HARRY POTTER IV
Round 0

Sharon Taylor

HI All: Well, I have finished the fourth book - no spoilers, I promise (I'm too afraid of that curse, June!) but I will say the hype was worth it, the book is very good, very funny, and even though longer than the others, the pace is well sustained all the way through. By the way, I was disappointed in Jack Zipes' interview in which he said the the books were formulaic, sexist and may be keeping children from reading the classics. I'm sorry to have missed the "defense" offered by a member of the list - I'm sure it was well-argued. Enjoy the book, everyone!

Michael Joseph

Congratulations, Sharon! You have just won the Evelyn Wood Memorial child_lit commendation "4 fst rdg f a bst sllng chldrns bk 4 20'0! (and my own personal congratulations!) Your special prize is already in the mail!

Sharon Taylor

Thanks Michael! My 13 year old daughter ripped the book out of her father's hand at 10:00 this morning, and at 2:20 this afternoon she is on p 517. So far, she thinks it stacks up to the other books. I guess speed reading (read obsession) runs in the family!

Mindy Jones

My thirteen-year-old finished the book today and I offer her general comments...... She seemed drained at the end but nevertheless declared the book to be her favorite thus far. She said it was darker and deeper than the other books, and that the characters were really growing up and that fact makes her a little sad.

Michael Joseph

I'm very glad and relieved to hear that preliminary reviews of HP4 are good, even if only from the vox populi. Although I don't really think Rowling's success can do us much good, I do think her failure can do us harm. I mean, her success will tend to increase positive attention to children's literature, but the general notion of children's literature is really divided from academic notions, to which for the most part we are committed, and the valuation of children's literature might even call into question the validity of reading it critically.

Of course, the split isn't that sharp--the rhetorical valuation of children's literature which is popularly embraced does influence academic work, and even infiltrates it through the aesthetic notions popularized by New Criticism, founded as they are upon Humanism and the Umanistas' central concern with Classical rhetoric. In some sense, the issue of historical fiction reflects the severe examination of classical rhetoric within academic studies, and the mode of such examination will not be positively affected by a general celebration of children's lit. The philosophical meditations of c.l. academics will in all likelihood still be looked at askance by folks who see the rhetorical values of HP4 as self-evident, and by colleagues who will find the popularity of HP4 and the surrounding cultural responses inelegant and noisy.

However, I do celebrate (champagne's in a brown paper bag in my desk drawer) because I think, were HP4 or JKR4 to fail, there would be a backlash of negative emotion, which would spawn the usual pernicious opinions (i.e., HP was overrated in the first place, too much has been made of it and c.l. anyway, the "best" of the bunch was not that great--just think of the current general enjoyment of the Macarena), and, inevitably, some of the academic discourse would be bound to adopt a defensive, expiatory, tone, which, I think, would be very, very, sad.

Linda DeGroff

I, too, scorn some of the books loved by the masses. But, I don't scorn them BECAUSE they are loved by the masses. I get the sense that Michael Joseph's scorn of HP IV is based on the readings and reactions of others rather than his own reading (if I am wrong, I hope MJ will inform us). Give us some specifics from HP IV from the LIT CRIT point of view.

Michael Joseph

Wow, "Michael Joseph's scorn of HP IV" certainly got MY attention, Linda. I said I was relieved that readers liked the book (although it apparently failed to charm J. Zipes, whose criticism was paraphrased for us); while I can see how one might somehow interpret my reference to the divide between recreational reading and professional criticism as arrogance, I did not mean to imply any condescension, but rather to express a sense of gratitude and relief.

By the way, I don't think that books praised by the vox populi (what I said, roughly) translates into books loved by the masses (what you heard). The vox populi implies popular opinion or sentiment, exclusive of weighted or authoritative opinon: people speaking as people. The masses, the larger segment of the population, silting off the wealthy or privileged, comes with an inescapable political meaning. Books loved by the masses implies a reification of a unique social point of view and unique political purpose. So, while, after reading it (as i plan to do this week-end), I might join my voice to the general praise of (my) HP4, I would quickly separate myself from the Republican (which is to say anti-Empirial) sentiments militating in support of (your) HP-IV.

