Title: Harry Potter and the Sorceror’s Stone [amazon]
Author: J.K. Rowling
Publisher: Scholastic; 1st American Ed edition (September 1998)
Pages: 309
Book Number: 21
What’s this 52 Books in 52 Weeks thing about?
Note: The widely loved Cas (well, I love her to bits) brought it to my attention that in the United Kingdom, the book was apparently called Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, not the Sorceror’s Stone. I read up a bit on this here, and learned that many words were translated from the original English to American English. For this, I may very well hunt down a copy of the original version and read it instead. Really, are we Americans that stupid? And now, on with my little review:
This was not the first time I read this book. I don’t recall exactly when I read it the first time – perhaps a couple of years ago? When I read it the first time, I was reading it to try and figure out what the big deal about Harry Potter was. On that first reading, I didn’t really find what I was looking for. It seemed like an okay book, but I certainly didn’t love it. I think, however, that my first reading was marred by something, namely, me. I think I went to Harry Potter expecting it – perhaps even wanting it – to not hold up to the hype, to fall on its face. I believe that mindset drastically altered my perception of the book. (Well, duh!) With the recent release of the final book of the series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, I decided I’d give the books another try with a more open mind. Instead of reading them to figure out the hype, I’d read them for – here’s a concept! – enjoyment.
So, how’d this second reading go? Great. I enjoyed the book a a lot. If I were to sum it up in a few words, those words would probably be “a fun little book.” Sure, the book isn’t written amazingly well. The characters are not hugely unique (and indeed, quite a few are very stereotypical). But when you get past that, if you skip criticizing it like I did previously – all in all, the book is a blast to read.
I came to really like a lot of the characters. I felt sorry for Harry, having to live with the intolerable Dursleys, and I simply loved Hagrid. If he were real, I’d invite him to come live with me. Albus Dumbledore could come visit, too, as long as he promised to do a bit of magic. (Speaking of Albus – Gandalf, anyone?)
Continuing with the fun and likeable mindset: Hogwarts. There are now two fantasy places that I’d love to live in for a while: Bag End and Hogwarts. Bag End could be the place I hang out to relax and read; Hogwarts could be the place I go when I want to get lost in an old, magical, spooky castle.
I suppose it’s a testament to how much I enjoyed this book, to say that I’m already reading the second one, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, alongside another sequel I’m reading, The Pale Horseman. If my enjoyment of the second one is on par with the first Potter book, I’ll probably end up reading the whole series. Ah – the power of having an open mind.
If there were any more books coming out (and I’m still not entirely convinced that there won’t be, but I’ve not read the last), I wouldn’t be going to the release parties, nor dressing up as a wizard. I’m not that into it. However, I can understand now what people see in the books. They’re not masterpieces by any means, but they’re a genuine blast to read.
Three notes:
1. Yes, I enjoyed the first book – a lot. Yes, I think I was a bit too hard on poor Harry and Co. on my first reading of the book. But – no, the books are not on par with Lord of the Rings. So there.
2. Look at this amazon.com search for “sorceror’s stone” in books. See anything peculiar? Why is the Urdu edition of it in the #1 spot? I have nothing against Urdu (or any other language), but my gut feeling is that the vast majority of folks searching on amazon.com for Potter books are looking for them in English. Strange.
This last note is really, really important…
3. PLEASE DO NOT POST SPOILERS IN THE COMMENTS. I have NOT read past book one (well, besides a little bit of book 2), and I don’t want anything spoiled. I don’t know who dies and who doesn’t, I don’t know who the half blood prince is, etc. etc. Please – no spoilers. Thanks.
Comments 14
OK, I’ll read this post properly if you do me one favour: at least mention that the book is meant to be called “Philosopher’s Stone”. Please?
Posted 26 Jul 2007 at 1:06 pm ¶Cas: Gladly! I would’ve mentioned that if I’d had any idea. I hadn’t really read up on the series as a whole, so when I started looking for the first book at the library, I simply came across Harry Potter and the Sorceror’s Stone.
Posted 26 Jul 2007 at 4:06 pm ¶It’s funny that I came across this post today. I just finished the Sorcerer’s Stone today and am about to start the second book (the title escapes me). I have been meaning to read them for a while and just borrowed them from a friend last week. I also thought the first book was great. The one thing I did like about Harry Potter Vs. Lord of the Rings is that Tolkien can get long winded!
Posted 26 Jul 2007 at 4:36 pm ¶Mike: Indeed, despite my love of Tolkien’s work, some passages in his books can be a bit long winded. I generally enjoy his descriptions of landscapes, for example, but the ones that seemed to drag on for 10 pages? Meh.
Posted 26 Jul 2007 at 4:41 pm ¶They’re good fun. I read 1-6 a couple years ago and 7 recently. I figured they sounded interesting, and with the big spoilers flying around it would be better to read them while there were still _some_ things I didn’t know. Things do lean a bit heavier and serious as the characters age, but for the most part, yeah, they’re more of a “fun” read than LOTR.
I’m still not sure how the series got so massive, though. I read them, I enjoy them a lot… but not so much more than other books that I quite understand how they’re now among the best-selling books ever, and the previously unknown author is now a billionaire. At some point the success becomes self-sustaining: obviously people like you and I got into them BECAUSE they were already big, but it had to earn those first dozens of millions of sales first.
