Am I the only one who hasn't read ANY of the Harry Potter books?

[LadyAziz]

I didn't know they existed until 2 1/2 years ago. I saw one movie (it was actually good). Yet I don't understand the hype, but its better than Parasite Hilton and other Hollywood hype. :P

RANT: I hate things that are hyped too much. I hated the sixth grade because of Titanic, every freaking day "oh my god Leonardo is so hot, my heart will go on by Celine Dion is the coolest song". Don't even get me started on the Tickle-me Elmo doll.

:rant:

Ok I feel better :-)

[bigwillq]

1. I've never read any of the books.

I saw one of the movies but watched only 20 minutes before I turned it off. It just didn't interest me.

[LadyAziz]

2. I can't escape HP books/movies esp. when it debuts

My younger sisters talk about it like its God's gift to the world. So weird

[bigwillq]

3. So does my sister!

She's a Potter freak!

[Neoma]

19. The movies suck.

Every true Harry Potter fan agrees.

[barb162]

4. I haven't read the books.

But I love the movies.

[petronius]

5. I've never read any of them - I think I've seen 2 of the movies... (nt)

[On the Road]

48. The Books are Infinitely Better

You should try them out.

[jobycom]

6. There's a difference between "hyped" and "popular."

Titanic was the biggest selling movie of all times. It swept the Oscars that year. Since so many people had seen it and loved it, they naturally talked about it. People talk about less well-known films, too, but there are fewer people doing it, so they don't seem to get as much attention.

Same with Harry Potter. Lots of fans equals lots of people talking, watching, and buying.

Contrast that to media-created crazes, like George W. Bush's campaign in 2000. Nobody even knew who he was, and the media was pimping him as the frontrunner, convincing people they had better start liking him, or else. That's hype.

Not saying you should rush out and read the books if you aren't interested in them, just saying the series wasn't popular because of the hype, but became popular as so many people read and liked the books.

Just my thoughts. :)

[LadyAziz]

11. you have a point but

it's not just people that make things "popular" but also the media who push it and promote it endlessly. Doesn't the media promotion aspect make it "hype"? Well in my opinion Titanic wasn't big because it was so good but mainly because of crazy teen girls rushing to see Leonardo. That's why it made a lot of money and it garnered a lot of awards because of it was the best known movie that year.


But you are completely right about the Bush hype. It was so scary, my parents fell right into that trap. I was 14 then but still saw through the BS.


thanks for your thoughts, jobycom.

[jobycom]

34. I'm sure there's some of both in most successful movies.

One feeds the other.

As for the teen girls driving "Titanic," I didn't see that, not being a teen girl when it came out. I was in my thirties, and had heard little to nothing about the movie until several male friends my age raved about it. Two of them, both extreme movie nuts I'd known since high school, told me they considered it the greatest movie ever made, and it had nothing to do with Leonardo being cute. I never really saw it as the greatest ever, but it was a far better than average film, and I'm sure the Academy, most of whom are not teenage girls, thought that it had virtues other than Leonardo being cute. Especially since he was the one significant aspect of the film not nominated by the Academy.

[Oeditpus Rex]

14. Are you saying nearly 400 million HP books have been sold

on word of mouth?

Let's consider a huge best-seller from before the Age of Hype: "Jonathan Livingston Seagull." Published in 1970, 40 million copies have been sold, or just under a million per year on average.

By contrast, 107 million copies of the first book in the "Harry Potter" series, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," have been sold. It was published in 1997, so that's a little more than 10 million per year.

The only non-HP book with those numbers is "The Da Vinci Code," of which 65 million copies have sold since it was published in 2003.

Considering that it and all the HP books have been the subject of media frenzies, one has to conclude that there's more at work in their marketing than readers talking to other readers or displays in Barnes & Noble.



(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_books)

[datasuspect]

46. there is absolutely no marketing strategy for harry potter

[Left Is Write]

7. I have never read any of the books, nor have I seen any of the movies.

I'm just not interested.

The hype and excitement don't bother me at all, though.

[billyskank]

8. Nope, I haven't.

Not going to criticise or offer any judgements on people who do, but they're books for kids and I'm not a kid.

