I am on a seesaw about Potter

[Aloc Acoc Goblin]

Remus Moony J Lupin

OlivierDeSillegue

Aloc Acoc Goblin

The books have the same content, I did not say there was an X rated version of Harry Potter! stressed

You were reproaching them to have a childish cover and written in a too large print to be taken seriously. Well, I'm showing you that J.K. Rowling had the foresight to make available two editions of the same books. One is all colourful and pretty and intended for the younger audience, and the other has a more sober appearance and a smaller print.

Take your mind out of the gutter and don't give a meaning to my words that isn't there, thank you very much.

I personally love the adult editions. the covers are gorgeous. Especially PoA.

BTW, there is an x rated version of harry potter. Its called fan fiction wink

No, it's called "slash" and is being prosecuted by Rowling and her attorneys.

[Rubyy768]

Aloc Acoc Goblin

I went from hating it without reading it at first because kids I knew were pretending to cast spells by mixing dirt and leaves and broken twigs and insects in a bowl. (LOL!) To finally reading it and thinking it was awfully huge print - definately for kids. To enjoying it a little when I saw the movie and trying to read the book (I am normally a bookworm). Until finally I am back to being extremely and terribly annoyed because the author seems to be killing off all of the most loved characters. Really awful. Like a horror series for gradeschoolers or some rot.

well J.K rowling said the series was all about dealing with death.
I really liked that, not because I liked seeing people dying, but because it taught me that death was inevitable.I think she killed people's favorite characters because it might teach people that no matter how much you love someone they're ultimately going to die and you have to move on with your life. Also I think she mentioned that Harry Potter was not intended for little kids.

[Aloc Acoc Goblin]

OlivierDeSillegue

Aloc Acoc Goblin

The books have the same content, I did not say there was an X rated version of Harry Potter! stressed

You were reproaching them to have a childish cover and written in a too large print to be taken seriously. Well, I'm showing you that J.K. Rowling had the foresight to make available two editions of the same books. One is all colourful and pretty and intended for the younger audience, and the other has a more sober appearance and a smaller print.

Take your mind out of the gutter and don't give a meaning to my words that isn't there, thank you very much.

One more thing: childish was YOUR word. Read my post again. I never used that word. There is a difference between the meanings of the words childlike and childish and even children. Seriously. Read what I posted again. You are taking liberty with my words and going off in a completely different direction.

[Mom Should Have Swallowed]

Aloc Acoc Goblin

OlivierDeSillegue

Aloc Acoc Goblin

ShinHaeMoon

You sound like you may have been a little older when the series first came out then? It's okay not to like it, but it's cool you kept coming back to try it out when some of it appealed to you.

It is hard that she killed off the characters, but the series is more "young adult" than for "children" as the main themes reflect this. It was stressful to me too, especially in the 5th book when we get our first major character death, to face this at the young age of 15. But at the same time, I think Rowling was really trying to shine through that people can always be their best and fight for what is right, even when they are emotionally, physically, and mentally at their worst.

I hope you keep with the series and enjoy reading/watching the rest, but if not...it's cool you tried!

A smaller font and some more mature artistry would lend to your theory better, I'm afraid. Huge print is for children. Cartoony artistry on the cover and et al makes one think the themes will fit in with the same. If it was designed for youth, then why were it's most adoring fans between the 4th and 6th grades in Elementary School? I've heard this argument before and I am still not convinced.

Here, have a look at these images.

Adult edition of Harry Potter:



No cartoon artistry on these covers, as far as I can see. As for the huge print... Are you saying that people with an eye sight disability are actually immature children? It can be nice for people with an eye disease like glaucoma to be able to read without having to use a magnifier. stare It's not because they prefer larger print that they are immature. Large print is not just for children, duh.

Ridiculous, your claims. If there is an adult edition - which Gaia wouldn't let you post - they aren't by Rowling, but somebody else. I work in Notary Sales. There was only one format in the 90s when these books came out and they were definately geared to Elementary School students. They were even marketed in the Scholastic Reader, which I still have a copy of out of pure chance. It got randomly shuffled into a file with academic records in it and because it's humorous I left it there.

I'm pretty sure on what he said "Adult version" was it's different addition of the books that have a more mature novely appearance. None of the content has changed.

[Miss Marinara Sauce]

Aloc Acoc Goblin

Miss Marinara Sauce

Yes, the earlier books were aimed at children. But as the series went on, the books and their themes became progressively darker. It's not fair to completely judge them based on the target audience; I love many children's books, and I love many adult books as well. My advice would be to just give them a chance: the series has meant a lot to millions of readers, myself included. That was one of the great things about the series; the audience grew up with Harry.

