Harry Potter and the NewClassic Outlook

Recommended Videos

NewClassic_v1legacy

Bringer of Words
Jul 30, 2008
2,484
0
0
[HEADING=2]Harry Potter[/HEADING]
This review is spoiler intensive, if you have not read the books, and care about the plot, browse Back [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/index/326] now. Don't say I didn't warn you. If you're still here, and want the verdict without the spoilers, see the verdict at the very bottom.

For the record, this is a comprehensive review, and will review the overview of the book series, not each individual book. That being said, I would like to try to hit the important points. This is a review on the books, not the games nor the movies. Well, put on your flame-retardant suits, boys and girls, I'm about to offend thousands of people.

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (Sorcerer's Stone for the US) is the first in a book series by J.K. Rowling, a book series which has managed to fuel the love of magic to an enormous community, and rocketed Rowling's net worth to that surpassing the Queen of England.

The book series starts us off through the eyes of a child named Harry Potter. The boy, a scant child of early teens, lives with his oppressive aunt and uncle in a stereotypical suburb. 'Live' being an inaccurate term, meaning he's malnourished, forced to dwell in the worst of conditions, and the subject of constant rudeness and ridicule. The family, clearly rude and upset at Harry for not being as ugly and obese as they are, treat him as if he were the outsider that he is.

Enter magic. The convenient device that the plot will (ab)use for the rest of the series. By some unforeseen and highly life-enhancing miracle, Harry Potter learns that he is a boy born to wizards. This propels him into a magical community that ultimately lands him at a seven-year boarding school for the magically-inclined.

The magical community, melded seamlessly with the mundane one, uses clever illusions and whowhenwhatsits to co-exist with the non-magically community. Referred to as muggles, the mundane community is often the butt-end of several punch-lines and ridicule. They are also very, very inept.

Enter Johnathan Q. Magic-School. Called Hogwarts, (just rolls off the tongue, doesn't it?) the magic-school serves as housing and education for its students for three-quarters out of the year (much like university). From the school, Harry Potter meets two fellow wizards (well, witch and wizard, but I think wizard has more refinement) named Hermione and Ron. These two characters, who will become his best friends, serve as Harry's anchor. Although, certainly remember their names, because they won't be all that important later.

As soon as we arrive on-campus, we run into two major antagonists who'll (you guessed it) antagonize Harry & Co. for the entire series. The first, a professor named Severus Snape (who happens to be an accomplished scholar of poison potions), and Draco Malfoy, the literal personification of pompous-elite. Remember that last name, he'll become one of the major villains in the series, just you wait.

By the end of the first book, Harry and Co. throw down with the mythical guardian of Hell, Cerberus, an ancient wizard who clearly spent more time flapping his beard than training his mind, and concluding by wrapping up a mystery that has vexed the greatest minds of the magical community for a number of years. That's right, a twelve year old just trumped the greatest minds of a community that understands and translates the arcane forces in life.

Sure, I believe it.

Each progressive book, new rules and regulations appear from the void, and new plot devices suddenly manifest where they weren't before. In year one, the only rumors that circulated were on the Stone, by year two, it was the Chamber that suddenly appealed to all. Funny though, because this chamber wasn't important the year before. Year three, a convict that suddenly has everything to do with Mr. Harry Potter. Each progressive book creates more and more links to anything interesting to Harry Potter. Normally, the plot would revolve around a character's actions to a set stimulus instead of the stimulus's relation and importance to the character. This makes me tilt my head to the side, and question what really went on in the author's head when she was writing these.

Within the fourth book, Harry Potter goes mono-a-mono with the strongest wizard in all of existence, 'He who must not be named.' Despite making every single simpleton wizard uncomfortable when people say his name, he manages to avoid justice from either the mundane or the magical community. Manning up with a cult that has the unfathomable power, Voldemort (-gasp!-) throws down with just about anyone he wants, at any time, and comes out on top. Except for one, Harry Potter. In this showdown, Harry Potter plays magical hot potato with the grand villain, and wins out of a plot hole plot device (despite that the villain physically manipulates the boy just before, in an obvious show of superior power and technique).