[LadyAziz]

12. So true

I can understand if it was just the kids but its the adults as well which makes it more weird :hide:.


- sorry HP fans

[GirlinContempt]

43. I don't think its weird at all.

I only really hear people who haven't read the books say things about them being for children.
But even if that is the case, even if they are just for children, I think it's supremely arrogant for those who've reached the age of majority to somehow act as if they're beyond whatever might be offered to those under it.

An excellent book is an excellent book. I don't care who writes it, or what age/sex/race/class it's geared toward. If it's excellent, it's worth reading.

[WildEyedLiberal]

66. Thank you

:thumbsup:

I was trying to figure out how to say that politely but you beat me to it. The only people I hear talking about how they're "kids' books" are people who have next to no familiarity with them.

Hey, if Harry Potter isn't your thing, that's completely fine by me, but I do quite resent being told that my literacy level/maturity level/tastes are juvenile (read: less intelligent) because I enjoy these books. It's quite patronizing.

[camero]

9. You're not alone

I am irresistibly drawn away from anything that's over-hyped.

[Mojambo]

10. I read the first 3 (well, 2 and a half)

I worked in a bookstore and the peer pressure was intense.

Couldn't quite make it through 3. I just found it a little hacky and repetitive to continue.

[YDogg]

13. I haven't read any of them.

Mrs. YDogg is finishing the last one this afternoon.

[gmoney]

15. I haven't either...

Saw about 10 minutes of one of the movies on cable. Yawn...

Wandered into my local bookstore Friday night and saw the throngs queued up to get their copy at midnight. I felt like warning them all to get over it and get a boyfriend/girlfriend, like Shatner on that SNL skit where he shouts at the Star Trek convention geeks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvzN8mGEqSc

[alarimer]

16. I haven't

I have seen all the movies though, mostly because I tend to watch whatever is new on HBO.

I would feel silly reading "kid's" books, which is the only reason I have not read them. Stupid, I know.

[texanwitch]

17. I have listened to the first 2 books on CD on a very long road trip,

I just couldn't get interested, but I glad so many people enjoy the books and movies.

[Fox Mulder]

18. I haven't read a single Harry Potter book and never will.

I find it kind of odd that a lot of adults are reading a children's book and that for a lot of these adults, it'll be the only book they'll read this year.

I don't know about everyone else, but I outgrew Harry Potter-type books when I passed the sixth grade.

[rainbow4321]

20. Not a one...

Saw a couple of the movies, though.
Both of my Potter book/movie addicted daughters say that they were disappointed with the current Potter movie...not good at all.

[SPKrazy]

21. No, I don't want to read about any Hairy Potter

I mean who wants hair in their clay?

:yoiks:


okay, :P stoopid me, I haven't read them though...

:rofl:

[usaftmo]

22. Haven't read any of the books...

haven't seen any of the movies...and am not interested in breaking that tradition.

[sbj405]

23. I haven't read any of the books or seen any of the movies.

The more the hype, the less likely I am to see/read something.

[pokerfan]

24. Never interested me

LOTR is about the only fantasy I've ever read and I like to read a lot. Potter just seemed kind of well, juvenile. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I read Heinlein's juveniles when I was a juvenile.

But I will say this. I tip my hat to Rowling for getting a generation excited about reading again. I saw a kid in Costco begging his mother to buy him the latest Potter. She's like, "You haven't finished the last one yet." I was amazed that this kid was throwing a borderline tantrum over a book, rather than some toy or video game. She told him to finish the current book and she'll buy him the next one.

A step forward for literacy.

[On the Road]

49. Rowling's Worldview is Much More Sophisticated Than Lewis's

The strength of the books is in their understanding of the characters' humanity -- the fallibility of authority, the need for disobedience, the tendency for justified anger to turn into evil, the randomness and inevitability of death, and the sometimes serious sins and faults of the best characters. That is some serious shit for kids to be reading in this politically correct world.

Rowling's agnosticism enabled her to draw more complex characters than Lewis. Despite Lewis's much greater learning and erudition, he was a medieval believer at heart. The kind of simplistic dualism in the Narnia books and the sci fi trilogy is just deadly to a modern novel.