Let me put it to everyone this way: when I was about 8 years old, I was in the next room when an older family member was murdered via a rifle held directly under his chin and the trigger pulled. Sounded like thunder of course. That was not a good thing for me to experience at that age. Nor is it good to put in books published by Scholastic from the inception and marketed for kids. And sold in the Scholastic Reader brochure distributed monthly at public schools. I have one still. The target was 4th graders. Says it right on the top.

Again, I didn't say I totally hate them. You guys keep putting words in my mouth. I stated very plainly from the beginning that I am on the fence about them.

First of all, I'm very sorry for your loss. That's awful.

Second, no deaths like that (or in fact, any) occur in the earlier books of the series. Not until book 4 do deaths really start to occur. Did that Scholastic thing say that all of the books were aimed at fourth graders? Because if it did, it was sorely mistaken. Like I said, the audience grows up with Harry.

Third, I never said you hated the books. I said you judge them based on the target audience, which is exactly what you are doing. I am not putting words in your mouth when I say that you are giving me the impression that you don't want to read the books at all. You've found a counter-argument for every suggestion given to you in this thread.

It's not up to us to convince you to read Harry Potter; it's up to you to decide if you want to. Really, it can't hurt you to just pick up the first book and read it. If you don't like it, then you don't like it, and likely nothing anyone says is going to change that opinion. You say you're on the fence about it; we're just telling you to give it a chance.

[Aloc Acoc Goblin]

Miss Marinara Sauce

Aloc Acoc Goblin

Miss Marinara Sauce

Yes, the earlier books were aimed at children. But as the series went on, the books and their themes became progressively darker. It's not fair to completely judge them based on the target audience; I love many children's books, and I love many adult books as well. My advice would be to just give them a chance: the series has meant a lot to millions of readers, myself included. That was one of the great things about the series; the audience grew up with Harry.

Let me put it to everyone this way: when I was about 8 years old, I was in the next room when an older family member was murdered via a rifle held directly under his chin and the trigger pulled. Sounded like thunder of course. That was not a good thing for me to experience at that age. Nor is it good to put in books published by Scholastic from the inception and marketed for kids. And sold in the Scholastic Reader brochure distributed monthly at public schools. I have one still. The target was 4th graders. Says it right on the top.

Again, I didn't say I totally hate them. You guys keep putting words in my mouth. I stated very plainly from the beginning that I am on the fence about them.

First of all, I'm very sorry for your loss. That's awful.

Second, no deaths like that (or in fact, any) occur in the earlier books of the series. Not until book 4 do deaths really start to occur. Did that Scholastic thing say that all of the books were aimed at fourth graders? Because if it did, it was sorely mistaken. Like I said, the audience grows up with Harry.

Third, I never said you hated the books. I said you judge them based on the target audience, which is exactly what you are doing. I am not putting words in your mouth when I say that you are giving me the impression that you don't want to read the books at all. You've found a counter-argument for every suggestion given to you in this thread.

It's not up to us to convince you to read Harry Potter; it's up to you to decide if you want to. Really, it can't hurt you to just pick up the first book and read it. If you don't like it, then you don't like it, and likely nothing anyone says is going to change that opinion. You say you're on the fence about it; we're just telling you to give it a chance.

You REALLY aren't reading all of my posts. If you had you would know that I HAVE READ THEM, well, some of them. And others I have only seen the cinematic version of them. And you are a very silly person. This isn't something that requires intervention. You should learn to let others have differing opinions from yours without trying to convert them to your way of thinking. Honestly, it wouldn't kill you.

[Aloc Acoc Goblin]

The New Comb

Aloc Acoc Goblin

OlivierDeSillegue

Aloc Acoc Goblin

ShinHaeMoon

You sound like you may have been a little older when the series first came out then? It's okay not to like it, but it's cool you kept coming back to try it out when some of it appealed to you.

It is hard that she killed off the characters, but the series is more "young adult" than for "children" as the main themes reflect this. It was stressful to me too, especially in the 5th book when we get our first major character death, to face this at the young age of 15. But at the same time, I think Rowling was really trying to shine through that people can always be their best and fight for what is right, even when they are emotionally, physically, and mentally at their worst.

I hope you keep with the series and enjoy reading/watching the rest, but if not...it's cool you tried!

A smaller font and some more mature artistry would lend to your theory better, I'm afraid. Huge print is for children. Cartoony artistry on the cover and et al makes one think the themes will fit in with the same. If it was designed for youth, then why were it's most adoring fans between the 4th and 6th grades in Elementary School? I've heard this argument before and I am still not convinced.

Here, have a look at these images.

Adult edition of Harry Potter:



No cartoon artistry on these covers, as far as I can see. As for the huge print... Are you saying that people with an eye sight disability are actually immature children? It can be nice for people with an eye disease like glaucoma to be able to read without having to use a magnifier. stare It's not because they prefer larger print that they are immature. Large print is not just for children, duh.

