From: CMcMhn at aol.com <CMcMhn>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 16:24:00 EDT

One of the more difficult moments I have with Rowlings' Potter books is her flat use of the allusions to previous versions of stories. When we read about her boggarts, I think of the "Magic to Burn" Boggart, who had more dimension. When we read in her books about the house elves and clothing issues, I think about the Scottish folk tale of the Elves and the Shoemaker, and I find it sad that the significance of the original was wiped out to make bric-a-brac for a series with (I find) less nuanced paradoxes.

But not everything we read has to be the best and greatest? I disagree with another respondent here over the value of the Wizard of Oz book versus the movie. However, our disagreement may have value because it leads to understanding the range of possibility available in the works. It never occurred to me the value of the movie which was lacking in the book.

I can enjoy Rowlings and Disney for what they are. Figuring out what that is takes effort, and I might be wrong, but I try to enjoy them for what I think they are.

Cathy McMahon Education Student
Received on Thu 20 Jul 2006 03:24:00 PM CDT