[pokerfan]

53. Would you say that LOTR is as simplistic as Narnia?

I ask this sincerely as I've never read Narnia. I've read some of Lewis' essays but never Narnia.

Tolkien was a devout Roman Catholic and was also a close friend of C.S. Lewis. The reviewed each other's works.

I mean, LOTR is also an epic struggle of good vs. evil. An ultimate struggle even, considering that Sauron/Morgoth is an analog of Lucifer, a fallen angel. Gandalf as a Christ figure: falling, "dying" amd being reborn/reanimated. Or Frodo as a Christ figure? Or was Tolkien just more subtle?

Is it that some characters were allowed to be less than ideal? Boromir's temptation to seize the ring leading to his doom. Even Galadriel's temptation. Frodo eventually succumbing to the temptation. The potential for redemption in Gollum/Smeagol.

Narnia vs. LOTR. Let's get it on!

[On the Road]

57. Your Examples from LOTR are Good Ones

It is has more depth than I remember (despite having written a high school paper on Sam's character development).

The worldview of the Narnia books is pretty simplistic. They are after all children's books, but then again so is Harry Potter. The contrast is pretty stark.

[LanternWaste]

58. Simplistic dualism?

Simplistic dualism? There are quite a few instances of major characters in the Narnia books skirting shades of gray almost habitually.

"Rowling's agnosticism enabled her to draw more complex characters than Lewis."

Odd that. Care to expound?


:shrug:

[On the Road]

64. Part of it Has to Do with the Portrayal of Authority (minor spoilers)

as I remember the Narnia books, authority is pretty clearly either good or evil. Individual characters can have flaws or commit sin and be redeemed, but the moral structure of the world is fundamentally clear. There may be doubt about the outcome of a struggle, but the lines are clear.

In the Potter books, good and evil authorities are less distinguishable. Slytherin is an integral part of Hogwarts. Death eaters form part of the power structure. Many lesser character float in between the poles of good and evil. Authority is often clueless and arbitrary. Rule-breaking is frequently the only way to proceed. Harry's beloved father was an ass and treated Snape abominably. Even Dumbledore had justified guilt over his sister, held undemocratic ideas about the greater good, had an unhealthy obsession to control death, and stupidly brought his own imminent deat

In Rowling's world, it is not just a dualistic battle between good and evil, but between them and chance, conceit, stupidity, blindness, and bureaucracy. I believe it's very instructive for young readers, but I can't see Lewis creating this type of world for his readers.

[messiah2012]

25. I haven't

[GardeningGal]

26. I always intended to read them.....

just haven't made the time. Maybe some day.

[GardeningGal]

27. I always intended to read them.....

just haven't made the time. Maybe some day.

[LSK]

28. no books, no movies for me

But I might start reading the books.

Maybe.

[Wetzelbill]

29. I haven't read one

which is interesting because I read a lot.

[flvegan]

30. Never touched a one of 'em.

[Robeson]

31. Nope.

[Indy_Dem_Defender]

32. Never read any of them

saw about half of the first movie, not interesting. Never saw the lord of the rings movies Either I'm one of few for that too, and guess what I have no desire to ever.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

33. I've never read any of them, but I saw the first movie on a plane to Japan

It was a pretty good movie, but I dont know if I'd want to read seven books worth of these characters.

[sakabatou]

35. Or 'Zilla

What an awful movie!

[UrbScotty]

36. A few pages of the first one, plus part of the first movie (nt)

[krispos42]

37. I listened to the first on on an audiobook

It was entertaining. If I was a teenager I'd probably be all over them.

Instead it was "Star Trek" novels...

[AngryOldDem]

38. I've not read any, nor do I plan to.

Just ain't my bag when it comes to fiction.

[Inchworm]

39. I haven't but I'm not much for reading books

I've bought a few Harry Potter books for kids but never read one.

And.. welcome to DU! :hi:

[LynneSin]

40. I read the back cover of one of the books but that's about it

You know, the highlights 'trailer' of the book. I think it was of the 3rd book - I was trying to figure out what the big deal was all about. Still didn't get it.

