So, Simon and I braved the rain and the crowds (my goodness, the crowds!) to pick up the last Harry Potter at midnight last night. (We are dressed as wizards in case you didn't pick it).
A couple of thoughts about things Potter:
- Rowling really isn't a great writer and she writes with no ear for how words sound. The Potter books are really quite tough to read aloud (and I should know) compared to classics like the Narnia series. This to me is a test of the quality of children's literature. She writes in choppy uneven paragraphs and uses quite colourless bland language. But that isn't her gift: her gift is her sheer inventiveness with characters and ideas to fill the world she has imagined. Like Dickens, there is always something new around the next page, some new brilliantly conceived person or thing. Like Dickens (at his worst) she sometimes uses this technique to keep the plot going when it is flagging.
- The Potter books are incredibly nostalgic. Remember Enid Blyton? She channels Enid Blyton half the time: the private school setting, the two-gendered friendships, the resourcefulness of the child heroes and what have you. Have you ever read The Naughtiest Girl in the School? And Quidditch resembles Lacrosse, which is the game the Naugtiest Girl plays. Potter harks back to that British children's literature which deals with upper middle class children in schools that no-one can actually afford.
- I always like to ask kids 'what kind of a hero do you think Harry Potter is? What makes him heroic?' It isn't actually his magic that does anything. It is his courage. I think he is a very courageous person rather than a talented one. To me it is interesting that Harry Potter and his friends always are prepared to break the rules if circumstances demand it - and are rewarded for doing so.