Ridiculous, your claims. If there is an adult edition - which Gaia wouldn't let you post - they aren't by Rowling, but somebody else. I work in Notary Sales. There was only one format in the 90s when these books came out and they were definately geared to Elementary School students. They were even marketed in the Scholastic Reader, which I still have a copy of out of pure chance. It got randomly shuffled into a file with academic records in it and because it's humorous I left it there.

I'm pretty sure on what he said "Adult version" was it's different addition of the books that have a more mature novely appearance. None of the content has changed.

Does no one see it but me? The little smiley cops with hand out, blocking the links to the "adult version"? A sign it's porn or adult rated. That's one of the features of this site.

[Mom Should Have Swallowed]

Aloc Acoc Goblin

The New Comb

Aloc Acoc Goblin

OlivierDeSillegue

Aloc Acoc Goblin

ShinHaeMoon

You sound like you may have been a little older when the series first came out then? It's okay not to like it, but it's cool you kept coming back to try it out when some of it appealed to you.

It is hard that she killed off the characters, but the series is more "young adult" than for "children" as the main themes reflect this. It was stressful to me too, especially in the 5th book when we get our first major character death, to face this at the young age of 15. But at the same time, I think Rowling was really trying to shine through that people can always be their best and fight for what is right, even when they are emotionally, physically, and mentally at their worst.

I hope you keep with the series and enjoy reading/watching the rest, but if not...it's cool you tried!

A smaller font and some more mature artistry would lend to your theory better, I'm afraid. Huge print is for children. Cartoony artistry on the cover and et al makes one think the themes will fit in with the same. If it was designed for youth, then why were it's most adoring fans between the 4th and 6th grades in Elementary School? I've heard this argument before and I am still not convinced.

Here, have a look at these images.

Adult edition of Harry Potter:



No cartoon artistry on these covers, as far as I can see. As for the huge print... Are you saying that people with an eye sight disability are actually immature children? It can be nice for people with an eye disease like glaucoma to be able to read without having to use a magnifier. stare It's not because they prefer larger print that they are immature. Large print is not just for children, duh.

Ridiculous, your claims. If there is an adult edition - which Gaia wouldn't let you post - they aren't by Rowling, but somebody else. I work in Notary Sales. There was only one format in the 90s when these books came out and they were definately geared to Elementary School students. They were even marketed in the Scholastic Reader, which I still have a copy of out of pure chance. It got randomly shuffled into a file with academic records in it and because it's humorous I left it there.

I'm pretty sure on what he said "Adult version" was it's different addition of the books that have a more mature novely appearance. None of the content has changed.

Does no one see it but me? The little smiley cops with hand out, blocking the links to the "adult version"? A sign it's porn or adult rated. That's one of the features of this site.

I seriously have no idea what you're talking about.

[Aloc Acoc Goblin]

ExtraCottonCandy

Aloc Acoc Goblin

I went from hating it without reading it at first because kids I knew were pretending to cast spells by mixing dirt and leaves and broken twigs and insects in a bowl. (LOL!) To finally reading it and thinking it was awfully huge print - definately for kids. To enjoying it a little when I saw the movie and trying to read the book (I am normally a bookworm). Until finally I am back to being extremely and terribly annoyed because the author seems to be killing off all of the most loved characters. Really awful. Like a horror series for gradeschoolers or some rot.

well J.K rowling said the series was all about dealing with death.
I really liked that, not because I liked seeing people dying, but because it taught me that death was inevitable.I think she killed people's favorite characters because it might teach people that no matter how much you love someone they're ultimately going to die and you have to move on with your life. Also I think she mentioned that Harry Potter was not intended for little kids.

AND YET, she never corrected Scholastic Books for marketing to them. 4th and 5th graders are 9 and 10.

Thapoint is, I think she would have better results and less friction from parents in the USA if she were to insist on marketing to older kids in Junior High and High School with the more sophisticated illustrations and a little smaller font inside the books.

[Aloc Acoc Goblin]

OlivierDeSillegue

Aloc Acoc Goblin

THEN WHY DID GAIA BLOCK THE LINKS?

... Because you have it as a preference for your account that Gaia blocks certain images with a little smiley that shows its hand. If you click on it, you should be able to see what it is hiding... Unless you're underage and there is some level of parental protection of which I am not aware...

They were simply images of book covers.

Finally I find this. Thank you. I didn't select that preference. Thanks. I'll have to edit my account settings.

