From: Dr. Ruth I. Gordon <Druthgo>
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 19:50:47 -0700

CCBC'ers: I've been elsewhere-ing recently and returned to see strange negative messages about Rowling's "Harry Potter." First of all, I believe it was I somewhat before ALA Midwinter who stated that DWJones was nearer to Harry than Dahl. So--I'll take both blame and credit for that. But it also seems to me that sometimes adults can really be overly critical about the literary quality of a book that is so patently popular with children. To those people I say, "Okey dokey, let 'em read James Joyce's "Finnegans Wake" and see what they say"--even if I can't spell the title correctly
(but I did leave out the apostrophe because Joyce did, too).

Let's lighten up and feel splendid that Harry has so attracted young and older readers. Anyone for a game of Quidditch? The problem with the second book is that there's far too little of Quidditch and a chapter or two really is so frightening (with the basilik [sp?]) that perhaps it should not be read as a bed time tale--just those frightening chapters.

Maybe the time has come to analyze less and show our stylistic brilliance less and enjoy more.

As we say, "Enjoy."

Big Grandma (who does--when not involved in a fast game of Q,)

================="You may not be able to change the world, but at least you can embarrass the guilty." Jessica Mitford (191796)
Received on Tue 25 May 1999 09:50:47 PM CDT