Ovation Lavinia! I rarely feel such pleasure as I do reading you in this thread.
Lavi, you have brilliant English. Better then I do, possibly.

If the reader approaches both texts with an open mind and Harry Potter engages more, and he gets more from it, then yes, it is a better book.

If no work of art evokes some kind of response inside of you, then it isn't good. It's impossible to rate something as a masterpiece and at the same time taking some objective stance and claim you have no passion for it. If you recognise it as a masterpiece, you must hold some passion for it. Lav, you hold The Pieta as a masterpiece because of your personal attachment to it; there's nothing wrong with that. So do I. You don't rate Harry Potter a masterpiece because of your personal detachment, or rejection of it.

Quote:

Are you telling me if some spotty teenagers tell me MichaelAngel's Pity is nothing but a crappy piece of marble, should I respect him simply because he doesn't have passion for it?

If anybody claims anything to be "crappy" without giving some kind of personal elaboration, then no, their opinion merits no respect. If the same teenager responds to Harry Potter by saying it's a "boring piece of shit", I'd feel the same way. What if I say The Pieta fails to evoke in me any sympathy for the figures it depicts? Does that mean I'm wrong, because the work of Art's objective greatness automatically overrides my own opinion? And, for the record, I admire the sculpture's accurate representation of the human figure, and because of that, I rate it a masterpiece of form.
If I said Michelangelo's figures were too accurate, and argued that if Art represents the world we see in a way so as to look real, then you may as well just take a photograph of it, then I'd be wrong? What if I said it was an overly manipulative piece, intended to evoke certain emotions in us, and failed in its goal, because I rejected those values? What if I think his sculpting abilities are far inferior to other artist's? Am I wrong?

Everything, I think, is a masterpiece in its own right. It's just a case of whether or not you connect with that. You don't connect with the masterpiece inside of Harry Potter; I don't connect with the masterpiece inside of Georgia O'Keefe's work.

Actually, it's quite the opposite. I'm comparing them with a personal attitude, judging their relative, intrinsic value upon me. You can't compare them in an objective way, I don't think. Or you could, but it defeats the purpose of Art appreciation, I think; these are literary texts, written by an artist and read by his/her audience. To value any work of art over another because it has stood the test of time more is unfair, I think (though I'm not saying you do). In fact, Harry Potter is part of my school's English syllabus now, and the year below me are studying it in comparison to Tom Brown's Schooldays as an academic subject.

Yeah, it always merits intellectual engagement, but as long as it's studied.

I don't mean studied in the sense of sitting down in class and answering questions on it. It can be done alone. Studying automatically implies some academic approach, and, actually, this approach is the one that is, for me, too fussy in trying to decode the meaning and messages of works of Art. There are more abstract, more pesonal, more rewarding ways to approach texts. Take this, for example: ever read when you're tired as hell, or with something distracting your mind, and you find yourself reading the same sentence over and over again, without it registering? This is, I think, reading without studying it. Thinking back to it after reading, you won't be able to respond in any way. But if you give everything to the text, then you're engaging in it, and that means you're studying it. In fact, I don't think things have to be studied post-reading, and that the actual reading of a text is good enough. The problem in some spotty teenager's rejection of Michelangelo lies not in his response, but in that he didn't give everything into his appreciation of it. This is why I always watch a film all the way through, or why I always insist on silence when watching a film with others, or why I wear headphones when watching them alone. So that, if I reject the piece, at least I've given everything into it.

So this automatically places a prejudice against newer authors and works. It basically says that, the novels we're reading today, whichi were also written today, we have no say in the matter whether they're good or not, and it'll be long after we die when they're judged as to their greatness. Do you agree with this? I don't. Who decides what is trendy and what is "deep"? History? Perhaps, but what if you're alive in 1606, and have just seen King Lear for the first time. Everybody's raving about it; its author wrote it for a quick buck. Is it, then, only trendy Literature, and not good? Or what of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde? Written by Stevenson, again, for a quick buck,and yet there are endless social, psychological and historical comments to be found in the piece.

