As I say in the title, I don't usually read fantasies. They seem too far removed from reality, the language can be hard to understand, and the worldbuilding demands a lot of work early on, like having to learn all these names, maps, various political and cultural systems, rules of magic, and so on. In other words, it's hard to get into it, at least for me.
But many people recommended Harry Potter to me, expressing surprise I had never read it. Now that I have, I'm not really sure how I feel about the book Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (aka Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone).
One, it was certainly easy to get into. I appreciated how the story was using Harry as a stand-in for the reader in a way that we felt puzzled as he did, and we learned the same things he learned.
I guess it was written primarily for younger people, so the language was quite simple. And it helps that the magical world exists in the real world and you are introduced it gradually. And it's not that complicated, though I got the sense the rules were not explained very well or JK Rowling was intentionally vague on some details, perhaps to try to surprise the reader.
Like the last chapter, the explanations by Dumbledore about why certain events unfolded the way they did were a bit random for my taste. We might as well have known those rules earlier.
think a strong aspect of the story is that it's not just fantasy but it's also adventure, mystery, and most importantly, really about the experiences of a young guy navigating school and dealing with very human problems for kids that age, like studying, competing in sports, dealing with teachers, standing up to bullies, etc. There is a lot of emphasis on the power of friendship, and I think that's a good message and something I could relate to.
Overall, nothing about the book stood out for me. It felt derivative, not original. And the writing felt inconsistent, like the early chapters read almost like a fairy tale, an orphan with an inexplicably abusive family, then there are various sudden shifts in tone in later chapters. In addition, I did not care much about the rules of various sports and competitions, though I know many people found those competitions among the best parts of the book.
But one thing the book is not is boring. Rowling is a good storyteller. I can totally see how younger people can be really captured by the book because as an older person, I still found it interesting. Lots of little memorable scenes, like when Hagrid arrives early to take Harry and begins cooking sausages over fire and Harry is finally treated with kindness, or when he meets the Weasleys on the train and he gets to know Ron and finally relate with someone his own age, the emotional moments of looking in the mirror and seeing his family, etc. I also enjoyed the humor btw, wish there was more of it.
Right now I'm considering whether to begin reading the second book to see how Rowling's style has evolved.
Those of you who have read the book, especially after the craze had died a little, how did you feel about the first one? Did you read the rest?
by honey-collector
4 Comments
They’re kids books. They’re a fun world and the stories are fine, but if you’re expecting a huge amount of depth and a sophisticated magic system, you’re reading the wrong thing.
Loved it as a kid, less so as an adult. It’s a nice introduction book.
They get progressively better imo, then the end dips a bit but it’s still good. You always have to accept they are young adult books and not highbrow literature, though. They are a good read for fun, but not life changing.
The first book is great but the weakest in the series imo. The series peaks around book 4 or 5.
Should’ve tried Discworld instead, now that’s a British fantasy series that knows how to write a living world that actually changes