![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Just finished reading Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. (Yes, I know, practically everyone else out there finished it over three or four weeks ago. Which reminds me, if you have posted a review or an analysis of Harry Potter on your lj - could you please provide me with a link to it? Pretty please? I don't think lj will let me scroll back six weeks to see everyone's reviews. Thanks in advance!!)
Overall? I agree with Stephen King's review of it in Entertainment Weekly, which I also just read. He doesn't go into detail on theme, character or plot, so much as talk about it as a general reading experience, highlighting what worked and didn't work for him and why he considers it a quality read or lasting.
The book, simply put, is magical - it takes you into another world and you enjoy being there. It also has a warm endearing message at its heart. And is what I'd call a "happy book" or for the "child" in all of us, regardless of our age. A point King makes in his review - which you can find online at EW.com.
What impressed me most about the book was the underlying thematic structure. Rowlings explores some old and interesting themes in a new way, highlighting points without preaching or talking down to her audience, or telling us what to think - so much as showing with dry wit and humor.
And, she manages in my view at least, to get at the root of an age-old issue that has been discussed quite a bit on lj of late - racism or more aptly put racial discrimination and does it through metaphor and analogy. Fantasy and sci-fi writers can often get away with discussing and exploring these issues in greater depth than literary or mainstream writers can. Why? Because we have the nifty layer of metaphor shielding us from some hard truths about ourselves and our society. As Mary Poppins used to say, it's always easier to take one's medicine with a spoonful of sugar.
The main theme of the Potter books of course is love over power or advancement/superiority. The characters who seek fame, glory, superiority and power pay dearly for their actions. While those who sacrifice these things for love are rewarded. Power isn't necessarily a bad thing, Rowlings states, but when it is sought after or desired over everything else it certainly can be. Hardly a new theme - other writers, such as Joss Whedon, CS Lewis, Tolkien, and Phillip Pullman have discussed this issue and came up with similar results. Whedon went so far as to create two tv shows - one where the heroine much like Potter does not want power, and attempts to shirk it or push it aside, seeing it as more of a burden than a gift and the other, where the hero desires power, yearns for it, and pays dearly for it once he obtains it.
But what distinguishes Rowlings novels from Tolkein, Lewis, and Pullman, as well as from Whedon's tv shows...is the underlying exploration of racism or how the power her villian seeks is often at the expense or the control and domination of those he believes have hurt him or are beneath him.
In Rowlings world or the World of Harry Potter - the dominant class or the class with the privilege are the Wizards. Yet, it depends on your point of veiw doesn't it? From the Muggles point of view, Wizards don't exist or are mere freaks to be frowned upon. It's only amongst the Wizards that Muggles are considered silly and beneath them - or even given the name - Muggle. Almost as if the two are different species - one is Wizard, one is Muggle.
And a Mudblood is a combination of the two. It's a deft exploration of group dynamics. And how those dynamics can be be counter-productive at times, isolating people who don't fit in, glorifying others, and encouraging the development of prejudicial and racist views and to a degree a feeling of superiority. Harry Potter and his two friends, Ron and Hermoine not only fight the villianous Voldemort in the books, they fight the prevailing attitudes of the society in which they live and in which they are being taught - discovering an increasing area of gray.
( Warning herein lie critical plot spoilers, do not read beneathe the cut if you have not read all the novels, specifically the last one Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows - assuming of course there is anyone still out there who hasn't. )
If I were to rank the books? I'd say my favorites are Prisoner of Azkaban, Deathly Hollows, HalfBlood Prince, and Sorcer's Stone.
Now? I'm reading something quite different yet oddly similar, Kafka on the Shore by Haruki Murakami (a Japanese novelist). It is about a lonely and friendless fifteen year old boy, who lives mostly inside his own head, and his journey to find his mother and sister who left when he was quite young. He runs away from his father on his fifteenth birthday and the story unrolls from there. A friend recommended it to me, it is magical realism and told in the first person. Very different writing style than Rowlings, more literary and far more descriptive.
Overall? I agree with Stephen King's review of it in Entertainment Weekly, which I also just read. He doesn't go into detail on theme, character or plot, so much as talk about it as a general reading experience, highlighting what worked and didn't work for him and why he considers it a quality read or lasting.
The book, simply put, is magical - it takes you into another world and you enjoy being there. It also has a warm endearing message at its heart. And is what I'd call a "happy book" or for the "child" in all of us, regardless of our age. A point King makes in his review - which you can find online at EW.com.
What impressed me most about the book was the underlying thematic structure. Rowlings explores some old and interesting themes in a new way, highlighting points without preaching or talking down to her audience, or telling us what to think - so much as showing with dry wit and humor.
And, she manages in my view at least, to get at the root of an age-old issue that has been discussed quite a bit on lj of late - racism or more aptly put racial discrimination and does it through metaphor and analogy. Fantasy and sci-fi writers can often get away with discussing and exploring these issues in greater depth than literary or mainstream writers can. Why? Because we have the nifty layer of metaphor shielding us from some hard truths about ourselves and our society. As Mary Poppins used to say, it's always easier to take one's medicine with a spoonful of sugar.
The main theme of the Potter books of course is love over power or advancement/superiority. The characters who seek fame, glory, superiority and power pay dearly for their actions. While those who sacrifice these things for love are rewarded. Power isn't necessarily a bad thing, Rowlings states, but when it is sought after or desired over everything else it certainly can be. Hardly a new theme - other writers, such as Joss Whedon, CS Lewis, Tolkien, and Phillip Pullman have discussed this issue and came up with similar results. Whedon went so far as to create two tv shows - one where the heroine much like Potter does not want power, and attempts to shirk it or push it aside, seeing it as more of a burden than a gift and the other, where the hero desires power, yearns for it, and pays dearly for it once he obtains it.
But what distinguishes Rowlings novels from Tolkein, Lewis, and Pullman, as well as from Whedon's tv shows...is the underlying exploration of racism or how the power her villian seeks is often at the expense or the control and domination of those he believes have hurt him or are beneath him.
In Rowlings world or the World of Harry Potter - the dominant class or the class with the privilege are the Wizards. Yet, it depends on your point of veiw doesn't it? From the Muggles point of view, Wizards don't exist or are mere freaks to be frowned upon. It's only amongst the Wizards that Muggles are considered silly and beneath them - or even given the name - Muggle. Almost as if the two are different species - one is Wizard, one is Muggle.
And a Mudblood is a combination of the two. It's a deft exploration of group dynamics. And how those dynamics can be be counter-productive at times, isolating people who don't fit in, glorifying others, and encouraging the development of prejudicial and racist views and to a degree a feeling of superiority. Harry Potter and his two friends, Ron and Hermoine not only fight the villianous Voldemort in the books, they fight the prevailing attitudes of the society in which they live and in which they are being taught - discovering an increasing area of gray.
( Warning herein lie critical plot spoilers, do not read beneathe the cut if you have not read all the novels, specifically the last one Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows - assuming of course there is anyone still out there who hasn't. )
If I were to rank the books? I'd say my favorites are Prisoner of Azkaban, Deathly Hollows, HalfBlood Prince, and Sorcer's Stone.
Now? I'm reading something quite different yet oddly similar, Kafka on the Shore by Haruki Murakami (a Japanese novelist). It is about a lonely and friendless fifteen year old boy, who lives mostly inside his own head, and his journey to find his mother and sister who left when he was quite young. He runs away from his father on his fifteenth birthday and the story unrolls from there. A friend recommended it to me, it is magical realism and told in the first person. Very different writing style than Rowlings, more literary and far more descriptive.
