CCBC-Net Archives
[CCBC-Net] HP7
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Randall Wright <randall.w.wright>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:17:05 -0600
It's a good think you don't have to be a speler to be a author and
"pundent", eh? I subscribe to the Klem Kadiddlehopper school of intelligence.
And speaking of intelligence. My kids keep asking me why I don't write a Harry Potter. By that they of course mean a best seller that will give them an inheritance.
So, my question is: how did She-who-must-not-be-named do it? What is it about the books, especially the first three that were the catapult that captured the world? I've heard people say it was the hype. But before the hype there was the amazing word of mouth. I followed the books from the beginning, and it seemed the hype came after-the-fact, almost an afterthought. Perhaps the hype added another tens position to her monetary value.
I read the first book before they really took off, and I was captured. I couldn't wait for the second. Then the third just made me want even more. After that, I was hooked by the momentum of the story. For the life of me, I can't figure out why.
The writing is serviceable. It is not incredible, but she has enough command of words to provide the vehicle. The story is not completely original (but then whose is?). Perhaps it's her speling? So, how can I do the same thing? Why Harry Potter and not my "Dead Toads don't Squelch" or "Darth Vader and the Attack of the Clowns"?
Randall Wright Author and Speler
-----Original Message----- From: Sally Miller [mailto:derbymiller at fuse.net] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 5:17 AM To: Randall Wright Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] HP7
I'm with you on that point, Randall.
Sally Derby, another author and pundit.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Randall Wright" <randall.w.wright at comcast.net> To: "'Bloom, Sam'" <Sam.Bloom at cincinnatilibrary.org>;
<CCBC-Net at ccbc.ad.education.wisc.edu> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] HP7
> I'm one of those few who believe magic is just that. It doesn't follow
> rules, which is why it's magic. I (secretly) am annoyed when magic is
> referred to as a system in world building that follows physical type laws.
> That destroys the magic of it for me.
>
> Of course that belief allows the author of books like Harry Potter to use
> magic as "rabbit-out-of-the-hat" solutions to problems. Ironic that that
> term is used, ain't it. This is fine with me, because I expect magic to
> defy
> my expectations. So reason for certain spells lasting and others not-well,
> it's the magic of it.
>
> BTW-what specific spells did the pre-eleven-year-old Harry use to set free
> the snake, jump to the school roof, etc. He didn't know any spells, but he
> had magic.
>
> My tupence worth.
>
> Randall Wright
> Author and opinionated pundent in nothing particular
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ccbc-net-bounces at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
> [mailto:ccbc-net-bounces at ccbc.education.wisc.edu] On Behalf Of Bloom, Sam
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 11:06 AM
> To: CCBC-Net at ccbc.ad.education.wisc.edu
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] HP7
>
>> I do wonder why some objects retain their magic after those who have
>> done the magic have died, and why other spells are released. Mad-eye
>> put protection spells on Grimmauld place that remained, but Harry was
>> released from Dumbledore's spell as soon as he was dead. Does anyone
>> remember anything that would make that clearer?
>
> This is not an original thought... but I'll take credit for it! =) Some
> believe that it was not Dumbledore who released Harry from his spell but
> Snape himself. If you think back to the chapter where Harry sees Snape's
> memories in the pensieve, Snape was very deep into Dumbledore's plans, so
> despite the invisibility cloak it is quite probable that Snape knew he was
> there.
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Sam Bloom
> Children's Librarian, Groesbeck Branch Library
> Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County
> 2994 W. Galbraith Rd., Cincinnati, OH 45239
> (513) 369-4454 / (513) 665-2819 (voicemail)
> Sam.Bloom at cincinnatilibrary.org
> _______________________________________________
> CCBC-Net mailing list
> CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
> http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>
> _______________________________________________
> CCBC-Net mailing list
> CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
> http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>
Received on Thu 16 Aug 2007 07:17:05 AM CDT
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:17:05 -0600
It's a good think you don't have to be a speler to be a author and
"pundent", eh? I subscribe to the Klem Kadiddlehopper school of intelligence.
And speaking of intelligence. My kids keep asking me why I don't write a Harry Potter. By that they of course mean a best seller that will give them an inheritance.
So, my question is: how did She-who-must-not-be-named do it? What is it about the books, especially the first three that were the catapult that captured the world? I've heard people say it was the hype. But before the hype there was the amazing word of mouth. I followed the books from the beginning, and it seemed the hype came after-the-fact, almost an afterthought. Perhaps the hype added another tens position to her monetary value.
I read the first book before they really took off, and I was captured. I couldn't wait for the second. Then the third just made me want even more. After that, I was hooked by the momentum of the story. For the life of me, I can't figure out why.
The writing is serviceable. It is not incredible, but she has enough command of words to provide the vehicle. The story is not completely original (but then whose is?). Perhaps it's her speling? So, how can I do the same thing? Why Harry Potter and not my "Dead Toads don't Squelch" or "Darth Vader and the Attack of the Clowns"?
Randall Wright Author and Speler
-----Original Message----- From: Sally Miller [mailto:derbymiller at fuse.net] Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 5:17 AM To: Randall Wright Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] HP7
I'm with you on that point, Randall.
Sally Derby, another author and pundit.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Randall Wright" <randall.w.wright at comcast.net> To: "'Bloom, Sam'" <Sam.Bloom at cincinnatilibrary.org>;
<CCBC-Net at ccbc.ad.education.wisc.edu> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] HP7
> I'm one of those few who believe magic is just that. It doesn't follow
> rules, which is why it's magic. I (secretly) am annoyed when magic is
> referred to as a system in world building that follows physical type laws.
> That destroys the magic of it for me.
>
> Of course that belief allows the author of books like Harry Potter to use
> magic as "rabbit-out-of-the-hat" solutions to problems. Ironic that that
> term is used, ain't it. This is fine with me, because I expect magic to
> defy
> my expectations. So reason for certain spells lasting and others not-well,
> it's the magic of it.
>
> BTW-what specific spells did the pre-eleven-year-old Harry use to set free
> the snake, jump to the school roof, etc. He didn't know any spells, but he
> had magic.
>
> My tupence worth.
>
> Randall Wright
> Author and opinionated pundent in nothing particular
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ccbc-net-bounces at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
> [mailto:ccbc-net-bounces at ccbc.education.wisc.edu] On Behalf Of Bloom, Sam
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 11:06 AM
> To: CCBC-Net at ccbc.ad.education.wisc.edu
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] HP7
>
>> I do wonder why some objects retain their magic after those who have
>> done the magic have died, and why other spells are released. Mad-eye
>> put protection spells on Grimmauld place that remained, but Harry was
>> released from Dumbledore's spell as soon as he was dead. Does anyone
>> remember anything that would make that clearer?
>
> This is not an original thought... but I'll take credit for it! =) Some
> believe that it was not Dumbledore who released Harry from his spell but
> Snape himself. If you think back to the chapter where Harry sees Snape's
> memories in the pensieve, Snape was very deep into Dumbledore's plans, so
> despite the invisibility cloak it is quite probable that Snape knew he was
> there.
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Sam Bloom
> Children's Librarian, Groesbeck Branch Library
> Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County
> 2994 W. Galbraith Rd., Cincinnati, OH 45239
> (513) 369-4454 / (513) 665-2819 (voicemail)
> Sam.Bloom at cincinnatilibrary.org
> _______________________________________________
> CCBC-Net mailing list
> CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
> http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>
> _______________________________________________
> CCBC-Net mailing list
> CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
> http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>
Received on Thu 16 Aug 2007 07:17:05 AM CDT