Reading Harry Potter as one book

[Voronwë the Faithful]

A couple of weeks ago, I received a request from Janet Croft, the editor of Mythlore, asking me if I would be willing to review a book called Harry Potter and the Law for Mythlore. She wanted someone with a legal background to review it, and there aren't many in the mythopoeic community. I impulsively said sure. Problem was, I had never read any of the Potter books. And while I might have been able to fake it, I really didn't want to do that. Besides, I've always kind of wanted to read the books, but I just never got around to it.

Well, I finished the seventh book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows this morning. Attention readers will notice that I said that I received this request a couple of weeks ago. I read the whole series, something like four or five thousand pages (I haven't counted) in less than eleven days. And that was while working, bike riding, drumming, and all the other stuff that I do (but a lot less sleeping than usual).

To say that I found the books compelling would be a tremendous understatement. Thriller writers certainly have nothing on Rowling for breakneck action that keeps you on the edge of the seat needing to find out what happens next. But unlike most thriller writers, Rowling created characters that you care tremendously amount (even, or perhaps even particularly, when they are not perfect). And, also unlike most thriller writers, there is a deepness to what she has to say.

I had, a think, a fairly unusual experience in that I was able to read the entire series from scratch in a relatively short time. That allowed me to approach it as one very long story, with everything fresh in my mind. I think probably the vast majority of people started reading sometime while the books were in progress, so they had to subsequently wait to find out what happened next. I'm kind of glad that I got to experience the books in this manner.

I'm a little sad, actually, that I don't have any more of it to read. But at the same time I was so deeply immersed in that world that it is a bit of relief to have a break. And I'm looking forward to catching up on my sleep.

And to read the books again in the not to distant future.

[Lalaith]

Interesting, Voronwë!

I could have much the same experience if I so choose. I did read the first book when it first came out, but I did not care for it. I was reading it more with the purpose of weighing its appropriateness for Katie, though. I wonder what I would think of it now.

[River]

I read 1-3 back-to-back and then had to start waiting for the next installments to come off the press. I'd refresh between installments though. When the series ended, I went back and read them all, 1-7. It's an amazing trajectory, even when you know what's going to happen.

[WampusCat]

I read each as it came out, but I think it would be a great experience to read them all as one book.

So have you read the book you were asked to review yet? It's an intriguing concept, but I'm not sure if there's enough to say to justify a whole book.

[Frelga]

That's quite an interesting experience. I am very fond of Potter books, even if I wish Rowling had a sterner editor and spent more time revising a few of them. Like Lali, I read them first with a mom's eye, as Lufu was just barely old enough to process them when he got his handses on them. Luckily, we had to wait for the heavier later books.

They were excellent books to discuss the craft of writing with my son, too. Things like, why Snape is a great character (IMO) even if he is not necessarily a very good person. And later, when he started on a string of knock-offs, some of them reasonably good in their own right, why the knock-offs were less compelling books. And a bit later yet, we got to talk about themes from Tolkien in Rowling's work.

But I confess, I never thought they could spark much legal discussion. How did that go?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I haven't read the Harry Potter and the Law book yet, but it is a meaty-sized book, and from glancing at it looks interesting. It's not about the legal battles over the Harry Potter books in the real world (though a book could definitely be written about that), it's about legal issues that arise within the books. I'll certainly let everyone know what I think once I've read it.

[Maria]

I tried to wait to read each book until after I saw the movie (otherwise the movie would be too much of a disapointment) but quit that after the last book was published and went ahead and finished the series.

After we got them as audio books, we tend to listen to them back to back as one big story. Why stop? It's like that with a lot of series for us.

[Pearly Di]

I'm so glad you enjoyed the books, V-Man!

I could have much the same experience if I so choose. I did read the first book when it first came out, but I did not care for it. I was reading it more with the purpose of weighing its appropriateness for Katie, though. I wonder what I would think of it now.

I read the first three books in the autumn of 1999, Lali, and was enchanted by them. As an adult reader, I enjoyed the increasing complexity of the plots of these children's books. And, as V-Man says, one of Rowling's strengths as a writer is her ability to create such strong, vivid characters that you really care about.

As the series progresses, it becomes much darker and more adult ... although still very much in the Young Adult genre.

I'm also rather chuffed that the HP books -- which are deeply British -- are so popular with millions of American children and teenagers.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

And adults.

[Cerin]

I tried several times to read the first book at my mother's urging and because it was such a cultural phenomenon, but it just didn't interest me. And it's clearly not a dislike of the genre, because I love the Nesbit, Lewis and Tolkien books. ??

I'm glad you had such an enjoyable experience, Voronwë!