The books progress, and Harry and Co. go on a quest to save the wizarding community after their mentor and principal gets murdered by (you guessed it!) Professor Snape in the sixth book. In the last book, Harry's friend finally gets fed up with him and leaves (because people have limits, except in Harry Potter), until he loses face and manliness by coming back.

In Book 7, the finale, the Malfoy's are stirring trouble (be careful, that plot point is kind of hard to see coming), and Harry Potter appears from his adventures, trumping death and defeating the bad guy. After years of preparation, Harry Potter fulfills his prophecy and saves the Earth! But enough about the plot...

The characters themselves are fairly stock of any story, patient to the end with the hero, and serve as plot tools rather than meaty characters. Their use in the story was pretty limited to how they could help the protagonist, and don't provide much other than standard dialog and key-pieces for plot transition. Any time I felt like I was really connecting with any of the characters, they were immediately dwarfed by Harry Potter's massive ego importance, and fell out of my mind until they were useful to Potter again. So ultimately, I felt they were a little lack-luster in the sense that there were flat. The entire series used the characters like one would use the hookshot in the Legend of Zelda games, or the Gravity Gun in Half-Life 2. Tools. No book should ever write tools... Especially not a best-seller.

The writing was clunky and unimaginative. Word choice and sentence flow weren't entirely missing, but they always had room for improvement. The descriptions were also adjective heavy, and I felt like so much of the word count was spent fluffing the pages rather than telling a story. The time spent reminding me of the light-orange hue that the potion on shelf 15 had could have been better spent working up the characters' vocabulary, or the world's feasibility. Instead, the entire thing read like propaganda for how much better wizards are than ye olde normal folk, and really did nothing to provide us with good conflict until the very end of the series. When we did get it, it was stereotypical, spelled out for us, and the plot synopsis would've started with "Here's how the prophecy was fulfilled."

The length of the series, especially the pacing, only got more and more abysmal as it progressed. It took me countless months to read the last book. Throughout, I had to set it down, and go do something fun. The reading, one of my favorite hobbies, was so far gone that I could not read it for extended periods. It was just too messy. Whoever her editors were failed to trim the fat from the series, or they were afraid to change something for fear of the almighty Volde- Rowling coming down upon them.

Ultimately, the book series was kinda "eh." Shallow writing, boring characters, but a fairly interesting tale, combined to form fat book series called Harry Potter. From me, the series gets and resounding and highly excited verdict: Mediocre. Not all that good, not even all that bad, just down the middle. It failed to really draw me in, even going so far as to push me away by the later books. Had the hype not been there, and the peers so adamant about my reading them, I probably wouldn't have.

Now before I conclude this piece, you may say, "NewClassic, why do you go and say such bad things about this book series? You know it's written for children, right?"
My reply, "Sure, but it's a New York Time's Best-Seller, a series large enough to spawn a multi-million-dollar movie and game franchise, and a highly recommended read from just about anyone you ask. It's not too absurd a concept to expect something better out of this."
"But," you may reply, "it's a good book series."
"Yes," I'll answer, "it is. For children. As a best seller, a multi-million-dollar profit-cow, and a book recommended to adults daily, it's fairly low-brow drivel with decent imagination but terrible writing."

Ultimately, this review is a waste of all of our time. If you like the series, you've already read it, and despite the validity or lack-thereof, for any of these points, they will be argued to the death. After all, this is the book series that have made grown men dress in frilly robes. This review is an opinion, one largely of aesthetic.

I didn't like the Harry Potter books, and I don't think they're nearly worth the effort of reading them, much less buying them. But, the story is kinda neat, if not a little predictable. Ultimately, it's up to you if you want to do it. I think there are other, better books to read.

[HEADING=2]Verdict[/HEADING] Pass. You aren't missing much but a lot of hype, and any story-related interest can really be summed up with more empathy and conciseness from the movies.

[sup](Besides, we all know she stole the plot from George Lucas [http://www.saynotocrack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/61074_harrypotterstarwars.jpg].)[/sup]
 

meatloaf231

Old Man Glenn
Feb 13, 2008
2,248
0
0
The best way to describe the Harry Potter books is "Deus Ex Machina."