BTW, I have a Tickle-Me Elmo Doll (bought it the day after Christmas the year it was the big item - and I got it on sale). And I think Leonardo is hot, but I hadn't felt that way until this past year or so. He definately was not "HOT" during the Titanic years

[Deep13]

41. Nope. Me neither. nt

[ghostsofgiants]

42. You clearly deserve a medal.

[jus_the_facts]

52. LMAO....

...you slay me! :D

[vi5]

44. I haven't but I also respect the fans of them...

I haven't read them just because it's not really my personal taste in books. But I'm also not one of these people who feels the need to crap on and insult those who have or to put my own tastes above theirs. Not that you did, but with all the discussion of this series I always feel the need to clarify because all too often it seems that in order to not have read them one needs to tout this fact with smug self satisfaction at every turn.

[Mutley]

45. Not me.

I haven't read any of them, but I probably will eventually just because I love reading and I'm curious about what all the fuss is about.

[Zavulon]

47. I haven't read any of the books or seen any of the movies. No interest.

It's bad enough that I had to actually stand in line for the last one for my niece, and then be unable to get any sleep before my next shift at work. I dragged ass all day because of Harry Potter. I'm just glad it's the last book, because I never want to repeat that experience again and can't tolerate the hype even when I don't have to stand in line.

[Bluestar]

50. I haven't read any of the Potter books

I did see one of the movies--OK, but not enough to make me go back for more.

I also couldn't stand Titanic--it went on and on with people in the water crying--it was so maudlin I thought I would puke.

[Common Sense Party]

51. All I can say is: DAMN, you're young!

"Titanic" in the SIXTH grade?

I think I had two kids by then.

Anyway, I believe I read the first book. Meh. It was okay.

My 12-year-old daughter has the first 6 memorized.

[NuttyFluffers]

54. never read one. but saw all the movies, except the one currently in theaters.

never saw Titanic, any version, and have no desire to. saw only the original King Kong, didn't care much for it -- more of a Godzilla fan -- and didn't see any of the remakes. never played any Tomb Raiders beyond 1 hour of the first one.

apparently i should be getting indy cred dispensed like tickets to a winner at the midway of a circus. but i really don't care about stuff like that. at some point i do want to read the books; the movies were cute, so i doubt the books could be worse.

currently i've been reading popular "newberry award winning books" because everyone seems to have read them. currently just finished 'Red Badge of Courage' and now working on 'Little Women.' not having the time of my life, but it brings me a bit closer to understanding the masses and their dominant culture (*cough*... so that i may enslave them to build my pyramids *cough*).

[Dragonbreathp9d]

55. I havent finished any

always had more intertesting reading going on. But I might pick them up for fun for the rest of this summer

[LanternWaste]

56. I haven't read the books nor seen the movies.

I haven't read the books nor seen the movies... and I get weird looks sometimes. But I've been outside of popular culture since 1986 (I've only this year found out who Paris Hilton is, and I doubt I could name three post-80's popular bands).

Not my cup of tea, but I'm happy that it may allow youngsters to read, and parents to read to their youngest children.

[ceile]

59. I've never read them.

But I have seen all the movies. :yoiks:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

60. hyped and popular are different.

[Rambis]

61. Me either

Never read a book nor seen one second of a movie-

[Crabby Appleton]

62. nope - me neither nt

[Sequoia]

63. You hated 6th grade

because of Titanic?!!...now that's funny. I liked (sort of) Titanic the first time but really can't stand Celine at all. At all!!!!! Leonardo is NOT hot either. The computer anitmated scenes were so noticable too. If you want to really see the best Titanic stick to the B&W original, "A Night to Remember" (http://www.jimusnr.com/Nighttoremember1958.html. I saw this movie on TV when I was 6 or 7 (also the first time the great movie "The Day the Earth Stood Still") with my dad. There was another Titanic movie made in the 60s in the USA(I think Glen Ford was in it) which was really lame so avoid it. Americans didn't like "A Night..." because there was no "love story" or any American actors. :eyes:

I've never read any Harry Potter books either although I watched the first movie.

[southerncrone]

65. Haven't read any OR seen any of the movies. Don't plan on it.

[wildhorses]

67. have not read any of the books. have seen the movies.

maybe, i will one of these days.