From: Andrew Ogus <andbooks>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 11:35:13 -0700

As one of the few who does NOT especially care for the Harry Potter books I have to admit I was pleased to read of a mediocre review. However, the review I read in the NYT flabbergasted me because it was so positive. I like chocolate, but I guess I like it bittersweet! For me the best fantasy has some grounding in reality. Thus my objections to the split between the magic and mudande worlds (what is the point of it if they don't touch?); to Harry's obliviousness to his terrible experiences (as Maia Cheli-Colando points out); to the fact that the magicians let them happen without intervention. Somehow these books tap into the zeitgiest. I'm glad they get people reading. I am pleased to know that Scholastic values the physical production values of its books. By the way, re food: in The Annotated Alice Martin Gardner points out that there is a great deal of eating in the Alice books, and that small children are obsessed with eating. Rowling seems to realize that, too.
Received on Sat 05 Jun 1999 01:35:13 PM CDT