As for the review, well, we have come to expect great writing from you, NewClassic. Looks like you keep exceeding our expectations.
 

Anarchemitis

New member
Dec 23, 2007
9,102
0
0
Wall 'o Text alert!

I stopped caring for Harry Potter when they said the word 'muggle', giving the impression that existing not inside her books was a negative thing.
 

Maet

The Altoid Duke
Jul 31, 2008
1,247
0
0
I only read the first four books. I'll confess, I thought Prisoner of Azkaban (or however that's spelled) was actually pretty good. It wasn't a tome of adjectives and terrible pacing that became the selling point for the fourth book and presumably every book thereafter. It was brisk and engaging. Something that was missing from the first two books, and wasn't repeated in the fourth.
 

broadband

New member
Dec 15, 2007
437
0
0
meatloaf231 post=326.72370.757765 said:
The best way to describe the Harry Potter books is "Deus Ex Machina."
at the beginning wasnt too bad, but at the end, was just ridiculous.
 

NewClassic_v1legacy

Bringer of Words
Jul 30, 2008
2,484
0
0
meatloaf231 post=326.72370.757765 said:
The best way to describe the Harry Potter books is "Deus Ex Machina."

As for the review, well, we have come to expect great writing from you, NewClassic. Looks like you keep exceeding our expectations.
Much appreciation. I'm going to have to agree with you.

Anarchemitis post=326.72370.757781 said:
Wall 'o Text alert!

I stopped caring for Harry Potter when they said the word 'muggle', giving the impression that existing not inside her books was a negative thing.
Normally I like to have screenshots to go along with my reviews, but a screenshot of an eBook wouldn't be any less monotonous than the wall-o-text to begin with. And yeah, J. to the K. was a little too pretentious about anyone that wasn't a wizard.

Maet post=326.72370.757801 said:
I only read the first four books. I'll confess, I thought Prisoner of Azkaban (or however that's spelled) was actually pretty good. It wasn't a tome of adjectives and terrible pacing that became the selling point for the fourth book and presumably every book thereafter. It was brisk and engaging. Something that was missing from the first two books, and wasn't repeated in the fourth.
Granted, the books had their moments, but on the overall, it got worse and worse as time went.

broadband post=326.72370.757816 said:
meatloaf231 post=326.72370.757765 said:
The best way to describe the Harry Potter books is "Deus Ex Machina."
at the beginning wasnt too bad, but at the end, was just ridiculous.
I'm going to have to disagree. Although the Deux Ex Machina wasn't absurd in the first book, the sheer capability-to-idiocy ratio between Main Protagonist and Antagonist versus everyone else is bogglingly large. And only gets worse the books progress. It's pretty bad...
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
You used "Enter" as a start to two paragraphs with only one injected between the two (Enter Magic, Enter Jonathan Q. Magic School). Whether that was deliberate or not I can't say, but I didn't like how it sounded, personally.

Besides that though you bring up very good points, especially concerning the lack of editor trimming for the final book. While I kept going and had it read within a few days through sheer determination, it most certainly was not the best reading experience I've had.

Nice review over all. I actually didn't find it to be too wall of text, despite the minor issue I had with it I found it flowed quite well as far as reviews went. I'd throw down an 8.5/10 if I had to stick a number onto it, but because I don't, I won't. *laughs maniacally*
 

Yassen

New member
Apr 5, 2008
1,308
0
0
Actually 'Eragon' stole the plot from George Lucas more than any other book i read. Just read the plot synopsis and you'll see what i mean.

Was a good review, pointing out all the flaws in the Harry Potters books besides the boring "It promotes witch craft and demeans women!" But despit all your points I still love the books and probably always will.
 

Dogeman5

New member
Apr 8, 2008
345
0
0
Anarchemitis post=326.72370.757781 said:
I stopped caring for Harry Potter when they said the word 'muggle', giving the impression that existing not inside her books was a negative thing.
But that's what the "Best" do
-I think that it is a load of BS, but what do I know I read books not watch them
NewClassic post=326.72370.757735 said:
(Besides, we all know she stole the plot from George Lucas [http://www.saynotocrack.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/61074_harrypotterstarwars.jpg].)
Aww I see now
 

otterbeans

New member
May 1, 2008
26
0
0
Here, let me make it simple.

