So... Harry Potter Turns 20 "Yawn "

The excitement  of Harry Potter's twentieth birthday is here.  It is a time to celebrate?   Hardly.   As a matter of fact it has been blissfully quiet, pleasing and satisfying not to have heard from the annoying little British, twerp of a wizard.   The publishing world feels that it must celebrate with new cover art in hopes a new generation of young readers will be caught up with this magical world.   Frankly, here's hoping that they don't.  Why?  To be brutal  and honest the story is lame, the characters are one dimensional and there are so many other books out there that better written and more entertaining.  J.K Rowling was extremely lucky to have the book published.  What can we say, some gals have all the luck.   Before the  book is thrown  or   clicking  to close the window and returning to  your happy life, could ten minutes be spared to consider these points.

First of all the argument that J.K. Rowling's books encouraged children to read "big" books is superficial.    Librarians working  with children day in and day out know that it is the quantity of pages that is read but the quality  It's is what the children get out of the books that's important.  I would be more apt to get excited about children reading War and Peace if  "thick tomes" if that is the measurement of a good reader. 

Secondly,   her choices of adverbs and grammar syntax are quite ghastly,  awfully redundant, and splendidly, and not surprisingly boring to read.  On the upside,  readers are treated to a quick read and additionally a refresher course on all words ending in -ly.   Doesn't really do much in the way of learning new words but the adverbs keep piling on. Good thing?

Third,  C.S. Lewis, who Rowlings is often compared to, was a master of painting a picture with his words and stories.  Even after the reader has put down the book, images of Narnia lingers in the mind.  It's vivid and real.  Rowlings, is simply a sketch artist at best with her style of prose.  Yeah one remembers the name of Hogwarts however, if it were not for the Harry Potter movies,  readers would not have a clue what it would look or feel like to be walking the halls.  The literary plot and devices such as invisible cloaks,  abandoned orphan and the "special mark" on the forehead have been used ad nauseam.   Please.. something new and exciting as well.  Yawn!

Last but not least,  the fact that  Rowling has yet to have another "stellar"  novel or series, should remind readers of the old saying that lightening never strikes twice.   One could argue that her adult novels did well once it was revealed that she was writing under the pen name of  Robert Galbraith.  Before the revelation, the novels were not doing well.  Did the writing change? No it was ho-hum like before.  These days everyone is into "brand names"  in everything from clothes to computers to cars.  It would stand to reason that the brand Rowling is appealing to some readers.

Lets end with something positive.   It's not entirely Rowling fault that she decided to be a writer in the age of  instant gratification.  Her writing is genius at sketching the story to allow the reader to move on quickly to the next book. The publishers are revamping, reissuing and reinventing the series for a new audience.  For small libraries, with small budget getting the new set will hardly be worth it.  The original set will have to do.  Maybe one day they might be worth something of value.  (Doubtful that this will be true)    Having said that,  there are those readers who long for the days of when writers painted a beautiful picture  simply by using words.

It is now safe to click the window shut and go on with your happy life.

The Problem with Hollywood and Young Adult Novels

There is something to be said about characters who have become so familiar with readers that they have become "real". That is why Percy Jackson, Harry Potter and Katniss Everdeen (Hunger Games), have become successful series. Each of these characters, with their likeable, quirky personalities have found their way into the hearts and minds of readers. They are a reminder that anyone can be a hero in their own way. The consequence of this is that the demand for these stories continues to grows because the time spent with these loveable "people" never seems long enough. Time just flies by when they are around. Which is a good thing. However, the not so good consequence of this is that Hollywood tries to force the characters and their adventures onto the silver screen.

The theme for Summer Reading Program for teens "You Are Here", is appropriate when reading the series mentioned above. Each of these series take readers to another place and time that is new, exciting and vastly different from the world that teens are familiar with daily. By placing the reader squarely in the middle of New York City battling ancient Greek mythological monsters, or playing a game of Quidditch along side Harry or getting caught in a survival of the fittest game against Katniss, each of these situations challenges the reader to put themselves in the character's shoes. In the mind's eye the action is exciting and real enough to smell, see and feel everything that the characters are experiencing. Questions come up such as, would the readers make the same decisions that the character made or could a better solution be found? The ultimate question comes down to whether the ride with the characters was satisfying or is there a desire for more stories and adventures? If the story is really good, and with all three of these series it is, the answer is YES, then the trip is worth it and more please. Having said this, who needs the silver screen to help with the imagery?