[vison]

I tried several times to read the first book at my mother's urging and because it was such a cultural phenomenon, but it just didn't interest me. And it's clearly not a dislike of the genre, because I love the Nesbit, Lewis and Tolkien books. ??

I'm glad you had such an enjoyable experience, Voronwë!

I'm with you on this one, Cerin. I thought it was an okay book and the movies that I've seen are okay movies, but no more.

However, Tolkien is pretty much the only fantasy writer I like and he's in a class of his own. Lewis, in particular, really put me off.

It's going to be interesting to hear what Voronwë has to say about his assignment!!!

[Lalaith]

I'm with Cerin and vison. I was not impressed with Rowling's writing, unfortunately. I will give her that she knows how to keep you reading (by ending every chapter as a cliffhanger--a practice I find very annoying).

But, Voronwë, I did want to add that it is impressive that you read all of them in such a short span of time.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I really didn't expect to enjoy the books as much as I did, for the reasons you guys say. But she really pulls you in. And not just with the Dan Brownsian technique that Lali mentions. She really makes you care about the characters, though I'm not sure how much that comes through with just the first book. And they are interesting, extremely flawed characters, which I like very much.

[Inanna]

So, my dear Sir V, do you like fantasy now?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I would say that certain types of fantasy appeal to me, and others do not. I love Tolkien, as we all know, though I have also argued that his work is not "fantasy". And I love Jonathan Strange, which I also half jokingly argued was not fantasy. And I have come to enjoy some of the older, pre-Tolkien works called fantasy, primarily the extremely bizarre novels of David Lindsay. And, of course, as we have seen, I did enjoy the Potter books, and they clearly are fantasy. But much else in the "fantasy" genre just doesn't appeal to me. Most of the sword and sorcery books since Tolkien are poor ripoffs, of course, and I don't like them because they just aren't very good. But I have too much respect for those of you who love Pratchett to not realize that he clearly is a genius at what he does. But his writing just plain doesn't appeal to me. It doesn't mean that it is wonderful, great stuff. It's just wonderful, great stuff that I don't particularly enjoy.

[Inanna]

I think "only certain types of X books" appeal is to be expected.

Interesting thing is that I started on Tolkien and Harry Potter at the same time. I quickly outgrew Potter and went deeper and deeper into Tolkien. Somewhere on the path, I stopped enjoying the Harry Potter series - I have read all of them, though. I am one of those people who have to know what happens!

[Maria]

As much as I like the Harry Potter books, her approach to magic is laughable. Enjoying her stories requires much more suspension of disbelief than reading about the rather limited magic in the Tolkien books, or the overt but somehow realistic magic in the Dresden Files series.

So, I don't know why I like the Potter books so much. I guess it's just my love of stories about people with superpowers coming through again, despite the unlikely way they work magic in that universe.

[Pearly Di]

As much as I like the Harry Potter books, her approach to magic is laughable. Enjoying her stories requires much more suspension of disbelief than reading about the rather limited magic in the Tolkien books, or the overt but somehow realistic magic in the Dresden Files series.

Rowling's Wizarding race is like another biological race altogether: you are either born magical or you aren't. Having been born with these powers, though, you have to learn to use them properly, like a technology or a science.

Magic in the Potterverse is a tool, really ... there is certainly nothing 'occult' about it. No secret rites or initiations, it's all quite straightforward.

So, I don't know why I like the Potter books so much.

Her characters?

[Frelga]

Yes, magic is really the weakest part of Potterverse, ironically. It's inconsistent, it's boundaries are not defined. The whole theme of the Weasleys being poor - what does that mean, when they are a family of powerful magicians who can apparently conjure objects out of the air or turn one thing into another?

The story itself is quite good, though, and I agree with Di, it's really her characters that set Rowlings apart. She pulled a rare feat of making them flawed in ways that are real, human and familiar, and yet not morally ambiguous.

[WampusCat]

As much as I like the Harry Potter books, her approach to magic is laughable. Enjoying her stories requires much more suspension of disbelief than reading about the rather limited magic in the Tolkien books, or the overt but somehow realistic magic in the Dresden Files series.

So, I don't know why I like the Potter books so much. I guess it's just my love of stories about people with superpowers coming through again, despite the unlikely way they work magic in that universe.

You're onto something here. I'm in the middle of a Dresden book right now (my sixth, i think), and have also been noticing the difference in what magic is and how it works. It seems more grounded, more limited but without losing any of its power.

In the Potter books, which I loved despite Rowling's need for an editor, magic is closer to wish-fulfillment.I'd love to be able to do that sort of magic, just as I'd love to snap my fingers like Mary Poppins and have my house clean itself.

In the Dresden Files, the power seems much more like the natural strengthening that rises in us when deep emotion is involved. It draws on those feelings, is shaped by them. And it comes at a price: normal technology malfunctions around a wizard.