I loved every word of the first novel as well as the later books. I've read these books countless times before becoming a writer and afterwards. I haven't ever read the Harry Potter books but your analysis seems spot on. Just my two (or significantly more than two) cents
It is definitely worth reading the series as a whole especially since the opening chapter does not do the book justice. Throughout the series, Rowling has proven to be a bit erratic especially as she didn't know how it was going to end when she began it. I absolutely love these books even now, but I accept their juvenile feeling as part of the energy of the books. They are very much separated from the "Muggle" community and as such have developed a very different style of dress than one would consider normal. The people walking around in cloaks serves to set up the mentality of the wizarding community as a whole. This is important nearer to the endof the series as he has to be very selfless and be able to empathize. The later books do expect more out of the readers.Īs far as his accommodations, if Harry was in the wizarding world from the get go he would end up pampered and spoiled. Since the idea of Hogwarts is that kids are selected when they are eleven to go makes it definitely make sense that Rowling was writing to a younger audience. The first book or two are definitely pretty heavy handed with the telling and belaboring certain points, but that serves a purpose with younger children.
I am a gigantic Harry Potter nerd, so I feel like I may be able to answer a few of the questions you have posed. Very glad you commented, helps me see the bigger picture. Thanks Richard, that was very illuminating for a layman like myself. And it's interesting to see that (in my opinion) the films get worse as the series progresses while their counterpart books get better - a case of the imagination being far more effective than any amount of CGI.Īs you say, Moody, the recurring phrase "The Boy Who Lived" is a terrific hook - particularly as, from the age of 11, he has a hard job remaining the Boy Who Lived. The first book is, as you say, very visual and contains enough jokey imagery and enough caricature to ensure the book translated well to film. Throughout the septology the reader is confronted with death, abandonment, treachery, betrayal - not the stuff of kiddies' books at all. (I believe she has said she would have liked to rewrite the first two books to reflect the style of the later books and make them more attractive to an adult audience.)īooks VI and VII deal with quite horrific matters: a man who tries to make himself immortal by secreting parts of his soul in artefacts - the ripping of the soul achieved by murder. I felt that, having produced two best-sellers, JKR was given the green light to write the books exactly as she wanted them with no publisher-imposed nod to the sensibilities of younger readers. However from Book III onwards (when the appeal for adults was acknowledged with adult versions of the dust-jacket) the storyline becomes progressively more complex and darker.
Book II is still an obvious children's book although - Harry being a year older (12) - the tone is slightly older. It's simplistic and written with a fairly broad brush, although there are touches in it that, seen from the viewpoint of Book VII, hint at darker things, and show that the whole storyline was clearly envisaged before a word was written.īut it's nonetheless a children's book with the narrator strongly present in the first chapter.
"As the first book in the series, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone has a special place in the affections of the millions of readers across the world and the proof reading error about the wand in the first edition has, of course, become a treasured piece of Harry Potter arcana," Haley explains. So, why would a muggle pay so much for a book with "1 wand" listed twice? Bonhams Head of Books and Manuscripts Matthew Haley offers his take in the auction listing.