I don't read a novel to understand it. I read it to understand myself. All texts (works of Art) are mirrors for humanity to gaze into it. Some argue that it's the most confrontational, challenging works that make that mirror the most rewarding, and therefore award Tragedies and Drama as the best kind of Literature. But what if some philospher reaches a stage in his life of total self-contentment, and decides one day, to sit down and read a Mills and Boon novel, and thinks it's the best book he's ever read?

Thanks for reading.

Mick, but you see any difference between, say, The Magus and Harry Potter? At least in their language? And how can you explain it?

Yeah.

The Magus explores far more interesting themes for me: Truth, facade, perception, love and obsession; whenever I read it it conjures up in me a zest for all the things Urfe goes through. I feel his betrayal every time I read it, and take relish in allowing myself to get lost in, and find new things in, Conchis' cryptic maze of Chinese boxes.

I've read Harry Potter, enjoyed it immensely, and therefore think its great. Approaching it with thoughtful analysis is the wrong way to judge it; of course, as a novel primarily intended for children (adults' love for it was a happy coincidence, I think), to reduct its quality due to it having no deep, inner meaning is like disclaiming The Magus because children can't understand it.

In case you reply before I edit, another paragraph:

If somebody said to me that they found Harry Potter far superior to The Magus because it spoke to them more, because they hold a personal love for fantasy fiction and how it inventively turns today's mundane education into some fantastical other world to which we can aspire and relate, then I have no problem with that.

If I said The Magus was better than Harry Potter because it had stood the test of time more, and was a more serious novel, I'd piss Potter-ites off; and in turn, I wouldn't respect anybody's opinion if they said The Magus was shit.

Of course they explore subjects of different depth. But still there's the level of language. You think Harry Potter as well written?

I find Rowling's language completely appropriate to the style and tone of the book. Do I find Fowles a better writer, though? Yes, because he engages me more. When I read Fowles' work, I suspend my disbelief emphatically, and embrace his characters and style as fictional embodiments of myself and my own world; I see many traits in Nicholas Urfe which I find in myself. When I read Harry Potter (which, ironically, was for school, about four years ago), I also suspended my disbelief. Which is, I think, good enough; especially for a fantasy novel.

Rowling is a far better writer than Puzo, I think.

To be fair, though, my thoughts on Rowling's language stems from my (vague) memory of it; if I revisited it today, I may well find it atrocious.

I know many girls who cried at the newest Harry Potter novel. If that doesn't merit praise for its use of language, I don't know what does. You need some kind of linguistic skill to evoke that kind of response in your readers when you're wanting to.

That must not lead you astray, girls often cry about sheer nothings.

I cannot agree here.
Puzo's writing can be at times very uneven, but at his best he's a genius. His prose is excellent, deep, and able to say many things between the lines, which I value most of all in good literature. But I won't start one more discussion on Puzo here, I've spent enough time analyzing the depth of his writing talent in other sections of these boards.

ok, there must be some generational gap here, Capo. I surrender! But you are still my fav BBs' spotless teenager. May I hope I'm still your fav BBs' teacher?

JM, this is extremely rewarding for me. No kidding!

This is plain lie. But I'll pretend I believe it anyway. I'm in a desperate need of flattering words at the moment...

Lavi, you are just the best. The best. You are like sunshine. We all love you. I suggest we write your nickname LOVEY.

WOW, that's some flattering stuff! I think I'm feeling better now. Thank you, JM. Anytime I need some outrageously flattering words I'll ask you!

I'm no good with words.

Would you allow flattering actions? (Please, allow me.)

And that was too much of an easy surrender; I'm disappointed. But yeah, I'll be your student any day.

you are more than good with words, Capo. Trust me.

You are legally an adult, right? I don't risk jail, do I?

I cannot compete with Harry Potter, Capo. He uses his tricks and I refuse using mine on you, dear!

Read The Camel Club this weekend. Typical potbopiler "thriller." Full of holes, cliches, and had an outcome I figured out halfway through the book. YAWN

Last semester I read this and enjoyed it the most out of the first 4 books. It was the longest up to that point but in some parts it felt like it wasn't long enough. I can't wait until I can read Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix this summer.