The title change of the first book does suck. The Philosopher’s Stone is something actually of legend. The Sorcerer’s Stone seems much more forced and generic set next to it. At least they didn’t try to dumb down the other ones. Harry Potter and the Secret Room. Harry Potter and the Fiery Cup.
“If there were any more books coming out (and I’m still not entirely convinced that there won’t be, but I’ve not read the last), I wouldn’t be going to the release parties, nor dressing up as a wizard. I’m not that into it.”
You could be the only guy there dressed as a Viking.
Posted 26 Jul 2007 at 5:33 pm ¶Loved? Aww *blush* thank you
And good review now I’ve read it!
But what strikes me is that you seem to be skirting round the trap most other people who read/review Harry Potter books fall into: you read them as adult books. They’re not. They’re children’s books and (the first few at least) were written with strictly that audience in mind.
To take the LotR theme you’ve got going on, it’s like comparing the Hobbit to LotR – both are great, but the Hobbit was written for children (though adults enjoy it too), and LotR was written for adults (though older kids enjoy it too).
When I first got handed a copy of Philosopher’s Stone in 1999 (for my 18th b’day, I was NOT impressed) I couldn’t understand why my brother had got me a kids book! Then I devoured it in one sitting and the next day went down the bookstore to buy Chamber of Secrets and Prisoner of Azkabhan, which I devoured with similar speed. The books are just – as you said – fun. One and Two are the most childish but by Three… ooooh, bring on the dark scariness!
Of all the books I think five (Goblet of Fire) is my least favourite – overly long and with far too much going on. But Deathly Hallows… I’m re-reading that now after speeding through it the first time in ten hours straight. Now I know what happens I can go back and savour every moment.
Posted 26 Jul 2007 at 6:21 pm ¶Cas: That’s a very good comparison, about The Hobbit and the Potter books. I love The Hobbit in its own right, but it’s quite different from LOTR. It was clearly written for a young audience. I think I was able to drop a lot of my “adult criticisms” of the book, because I truly did it enjoy it; however, I think I’ll like the series even more when, as you describe, Rowling shifts gears a little, making things darker as the cast grows older.
But again, the first book is a great, fun little book, just as it is.
I am curious, though, like Joshua, wondering what exactly kick started the Potter crazy. He and I got onto the band wagon after succumbing to mass hype; what caused that hype to begin with? You’re in England where it was originally released. Can you shed any light on what went down over there? Was there a huge amount of advertising? Did it just spread via word of mouth?
Posted 26 Jul 2007 at 10:20 pm ¶/falls flat on face
I go away for four days, and this is what happens when I’m gone! I had to read your entry more than once in order to fully believe what I had read.
And you … You ~mocked~ me for reading the Potter books!!
I’m really and truly flabbergasted.
Posted 27 Jul 2007 at 12:05 am ¶Oh, and by the way, here in Canada we are intelligent enough to have the “Philosopher’s Stone.”
Posted 27 Jul 2007 at 12:08 am ¶Josh – as I said, the first time HP crossed my path was in 1999, three years after it was released. I hadn’t heard any hype, though to be fair I might not have been looking in the right places (small west country towns are not renowned for having lavish advertising spread on them!).
Judging from the source of my HP connection – my 21 year old brother – I would guess that for some reason the book caught the attention of student audiences around 1999. They had won children’s book awards previously but… who knows?
I’d have to go out on a limb and say word of mouth. By the time book four came out it was bigger thing, with attention in the press (I partly think) because of hype about the film they were just then starting to make.
Also, a major UK children’s show – Newsround – decided that Harry Potter was going to become their thing, with lots of specials and interviews designed to raise the hype.
Posted 27 Jul 2007 at 3:02 am ¶Fig: Yeah, I know. My apologies for teasing you about them.
I suppose I’ve seen the Potter light or some such. Also, in regards to Canada having the Philosopher’s Stone… well, ahem.. /rude.
Cas:Thanks for the information. To think that it grew to such a large size from word of mouth originally is pretty impressive.
I take it you know Rowling’s story, about being on welfare when she started writing the books to entertain her kids? Quite a change, going from welfare to billionaire…
Posted 27 Jul 2007 at 10:01 am ¶If only Jed Clampett had penned fantasy fiction.
Posted 27 Jul 2007 at 12:40 pm ¶I’ve read the last book of the series last weekend, read it again throughout the week and started today with book no. 3. Just for fun. I’m really addicted to Harry since my librarian recommended him to me in…I guess it was 1998. I still remember how she wispered “I’ve got something for you” over the counter.
Posted 28 Jul 2007 at 10:34 am ¶You might want to stop reading here now, because I think: Harry Potter ist better than LOTR. The characters and the storyline are more complex, more realistic. You cannot guess how it ends from the very beginning, the good are not neccessarily good, while the bad ones are not always as bad as they seem. Harrys world is not black and white, but in shades of grey.
Zeitlos: Better than Harry Potter! Hmph!
We shall agree to disagree, and simply say that both series are great in their own way.
Posted 28 Jul 2007 at 4:46 pm ¶Trackbacks & Pingbacks 1
[...] it happened. It was tentative for a brief period of time, when I had only reread the first Potter book. Now, however, it’s done. I suppose one could say that the spell has [...]
Post a Comment