h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It is?
(ooh)


Must have slipped by me then. Who's he?

"Sharp Suit"

His first album was called "Get Sharp!" and featured winkle pickers on the cover.

Aha.
You could always cut a hole in the album sleeve and wear that, then.

"A natty nerk in a cardboard wig accosted me with great aplomb. Unfortunately, I'd already eaten."

I have finally read the first Harry Potter (found a large print version lying around at work).
The style reminded me strongly of Enid Blyton. Quite readable, but definitely a kid's book - I really can't understand why so many adults rave over it. If it gets people reading, that is good, but I certainly don't think it deserves all the hype.

Yeah, I reached the end of the first chapter and didn't find it gripping by then so 'rested' it.

I read the fifth book a couple of months ago - when it first came out. It was as lovely and charming as all the others. Why the big fuss? They are nice children's books that can also be enjoyed by adults.

Perhaps all the hype spoils it for some people. I just ignore all the hype myself.

az

I think the whole fuss is because they're nice chilren's books that can be enjoyed by adults. They're lightweight, fun, and entertaining and can be read by anyone without the label of "Literature" hanging over their heads. But honestly, I fully imagine that in a hundred years these are going to be classic literature. Dickens was wildly popular in his day, and now he's thought of as literature and forced upon high school students.

The fifth book I got from the library (put in a reserve before it was officially released, and I'm sure almost all libraries have these books, but they're too popular to stay on the shelves) and read it in somewhat less tha four hours that evening. In my opinion it wasn't worth having to wait a year fot it and he spent way too many pages being 15 and I hope he gets over it for the next book.

You're right Az, the hype does spoil them.
Loads of childrens' books are also fun for adults to read, Harry Potter is just longer than most (a bit unneccessarily long in my opinion) & certainly no better. Unless JKR goes on to write other well received books, I don't think she will be regarded as a classic childrens' author in the future. Not like writers such as Roald Dahl, who produced greater variety.

Yeah, couldn't agree more, JKR needs an editor who will stand up to her! The last two books were approximately twice as long as they needed to be.

I've read all five books. With the positive reinforcement of the movies of the first two (which I've seen several times, thanks to Sky's never-ending repeats), I can remeber the plots. Haven't a clue what happened in the third and fourth books. Can just about remember the fifth.

These are books that I've read in the last 2 years. I can clearly remember the plots of other books that I've read 10 years or more ago (including "children's" books - Dahl, Tolkien, Kipling, Lewis). There seems to be a quality about JKR's writing that fails to stick in the mind - your consciousness simply glides over the surface and nothing sinks in. Anyone else have this experience?

I remember all five books quite well (surprising considering my usually crap memory! ). My favourite was book three.

az

I vehemently agree about JK's editing and memory slippage.

I think her editor was a and I can't remember much of anything about her books, including the fifth, except the bits about hagrid and a lot of stuff in some abandoned girl's loo!

I can remember a lot about the plots - but then I tend to do that with most of the books I read, be they Harry Turtledove's stupendous Darkness/World at War series, Anne McCaffrey's Pern books or JK Rowling's Harry Potter and the whatever-it-is-this-time.

One thing that does come through to me is that the world has a lot more in it than we get to see, and I find that very interesting indeed. I just like to speculate about these things.

The inconsistences are irritating though. One thing I'm sure I'm right about is in book five, everyone who Apparates or Disapparates does so with a loud 'crack'. In book four, Ludo Bagman Disapparates with a slight 'pop', and the only person we see who Disapparates with a loud 'crack' is Dobby the house elf, who can reasonably be assumed to be doing things a bit differently to a human wizard or witch.

So why the sudden switch to a loud 'crack' other than so that Harry can hear Mundungus Fletcher Disapparating?

JKR obviously hadn't read last week's front page guide to creating a believable universe!

My point was that I usually remember the plot/characters/quotes, but find JKR's writing doesn't affect me deeply enough to register in this way.

And I concur.