Harry Potter Discussion (spoilers)

I kind of hate the fact that the movies have come out so soon... I can't help but think of the actors instead of the characters, which really frustrates me because it limits my imagination while reading.
 
If you go to wikipedia and enter in "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" there's a really interesting entry about the book... Check it out.
 
Scholastic announced today that the US edition of Deathly Hallows will contain 784 pages, making it the second longest book in the series behind OOTP!
Click to expand...

Wasn't Goblet of Fire longer?

Ah well, this is good news.
 
Why are the American editions so much longer than the Canadian/U.K. ones?

Do you semi-illiterate yanks need larger type or something?
Click to expand...

According to Corporate America we do. But, Corporate America is comprised of morons, so. . .

Joe Kalicki said:
Well, we couldn't handle a Philosopher's Stone, what do you think?
Click to expand...

That was probably the dumbest decision ever. God forbid a kid looks up what a Philosopher's Stone is.
 
Last edited:
Lynx said:
That was probably the dumbest decision ever. God forbid a kid looks up what a Philosopher's Stone is.
Click to expand...

I know. It's even better because they explain what the Philosopher's Stone is in the book. So instead of learning what a fake stone that's actually relevant to mythology and history is, they learn what a fake stone that's only relevant to Harry Potter is. If they don't know what a Philosopher's Stone is, how the **** would anyone know what a Sorcerer's Stone is, especially since it doesn't even exist in the fevered, mercury-riddled brains of ancient alchemists?!
 
TwilightEL said:
I know. It's even better because they explain what the Philosopher's Stone is in the book. So instead of learning what a fake stone that's actually relevant to mythology and history is, they learn what a fake stone that's only relevant to Harry Potter is. If they don't know what a Philosopher's Stone is, how the **** would anyone know what a Sorcerer's Stone is, especially since it doesn't even exist in the fevered, mercury-riddled brains of ancient alchemists?!
Click to expand...

Because it says "Sorcerer's" and kids understand what that word has to do with magic.
 
The weird thing is, they don't Americanize anything else in the entire series. Just that one word in the freakin' title fo the first book for some reason.

Any kid who grew up reading Flash would know what a Philosopher's Stoen is, by the way. Dr. Alchemy uses it!
 
Joe Kalicki said:
The weird thing is, they don't Americanize anything else in the entire series. Just that one word in the freakin' title fo the first book for some reason.
Click to expand...

That was before they knew the series would sell. These are the same people who suggested that Ms. Rowling go by J.K. because the chumps in P.R. thought that they could sell the series better if the readers thought it was written by a guy...

And they did americanize some things in the other versions, for instance "jumpers" to "sweaters" (but I think they stopped doing that once Jo had more editorial control over the series).

The series was a long-shot from the get go, as fantasy wasn't in its hay-day when HP came along, so the people in charge freaked out that kids would think that a book that had something to do with Philosophy wouldn't be interesting.

What I think they should have done was change the title (because its not unreasonable to think that ten and eleven year olds wouldn't want to read about the Philosopher's Stone, because only one in a million would have heard of it before), but keep it the Philosopher's Stone in the books, The title simply referring to one of the various sorcerors in the book who had possession of it (well... Dumbledore and Nicolas Flamel, at least). But unfortunately, I do not have any metaphysical control over the past.
 
Last edited:
Dr.Strangefate said:
What I think they should have done was change the title (because its not unreasonable to think that ten and eleven year olds wouldn't want to read about the Philosopher's Stone, because only one in a million would have heard of it before), but keep it the Philosopher's Stone in the books, The title simply referring to one of the various sorcerors in the book who had possession of it (well... Dumbledore and Nicolas Flamel, at least). But unfortunately, I do not have any metaphysical control over the past.
Click to expand...

That would have been a fair compromise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top