Terry Prachett > JK Rowling

Naomi Novik > Christopher Paolini

Anyone with Microsoft Word > Stephanie Meyer
 

Lauren Admire

Rawrchiteuthis
Aug 8, 2008
685
0
0
I gotta say, I thoroughly enjoyed the Harry Potter series. Yes, there was enough Deux Ex Machina to go around, but it's fun to suspend disbelief every once in awhile and just get completely wrapped up in a story. I will agree, however, and say that most of the books were "Oooh, I bet this happens", swiftly followed by a "And...of course it did." After the first couple of books, it does turn into one of those "Really...I mean...really? Did you have to?" type of things, but I found them enjoyable if I just didn't dwell too much on them. I gotta say that I did hate the ending of the last book (where the cast pairs off and everyone goes on their merry, magical way), but thankfully it was the end of the series.
 

NewClassic_v1legacy

Bringer of Words
Jul 30, 2008
2,484
0
0
Maet post=326.72370.758339 said:
otterbeans post=326.72370.758133 said:
Anyone with Microsoft Word > Stephanie Meyer
I use notepad. :(
I use Open Office. :(

TheNecroswanson post=326.72370.758318 said:
You didn't mention the fourth book, and the "fight" in the fifth book was actually at the end of the fourth. And ol' Ron being a total **** and leaving Harry happened in the seventh book.

Other than that, I agree with you. As a childrens book it was pretty mediocre, but as it being what it is, it was utter shit.
I pointed out the Ron leaving was in the last book, but good catch on book 4. I remember the book's order wrong... Whoops.
 

Dr Spaceman

New member
Sep 22, 2008
546
0
0
First of all, I'm pleased to see that someone who criticizes Harry Potter has actually read the series. I get tired of defending the books from people with absolutely no intention of ever getting near them.

On to your review. I feel that many of your descriptions are fairly generic and without much strength: for example, in describing the characters of the books as "stock" and "plot tools" there is a failure to provide examples of this. Tell me why you thought this, I can't just take your word for it. I actually liked most of the characters, and in fact fell in love with most of them. Seeing Hermione get knocked out during the battle at the end of the fifth book left me genuinely terrified. I wanted her to live. Few books, movies, or video games have ever caused such a strong connection with any character.

Not wanting to dissect your entire review, I also want to point out your changing adjectives to describe the books. You call it a "fairly interesting tale" and "eh" and "drivel" throughout the review. That's a pretty wide range of opinion. Which is it? Throughout the review, I couldn't tell whether you thought Harry Potter was good (if flawed), or a flaming pile of crap.

Lastly, if you want to be taken seriously as a reviewer, lay off the sarcasm and ridicule. I have heard good points made about the Harry Potter series in terms of poor choices made by J.K. Rowling, I've even agreed with many of them. However, your point is lost amidst the thunderstorm of attempts at humor.
 

vrmlguy

New member
Sep 25, 2008
56
0
0
I liked the first six books. Yeah, the plots were trite, but in each one Harry had to deal with the loss of his parents (in book one), Dumbledore (book six) or Ron (temporarily in book seven). Great life lessons for teenagers, and not a few adults.

The ending of the seventh book, though, was crap. One reviewer described the (anti-)climatic battle as Harry arguing about contract law, and I really have to agree. I'd expected the books to complete a circle: Voldemort would try to insta-kill Ginny, and Harry would realize for the first time exactly what motivated his mother to throw herself in harm's way to protect him. (But he'd be saved by a Deux Ex Machina involving his possession of two of the three Hallows.)
 