I also got this for Christmas and read it while I was in New York. I enjoyed it but was very disappointed. I was hoping it would pick up right where For the Love of the Game left off but unfortunately it didn't. It was about his life but also about his Jordan Brand and business. Basically it was just about the qualities Michael Jordan possessed, how he's used them in the business world as well as the basketball court, and how he's been successful

Mmmm....2 questions, one for Capo, one for Lavinia...

Capo :

I know a dozen of girls who cry at "Armageddon" (there are at least 2 known tear-jerker scenes in this movie)and also at "Pearl Harbor" -(one of the last scenes)

Is Michael Bay a great director?

----
----

Lavinia :

Did you read any of the Harry Potter books?

-if you did, which one?

I am currently reading "Shine" by Star Jones (Reynolds). I'm a big fan of hers (sorry I know most people here probably don't like her). I didn't realize how appropo (sp?) this book would be for me. She was 41 when she decided to make a change and when she realized how unhappy (although very successful) she was. She decided to lose weight and find the man of her dreams. The subtitle is Shine: A Physical, Emotional, and Spiritual Journey to Finding Love And what do you know? She did, right in the middle of all that changing. It's a great book and I recommend it for all middle-aged women looking to improve ~ whether it be to marry, remarry or just feel better about yourself and life. Here's a link at amazon.

I read some extracts of the first one (can't remember the title). I had to because my pupils were absolutely thrilled with it and I wanted to realize what it was all about. And I still think what I thought then. It's harmless. If you add some "real" literature.

Great autobiography! Very inspirational. I'm sure even non-wrestling fans would enjoy it.

I just finished up reading The Great Gatsby for school, and, despite the depressed mood it put me in (realistic and too much like life... ), I really enjoyed it. I've had great luck with school books, and this is probably one of my favorites, now. I couldn't believe how easy it was to read, compared to ones like A Tale of Two Cities, yet it also had the "deep" meanings to it.

Anyway, after finding out that a movie was made of it, I'm hoping to rent it.

Has anyone here read the book or seen the film?

I had to read the book and watch the movie for 11th grade English.

I really liked both, but maybe I'm weird. No one else in my class liked either.

Robert Redford was nice to look at anyway :p

Thanks, Bogey. Either you're not weird, or we're both weird. I always find myself getting much more into the books we read than most of my friends - English is my favorite subject, though, so maybe that's the reason.

I will definitely pay special attention to Robert Redford due to your recommendation...for character analysis, of course.

Gatsby's character was just so sad, though. I think I was just being greedy, and I wanted an idealistic story since it was just a story, and when it ended up reminding me so much of "real" life, it just left me feeling depressed. But it truly was a great book. Anyway, thanks for the input.

A friend of mine recommended I read this and the only reason I did was because she purchased me a copy. Not a bad book but it didn't have the affect on me that I think she was hoping it would.

"Discovering the Secret of a Man's Soul" is certainly a tag line which would sell itself to me. You recommend it?

I've just finished, the other night, The French Lieutenant's Woman, by Fowles. A mesmerisingly seductive, always unpredictable, richly observed and brilliantly woven novel, layered, complex and utterly of its time. Perhaps a definitive dissection of Victorian society, sexual repression, social emancipation. I could almost read it again.

No I personally wouldn't recommend it

Im currently reading the book "REBECCA" i think the title is very catching and in your face. I first watched the film and thought it was good and now i am going to find out if the book is any better!

Rebecca (about the novel)

I just finished Steve Martin's The Pleasure of My Company, and I loved it.

Amazon Page

It was beautifully written and, though an easy read, captured and held my attention completely. I've enjoyed Martin as a comic for years now, but I never would've expected to find such sheer poetry in his literary work.

I found a lot of the character's OCD habits familiar, though to a less severe degree, thankfully. I've believed for a while now that many people possess at least a hint of OCD - in some way, we have our own distinct quirks that inhibit normalcy yet give us the sense of righteousness. Maybe I'm just crazy, but I truly felt for him and appreciated his feelings on love and life.

I was certain that someone in my family had a copy of Shopgirl, so I'll hopefully get my hands on that, next.

I'd be interested in reading John Fante's "Ask the dust". I read enthustiastic reviews of it. Anybody read it?