[Rubyy768]

Aloc Acoc Goblin

ExtraCottonCandy

Aloc Acoc Goblin

I went from hating it without reading it at first because kids I knew were pretending to cast spells by mixing dirt and leaves and broken twigs and insects in a bowl. (LOL!) To finally reading it and thinking it was awfully huge print - definately for kids. To enjoying it a little when I saw the movie and trying to read the book (I am normally a bookworm). Until finally I am back to being extremely and terribly annoyed because the author seems to be killing off all of the most loved characters. Really awful. Like a horror series for gradeschoolers or some rot.

well J.K rowling said the series was all about dealing with death.
I really liked that, not because I liked seeing people dying, but because it taught me that death was inevitable.I think she killed people's favorite characters because it might teach people that no matter how much you love someone they're ultimately going to die and you have to move on with your life. Also I think she mentioned that Harry Potter was not intended for little kids.

AND YET, she never corrected Scholastic Books for marketing to them. 4th and 5th graders are 9 and 10.

Thapoint is, I think she would have better results and less friction from parents in the USA if she were to insist on marketing to older kids in Junior High and High School with the more sophisticated illustrations and a little smaller font inside the books.

Oh well she can't change it now. Besides the parents need to get over themselves. so what someone died in the book. it's not like she described them bleeding to death and getting their head chopped off. She actually made their deaths very graceful to read about.If I was a parent I would much rather see my kid reading and watching harry potter than watching all the reality bull crap on T.V. J.K is probably thinking to herself " Stupid Americans..." lol

[Mayor Gravity]

Aloc Acoc Goblin

Remus Moony J Lupin

OlivierDeSillegue

Aloc Acoc Goblin

The books have the same content, I did not say there was an X rated version of Harry Potter! stressed

You were reproaching them to have a childish cover and written in a too large print to be taken seriously. Well, I'm showing you that J.K. Rowling had the foresight to make available two editions of the same books. One is all colourful and pretty and intended for the younger audience, and the other has a more sober appearance and a smaller print.

Take your mind out of the gutter and don't give a meaning to my words that isn't there, thank you very much.

I personally love the adult editions. the covers are gorgeous. Especially PoA.

BTW, there is an x rated version of harry potter. Its called fan fiction wink

No, it's called "slash" and is being prosecuted by Rowling and her attorneys.

Can you prosecute something like fanfic? Most people are smart enough to put a disclaimer on it.

[Aloc Acoc Goblin]

OlivierDeSillegue

Aloc Acoc Goblin

ShinHaeMoon

You sound like you may have been a little older when the series first came out then? It's okay not to like it, but it's cool you kept coming back to try it out when some of it appealed to you.

It is hard that she killed off the characters, but the series is more "young adult" than for "children" as the main themes reflect this. It was stressful to me too, especially in the 5th book when we get our first major character death, to face this at the young age of 15. But at the same time, I think Rowling was really trying to shine through that people can always be their best and fight for what is right, even when they are emotionally, physically, and mentally at their worst.

I hope you keep with the series and enjoy reading/watching the rest, but if not...it's cool you tried!

A smaller font and some more mature artistry would lend to your theory better, I'm afraid. Huge print is for children. Cartoony artistry on the cover and et al makes one think the themes will fit in with the same. If it was designed for youth, then why were it's most adoring fans between the 4th and 6th grades in Elementary School? I've heard this argument before and I am still not convinced.

Here, have a look at these images.

Adult edition of Harry Potter:



No cartoon artistry on these covers, as far as I can see. As for the huge print... Are you saying that people with an eye sight disability are actually immature children? It can be nice for people with an eye disease like glaucoma to be able to read without having to use a magnifier. stare It's not because they prefer larger print that they are immature. Large print is not just for children, duh.

Okay, now that I can see the art, I see where you are coming from. Certainly much better geared to older fans, and hopefully they will redirect the marketing now and keep it out of the elementary schools. Seriously. That was just wrong.

[Aloc Acoc Goblin]

Mayor Gravity

Aloc Acoc Goblin

Remus Moony J Lupin

OlivierDeSillegue

Aloc Acoc Goblin

The books have the same content, I did not say there was an X rated version of Harry Potter! stressed

You were reproaching them to have a childish cover and written in a too large print to be taken seriously. Well, I'm showing you that J.K. Rowling had the foresight to make available two editions of the same books. One is all colourful and pretty and intended for the younger audience, and the other has a more sober appearance and a smaller print.

Take your mind out of the gutter and don't give a meaning to my words that isn't there, thank you very much.

I personally love the adult editions. the covers are gorgeous. Especially PoA.

BTW, there is an x rated version of harry potter. Its called fan fiction wink

No, it's called "slash" and is being prosecuted by Rowling and her attorneys.

Can you prosecute something like fanfic? Most people are smart enough to put a disclaimer on it.

google it if you don't believe me.....that's where I found it

[Specter Flux]

OlivierDeSillegue

STUNNING.

I have actually put off buying a set because I always hated the goofy art.