The Blue Mongoose

New member
Jul 12, 2008
537
0
0
i totally agree with you. i read the potter books... i persevered through the last 4 after having loved the first 3.

maybe it's because i got older as they came out, but i remember the first 3 being pretty good (not up to pratchett standards, oh no!) and the rest being... well... bad :\

i kept hoping for something brilliant... so i kept reading... eventually i just went back to Lord of the Rings because it made me forget the hours wasted on Potter and his ilk

Edit: did anyone else think Neville should have been the Chosen One? i mean... there was a foreshadowing of that in one of the earlier books... Harry should have been a vessel for Voldemorts soul and Neville should have had to kill him in order to save the world... anyone? anyone at all? no? just me then :(

Edit 2: what about having Dumbledore use Harry as a figurehead for his attack on Voldemort? see i though we could have Dumbledore using Harry, and the fact that he lived when he should have died, as a propaganda type thing against the big baddie. Dumbledore would have orchestrated each of the trials in the first 6 books and Harry would have found out in the seventh that he was just a tool being used for the furthering of the wizarding community... or something....
 

Enigma90

New member
Sep 25, 2008
1
0
0
While reading replies here I laughed. The arrogance of the human race is a natural occurring element that defines us and separates us from animals.

Me? I enjoyed the Harry Potter series and even though I can name a hundred books that I enjoyed even more I still cant express my gratitude for the hours of great reading Harry Potter has provided me.

Yes, the book was aimed at children and everyone is entitled to have an opinion and to express that. However while expressing an opinion, like an analytical deconstruction evidence must be clearly defined to prove a point none of which Ive seen in any reply here.

Has, anyone here written and published their own piece of work? I highly doubt it. All I see here are cheap stabs at the series because ones opinions of the book are not of their satisfaction.

As for the stealing of plots, many story lines contain the same layout of other plots from varies books and movies. Eargon's plot has many similarities with George Lucas', but I'm sure if you looked back before the creation of Starwars their would even be a similarity there too. All great works are in some way a reflection or copy from another work and this applies with any genre of creation.

I have many friends who hate the Harry Potter series and they have given me some very good reasons as to why it inst worth there time reading. And I respect there opinion. But here, I see you all as a pack of blood thirsty vultures savaging for all you can get.
 

NewClassic_v1legacy

Bringer of Words
Jul 30, 2008
2,484
0
0
Dr Spaceman post=326.72370.758418 said:
First of all, I'm pleased to see that someone who criticizes Harry Potter has actually read the series. I get tired of defending the books from people with absolutely no intention of ever getting near them.

On to your review. I feel that many of your descriptions are fairly generic and without much strength: for example, in describing the characters of the books as "stock" and "plot tools" there is a failure to provide examples of this. Tell me why you thought this, I can't just take your word for it. I actually liked most of the characters, and in fact fell in love with most of them. Seeing Hermione get knocked out during the battle at the end of the fifth book left me genuinely terrified. I wanted her to live. Few books, movies, or video games have ever caused such a strong connection with any character.

Not wanting to dissect your entire review, I also want to point out your changing adjectives to describe the books. You call it a "fairly interesting tale" and "eh" and "drivel" throughout the review. That's a pretty wide range of opinion. Which is it? Throughout the review, I couldn't tell whether you thought Harry Potter was good (if flawed), or a flaming pile of crap.

Lastly, if you want to be taken seriously as a reviewer, lay off the sarcasm and ridicule. I have heard good points made about the Harry Potter series in terms of poor choices made by J.K. Rowling, I've even agreed with many of them. However, your point is lost amidst the thunderstorm of attempts at humor.
Your last paragraph is largely of aesthetic. I tend to rely a lot on humor and sarcasm in my writing no matter what I'm reviewing. It does take a pot-shot at credibility, true, but it [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation] works [http://www.g4tv.com/xplay/videos/21086/Drake_of_the_99_Dragons_Review.html]. It doesn't mean it's the best, but it's a functional strategy. And it's entertaining, which is my primary focus with writing. Honestly, this review is like dropping a pebble in an ocean. Even if I cause a little ripple, it's not going to suddenly make the world see how "par" the HP series is.

As far as the inconsistency goes, I call Harry Potter an interesting story. That isn't a lie, the story itself is alright, I'd even go as far as to say pretty good. Now the writing, and the books themselves, no. The writing is slow, awkwardly paced, and tells an adult-level story at a child-level vocabulary and sentence structure. If someone like Terry Pratchett, or Neil Gaiman, or Jim Butcher rewrote Harry Potter, it would still be a good story, with much better writing, pacing, and structure.

