book A LONG time ago. But with the movies lately although I enjoy the newer ones I have left feeling more confused and with even more questions. I think if i read all the books in order that would help alot and then if I re-watch the movies I will understand alot more and can make proper judgements.


That's what we're going to do before the 7th movie comes out - read the first book, watch the movie; read the second book, watch the movie...


----------



## MamaProfCrash

I would highly encourage you to read the books. They are wonderful.

The movies do not do them justice. My nine year old nephew is able to identify were the movies are changing things that happen in the book and all the areas that are left out. Which means that the differences are pretty obvious.

I know that the movies are enjoyed by many of the fans of the books. I am one of those people who struggles with watching anything taken from a written source that I know. The only comic book movie that I watch in the theater are the recent Batman movies. I watch those because the character of Batman is so close to the character written by Frank Miller in the Dark Knight returns in terms of attitude and behavior that the movies are enjoyable. I watched the first X-Men movie and went nuts with all the changes that were made. Bobby Drake was an original member of the X-Men not a student being taught by Scott and Jean. The members of the X-Men were never actually teachers. It is a long, long list. 

I was petrified when Lord of the Rings came out that they were going to screw it up and was amazed how much of the feel and spirit of the books was found in the movie. I thought they did an amazing job and made some good decisions about what to drop and what to keep. 

The first HP movie was good. I enjoyed it. The second was ok, the third was awful. They moved from keeping the awe and more complex relations and interactions in the books with some action to all action all the time. It might make for a good flick but you loose so much of who the characters are and how the characters are developing as people that it hurts the storyline.


----------



## 4Katie

I think the biggest problems with the HP movies are that the books are so long the movies can't possibly include everything. What they do, they do very well, but there's so much missing.

I was horrified at the World Quidditch Cup Tournament at the beginning of the Goblet of Fire movie. If you hadn't read the book, you were seriously cheated. In the book it was a really big deal and was described in such detail I felt like I was there. But it only lasted what seemed like a few seconds in the movie. We were shocked!


----------



## Gertie Kindle

ProfCrash said:


> I would highly encourage you to read the books. They are wonderful.


Definitely. There is so much substance to these books. I was talking to someone today who had never read them or seen the movies. I explained to her all of the classical and mythological allusions there are in the books. All the clues and all the red herrings. But, "somtimes a mouth organ is just a mouth organ." 



> The movies do not do them justice. My nine year old nephew is able to identify were the movies are changing things that happen in the book and all the areas that are left out. Which means that the differences are pretty obvious.


I watched the first movie with my HP book club. I think we watched about 30-40 minutes and I offered them a house point for every difference they found between the book and the movie. In that short time, they found 70+ differences.



> I was petrified when Lord of the Rings came out that they were going to screw it up and was amazed how much of the feel and spirit of the books was found in the movie. I thought they did an amazing job and made some good decisions about what to drop and what to keep.


PJ & Co. did an amazing adaptation of the books. It was so obvious that he loved the material, which is why, I think, avid fans of the books enjoyed the movies.



> The first HP movie was good. I enjoyed it. The second was ok, the third was awful. They moved from keeping the awe and more complex relations and interactions in the books with some action to all action all the time. It might make for a good flick but you loose so much of who the characters are and how the characters are developing as people that it hurts the storyline.


I liked the first two because they brought the books to life. I can't stand the third. I watch it when I'm on an HP marathon, but I'll usually do something else while it's on.

If I wanted to pick apart this last movie, I would find many, many flaws. But I think the totality of the movie was true to the essence of the book. I enjoyed it for what it was; part of the HP _*movie *_franchise.


----------



## marianneg

4Katie said:


> I was horrified at the World Quidditch Cup Tournament at the beginning of the Goblet of Fire movie. If you hadn't read the book, you were seriously cheated. In the book it was a really big deal and was described in such detail I felt like I was there. But it only lasted what seemed like a few seconds in the movie. We were shocked!


Meh, I agreed with that call. Yeah, it was incredible in the book, but it really didn't move the story forward at all, except to introduce Cederic and the Death-Eater incident after.


Spoiler



And the house-elf saving the empty seat, of course, but that wasn't really essential, either, just a nice gotcha moment.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

marianner said:


> Meh, I agreed with that call. Yeah, it was incredible in the book, but it really didn't move the story forward at all, except to introduce Cederic and the Death-Eater incident after.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> And the house-elf saving the empty seat, of course, but that wasn't really essential, either, just a nice gotcha moment.


I agreed, too. They put in all they needed of the QWC. I would like to have the scene where the Weasleys pick up Harry at the Dursleys before the match. That was major fun. But I can see why they left that out, too. I'll just have to read it again (such a hardship  ).

I would like to have seen Luna commentating on Quidditch instead of the pointless waitress scene (have I said that 500 times, yet?).


----------



## 4Katie

My problem is that I don't want them to leave anything out...


----------



## Aravis60

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> I would like to have seen Luna commentating on Quidditch instead of the pointless waitress scene (have I said that 500 times, yet?).


I agree. Luna is one of my favorite characters.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Aravis60 said:


> I agree. Luna is one of my favorite characters.


At least as Harry was circulating around the Christmas party, we could have heard a couple of lines on the rotfang conspiracy.


----------



## srmalloy

mlewis78 said:


> I've only heard that she wasn't going to write any more HP books and that she would write her next book for adults.


Ahh... Harry Potter and the Strange New Feelings?