Reading demands that teens actively turn on their imagination and drift into another time and place. While Percy, Harry and Katniss have the lasting power in books, they also share something else in common. They are all, or soon will be, on the silver screen. Hollywood has taken popular book titles and turned them into movies for years. From a reader's point of view this could be the WORST thing to happen for an author and the beloved characters. Sure, this means that the book is a huge commercial success once it is picked to go on the big screen. However, at what price is it worth the "prestige"? Granted the Harry Potter films remained true to Rowling's work, the same can not be said for Percy Jackson. A serious mistake was made when they omitted Clarrise in the movie. Seriously, she plays such a huge role in the first book that it was hard to believe that she never appeared in the movie. Not even once. As for the Hunger Games, who knows what Hollywood will drop from the plot. It is almost enough incentive to say "pass" when the movie comes out.

The argument can be made that the movie versions of the book can inspire teens to read the books. In some cases, that may very well be true. Although, there is a risk that the difference between the book and the film may be enough to disappoint the reader. The silver screen robs the reader of the joy of stirring the imagination. What's there to imagine what Katniss looks like in her "fire" outfit when the image is right there on the screen? Imaginations need to be exercised on a regular basis. This is precisely why reading is so important. A healthy dose of imaginations prepares the mind to think outside the box and dream of creative ideas. The silver screen may have its uses, but nothing beats a healthy imagination fed by good stories. Perhaps, instead of grabbing every young adult novel and turning into a movie, Hollywood should consider using their own creativity to come up with stories.

As everyone will be clamoring for tickets to see the midnight showing of the last Harry Potter film, this blogger will be safe at home reading the next book of the Kane Chronicles. As each page is turned, fingers will be crossed in hopes that Hollywood leaves this series alone and allow teens to exercise their minds to explore, imagine and enjoy Riordian's tale.

Random House E-Book Policy: Not A Friend Of The Library Anymore!

Random House Publishing has decided to pull a number out of a hat to set the limit of how many times a library can loan out a "copy" of one of their digital titles to patrons. That magic number happens to be twenty-six. Which is baffling to a veteran librarian such as myself. It seems that Random House no longer wants to do business with libraries when it it comes to e-books. If that is the case one has to wonder why? Do the publishing executives believe that once every book goes digital, libraries will cease to exist? Do they believe that profit are more important than customer loyalty? Or is this a case of being short sighted about the topic? Whatever the reason, Random House has definitely gone where no publisher has gone before. It seems as if the executives have become short sighted in their attempts to protect their "services." If Random House and other publishing companies want to "punish" the libraries for purchasing their product, they should remember elementary psychology. Punishment can lead to unwanted behavior patterns. In this case, instead of the desired increase in e-book sales, it may lead to the opposite.

The concept of forcing a library to purchase a "new" digital copy of a book after twenty-six checkout is foolhardy. The logic just is not there. Why would a library want to spend more than they have to on a product that never gets torn, yellowed or damaged? The benefit of a digital copy of a book is that it is like a new book each time it's loaned out. If a librarian has to make the decision to spend $25.00 on a hard copy book with the knowledge that a book may have a longer circulating life than twenty-six times versus the digital copy that will require to spend more budget dollars, than why go digital? Most publishers are betting that the libraries will answer that question by acknowledging that the patrons want this service and it is a necessary evil. However, they just might find that libraries may be forced to follow the route of getting more bang for their bucks.

Publishers have long had a love-hate relationship with libraries. While they love the fact that libraries purchase their titles, they hate the fact that libraries loan out their products with no costs to the borrower. In a CEO's world this is a kin to robbing them blind because in their eyes they are losing money every time a single title is loaned out. If this were true, then explain why Harry Potter series has sold millions of copies worldwide? Libraries do not hinder sales of books. It can be argued that they spur sales. Many avid readers often purchase favorite titles after they have borrowed the books from the library. Why? They have made an emotional connection with the book and now want to own their very own copy.

At a time when the economy is not at it's best, to see a big corporation take this action in order to make more money is foolish. Consumers will view this as a "greedy" act. Publishing executives need to remember that the money to purchase books at public libraries come from the Taxpayers otherwise known as the Average Joe who occasionally go to bookstores to buy books. In essence they are overcharging their own costumers in ever city that has a library. Keep in mind also that most people do not have as much discretionary funds as they use to have in previous years. This is shutting out consumers who would have bought your titles, but since times are tough they turn to the library for the title they want and need. Shouldn't Random House want to continue to be seen as a partner with libraries in providing books in all its formats to those who can't afford it at the present time? One would think so, but it appears that the publishers are determined to shoot themselves in the foot.