It's the same reason I'm okay with Eoin Colfer continuing the Hitchhiker's Guide series. Despite the fact that his books are also children's books, they're better written. Even if the story is a lot less accessible. But that's neither here nor there.

As far as the flat characters... I don't have the books on me, so I can't pull exact quotes or references, but this all falls back on the characters and events only really existing to serve Potter, not the other way around. In any [http://www.lordoftherings.net/] book [http://www.danbrown.com/novels/angels_demons/plot.html] that gets super popular, the plot is driven by the character's actions in response to a stimulus, like apocalypse or a barrel roll or whatever. In Harry Potter, the stimuli were all directly leading to Potter, and everything that happens in the books, even the useful talents of the side characters, were only really showing up when they helped Potter. It's like they were written-in to be useful as an afterthought.

As far as their personality goes, it does a good job of inspiring empathy, but it doesn't do a great job. In something that's heralded as one of the best book series' of all time, this won't cut it. Especially since I developed more apathy than empathy for a majority of the goings-on. I genuinely laughed when his owl died.I never felt connected enough for me to say the characters were strong and convincing. They were just as I described them, tools, in my eyes. When they got married, not only was it "Durrhey, obvious..." but it was also, "Tch, tools." The whole experience had me second-guessing their next function rather than their next character development. Kinda like seeing a bunch of hookshot targets in a dungeon in a LoZ game.

But, as I said, this is all very aesthetic. You may have found the Hitchhiker's Guide series to be abysmal, but I loved it. You might possibly hate Jim Butcher, who happens to be my favorite author. It really boils down to what you like, and how you observe the world around you. I saw the characters as shallow and unmoving, but you may've seen them as real, emotive people.

Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe, really. I can't argue aesthetics, but I think I've made my opinions and my bases for them pretty clear. For more specific examples, I'll have to find a copy of the book somewhere where I don't have to pay for it again. I've already given that decent-at-best writer enough of my money.

Enigma90 post=326.72370.758446 said:
While reading replies here I laughed. The arrogance of the human race is a natural occurring element that defines us and separates us from animals.

Me? I enjoyed the Harry Potter series and even though I can name a hundred books that I enjoyed even more I still cant express my gratitude for the hours of great reading Harry Potter has provided me.

Yes, the book was aimed at children and everyone is entitled to have an opinion and to express that. However while expressing an opinion, like an analytical deconstruction evidence must be clearly defined to prove a point none of which Ive seen in any reply here.

Has, anyone here written and published their own piece of work? I highly doubt it. All I see here are cheap stabs at the series because ones opinions of the book are not of their satisfaction.

As for the stealing of plots, many story lines contain the same layout of other plots from varies books and movies. Eargon's plot has many similarities with George Lucas', but I'm sure if you looked back before the creation of Starwars their would even be a similarity there too. All great works are in some way a reflection or copy from another work and this applies with any genre of creation.

I have many friends who hate the Harry Potter series and they have given me some very good reasons as to why it inst worth there time reading. And I respect there opinion. But here, I see you all as a pack of blood thirsty vultures savaging for all you can get.
First of all, I am working on becoming a published author [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.72168]. But unlike Rowling, I don't have twenty extra years of my life to have become a published author, although I have almost no doubt I will break into the business post-college. Feel free to quote me on this, it is my ambition and life goal.

Secondly, comparing people you're trying to politically out-maneuver to a "pack of blood-thirsty vulture" is a great way to discredit your own statement. It's counter-intuitive to taking the "intelligence high ground."

Thirdly, I don't recall calling myself a better writer than Rowling. I don't even recall saying her book is bad. I recall specifically saying that when compared with its peers, and therefore the hype surrounding it, is highly more shallow, less well-written, and less entertaining. For the standards its peers set, the HP series really lacks quality, in a lot of ways. That is really the meat of this review.

Lastly, the final line was a joke. If you base my entire review off of that line, I might as well edit the entire post to say "frosted butts" and be on my way. It's a quick one-line joke, and I really think it does well. If you take that too seriously, then you're already missing was the rest of the review is about. Although, as I seem to be repeating a lot today, it's a question of aesthetics. I can't simply force my taste on you, nor yours on me. We'll just have to agree to disagree.