I don't have any specific lit crit citations for any of the HP books to offer, although perhaps others who do would be generous enough to share them.

June Cummins

The review of HP4 in USA Today was not favorable. Most of us probably don't value reviews in that publication as much as we do in others, but USA Today has a tremendously wide readership. This could indicate the beginning of the "backlash" trend so popular in our society. Sometimes when something becomes extremely popular and super-cool, the way to be even cooler is to "dis" that something. We might be seeing the onset of that competitive "I'm cooler than the masses" sentiment. I have not read the book (although I've lugged it up and down New York state and between New York and Chicago via two planes, four trains, and a taxi cab--my left bicep is noticeably bigger!), but I noticed that some of the USA Today's reviewer's criticisms were similar to a few I made (in an otherwise very favorable review) of the first two HP books which will appear in the Michigan Quarterly Review. These criticisms have to do with repetitive, predictable plot structures and a flattening of characterization, especially when it comes to stock "bad guys."

I'm not too worried about "bad press" as long as there continues to be "good press." I think that the notion that the aesthetic and ideological values of children's literature are debateable and the fact that this debate shows up in the popular press only further our visibility and credibility and, in the end, demonstrate the overall worthiness of the genre. At least, I hope so, because "negative hype" is sure to happen.

Monica Edinger

I agree with Jane Wickenden (and the Post reviewer) that it the start is a bit cludgy and could have done with some tighter editing. Clearly Rowling has her world well worked out, but needs help knowing how much to give out at a time without becoming tedious. However, I enjoyed it a lot! The USA Today review evidently liked the first two most of all; whereas others (with whom I agree) thought the second was the weaker of those out so far.

However, I must say that the size of the book is quite extraordinary. I will be curious to return to my school this fall and see how many of my new fourth graders claim to have read it. It was already a bit of a problem last year. I had to really downplay the books so kids who were clearly not enjoying them could quit them without feeling they had missed out on something significant. It is one thing to go off and see a movie so you can talk about it with your pals and quite another to get through this monster book. I suggested to my sister that she get the book tape for my ten year old niece who was enjoying a reread of an old Amber Brown last week. She is now telling me she is going to read it aloud to her which will probably take until the next one is out. Most of the nine and ten year olds I teach are not in the habit of reading books over 200 pages as a rule (the earlier Harry Potters excepted), but over 700 pages? I simply can't imagine it. I'll be curious if those kids settling out to read it now (not the speedy bookworms sorts, but the kids who usually are content with something much shorter) will stick with it to the end.

Jane Wickenden

Yes, Monica, the *size* of it! I've now finished it: have been reading it in bed, laid low by a stomach bug. It should come with a health warning and steel wrist supports ....

now what am I going to read tomorrow if I'm still off sick?? (joke)

June Cummins

Yes, I saw this review. Doesn't Maslin generally review movies? I've never seen a book review of hers--is this a common practice? Does Maslin generally review kids' books? If not, what can we make of a asking a movie reviewer to critique children's literature? Any thoughts?

Michael Joseph

Jane, try Thomas Pynchon's _Mason & Dixon_! At 773 pages it seems the only logical afterpiece (particularly if one should have a very strong and enduring preference for Historical fiction). And it is framed as a children's story (the narrator is an uncle and the audience a nephew & niece) & contains toothsome and intriguing comments about children's literature, like "The Revd only beams. One reason Humans remain young so long, compar'd to other Creatures, is that the young are useful in many ways, among them in providing daily, by way of the evil Creatures and Slaughter they love, a Denial of Mortality clamorous enough to allow their Elders release, if only for moments at a time, for Its Claims upon the Attention."

If that doesn't make you get better, nothing will!

Monica R. Edinger

(regarding Maslin -- fcl note)

She quit movie reviewing sometime last year and recently became one of the daily book reviewers. I assume she reviewed as part of her regular duties as a daily reviewer and that it is now seen as both a crossover book, for kids and adults.

Kathleen Kelly MacMillan

The USA Today review annoyed me. The criticisms there seemed to consist mostly of "This book is not appropriate for 5 year olds" when Rowling has said all along that they are going to get darker.