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Deathly Hallows spoilers:  





I just finished reading for the umpteenth time, HP-7.  Remember that in the Room of Requirement, Vincent Crabbe casts a fiendfyre spell and sets the room and himself on fire?  Jamie Waylette who plays Crabbe, had been arrested several months ago for growing cannabis plants, so he's out of the movie.  Gregory Goyle (Josh Herdman) will be the one who does the dying in the RoR.  

I'm glad the producers made that decision.  

Josh also says the current plan for splitting the movie is after the snatchers grab the trio, but before they are taken to Malfoy Manor.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Gertie Kindle 'Turn to Page 390' said:


> Jamie Waylette who plays Crabbe, had been arrested several months ago for growing cannabis plants, so he's out of the movie.


Once a Slytherin. . . .always a Slytherin. . . . ..


----------



## Gertie Kindle

Ann in Arlington said:


> Once a Slytherin. . . .always a Slytherin. . . . ..


So true.


----------



## DYB

Okay, I'm a little late to the "Dumbledore is gay" discussion, but - that Carnegie Hall event was not the first time Rowling told someone that Dumbledore was gay.  In one of the movies the screenwriter wrote a reference to a woman in Dumbledore's past.  Rowling - who read scripts ahead of time - made them take it out because Dumbledore was gay.  And the revelation that Dumbledore was gay makes his relationship with Grindelwald much more complex and interesting, I think.

There's something I've noticed about most fantasy fiction, as well as sci-fi: the almost complete absence of homosexuality.  (Okay, there's a gay psychopath in "Dune.")  With all the romance and raging hormones in the Harry Potter series (and beyond it), with all the snogging and all the broken hearts - not a single gay teenager.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

Spoiler



I write fantasy with lots of gay characters.



Edward C. Patterson


----------



## 4Katie

Honestly... I could care less if Dumbledore is gay or straight. Who he may or may not have slept with is not integral to any of the books.

I really don't get it... unless you're going after my husband or any under-age minor, I don't care who you sleep with!


----------



## MamaProfCrash

I don't know, I have a sneaking suspicion that a gay teenagers in a relationship in any book for young adults would cause a bit of an uproar these days. Gay teenagers in Harry Potter probably would have caused even more controversies then the magic in the series. 

This tells me that society has a decent distance to go when it comes to homosexuality. Society as a whole is fine with teenagers being teenagers and snogging, as long as they are different sexs. Same sex snogging in Harry Potter, books or movies, would cause an uproar.

I could be wrong, but I doubt it.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

And that would be music to my ears, having been a teen who could have used a good stunning charm in the schoolyard when accosted by the Slitherins. But now I'm older than Dumbledore, and, maybe not gayer, but certainly more evident. Still, it's very hard to find a decend master wand when you need it, Merlin's Beard.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## mlewis78

Edward C. Patterson said:


> And that would be music to my ears, having been a teen who could have used a good stunning charm in the schoolyard when accosted by the Slitherins. But now I'm older than Dumbledore, and, maybe not gayer, but certainly more evident. Still, it's very hard to find a decend master wand when you need it, Merlin's Beard.
> 
> Edward C. Patterson


Ed, you are not older than Dumbledore. Wasn't he about 150?

It's bad enough that some fundamentalists demonized the Harry Potter books as they are. Says more about them than the books.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

150. That's about right.  

Ed Patterson

Actually I'm 8.8 years old in dog years.


----------



## DYB

ProfCrash>  You're not wrong. I agree that the controversy would have been huge.  But it doesn't mean it shouldn't have been done.  Rowling did use the word "bitch" in the last book; she was obviously taking chances!

Frankly, I always thought Ron should have been gay...


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

She also has Ron say: "It's an


Spoiler



efing


 Horcrux Harry.

I keep track of such things. 

Edward C. Patterson

Uncle Vernon does the


Spoiler



efing


 honors in Book 6.


----------



## DYB

Ah, yes, I forgot about the "effings!"


----------



## MamaProfCrash

I think it would have been great if JKR had a gay teen or two in the book. I think she knew that sales of the book and the movie revenues would have taken a large hit and decided not to include openly gay charaters in the books for that reason.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

I think she was just writing a story and didn't even think about the sexuality of the characters until it got to be so big that it was getting a lot of media attention and then she felt she had to say something.

BTW, I want to publicly say THANK YOU to Betsy who kindly carried for me a set of Harry Potter books from England on her recent trip.  I now have the British edition in paperback, and the US edition in hardback.  DS has the US edition in paperback.

And, you know, if they were offered legally, I'd buy 'em again for Kindle.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

Ann:

Do you have the audiobooks on CD. I've read the US versions a few times, but I have a day job where I can listen to music or books, my choice (I now listen to the text to speech all day while I work), but before that I went through the entire HP series twice on audio books (and S. King's Dark Tower series twice 2, and LOTR once). I'll never forget the day I stopped posting cash to


Spoiler



weep over Dobbie


 in book 7.

Ed Patterson


----------



## Ann in Arlington

I have not purchased the audio books. . . I'm not as keen on audio books except on long car rides. . . and since DH retired from the Navy we haven't had as many of those. . . .plus he has XM radio and prefers music.    Though one time we were on a trip and were taking my Dad. . .we found a channel that had a bunch of old radio shows  -- the Shadow and all -- and Dad really loved it!


----------



## Edward C. Patterson

The Shadow and Dragnet were favorites when I was growing. TV was just coming into vogue (Uncle Milty, Howdy Doody), but I remember Dragnet esepcially and the Shadow when I was a young tyke of 5 or 6.

Ed Patterson


----------