At the moment, libraries are Random House's target to increase revenue. Who is next on their hit list? Judging on the road that digital music took, it appears that the next direct target will be the consumer. If publishers follow Random House's lead, the consumers will have to be careful about how they share, load and protect their purchased books. Nook currently allows their e-readers to share books with friends. How long will it be before publishers begin to belly ache that profits are being lost due to this practice? In the world of corporate greed, I suspect they are already planning this out and will explain that they are doing this in the name of protecting the artist's intellectual property. I hope I'm wrong, but something tells me differently.

In the long run, Random House will be clipping the wings of the e-book natural rise in popularity with their current policy. Every opportunity to get a product into the consumers hands is a positive in any industry. E-book lending will allow patrons to discover a new way of accessing information. The more consumers use it, the odds increase that they will want,need, and buy it. It's that simple.

With Random House's current policy of twenty-six check outs, there are many losers that come out of the ill thought of plan. The first obvious one, are libraries whose budgets are shrinking each year. The patrons who want the e-books and would like a economical way to obtain them. Finally, the publishers themselves, who are now perceived as greedy, short sighted and impossible to work along side. Librarians are reasonable people. It is understood that it takes time and resources to create a product. With this in mind, Publishers should stop treating libraries as "robbers" who want the publisher's product for nothing. There needs to be a win-win situation for all involved.

What makes a good character?

An academic definition of  a good book would normally go like this:  The characteristics of a good book are solid characters, believable plots and subplots that help the story move along.  I agree with this definition, but with a little twist.   The voice of the author has to ring true for the reader.  It  has to be authentic.  These are the stories that last a lifetime and beyond.    For this reason, I truly believe that only a few titles now will become classics for the next generation.  For example,  Tale of Two Cities by Dickens.  This is a classic for all ages because it can still reach out to the reader's today as having an authentic voice.  The reader can literally feel themselves going back in time to the French Revolution.  The same can be true of Frodo and his world.  Every person who has ever read Lord of the Rings, knows of Frodo's battle and his world.  They walk with him and at times feels the enormous weight of responsibility that plaques Frodo from the beginning to the end of the tale.  

The discussion to what will be a classic in the future can go on and on.  Everyone has a favorite.  Will Harry Potter live forever?  Probably,  but not because it was a literary stroke of genius on Rowling's part.  It is more likely that the kids who loved it today will become parents and recommend the books to their children as way of sharing something of their childhood. Harry Potter, does not have the qualities of a character that will last a lifetime and beyond.  Quite frankly, I think the movie versions of the saga has ruined the opportunity for the character to become the character of the ages.    Rowlings sold out to commercialism in a huge way and it effected, I believe the outcome of the story.  But that is a debate for another time, another place 

Are there any books or characters that would stand the test of time? Before answering that,  what makes a character stand out for a lifetime.  First,  the voice of the characters still echos even after the book has been closed.  Need an example?  Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen when in chapter six the observation has been made that, "A lady's imagination is very rapid; it jumps from admiration to love, from love to matrimony, in a moment."  Elizabeth's voice is very clear as she shares her observations about her surroundings.  These are the rare moments that the reader nods their head in agreement.  It has a striking ring of truth and they share the same feelings with the character.   The voice is so clear, that even after the book has been put down, the reader still can hear it in their mind.  Their thoughtful voices are true for not only their generation, but for ours as well.  Second,  the character does not  have to be likable, but they must have the quality of having flesh and bones, meaning you can imagine meeting them down at the local pub,  or in the library or in school.   Another example of this can be found, in Penny From Heaven by Jennifer Holm.  This is a touching book about Penny growing up in 1953 and her delightful family.  The reader likes Penny, they are rooting for her and she reminds them of the girl next door.  They've met her before and they want to see her again.  On the opposite coin, there is Artemis Fowl, who is a genius but not quite likable because he manipulates people to get what he wants.  However, readers stick with him because they want to see what he is going to do next.   He may be selfish, self serving and perhaps a little, evil, but there is a little piece of the reader who thinks, I wish I could get away with half the things he does.   Last but not least,  the character has a cause worth reading about.  Whether it is the hypocrisy of social classes,  adjusting to a mother getting remarried or a plot to become the ring leader of a crime gang, it is worth giving up precious time to go along with the characters on their journey.  

Who would I pick as out of modern day literary heroes to live forever?  Timeless classics, as they have been called?  You will have to get the answer in my next blog.  In the mean time, think of  the characters you would put on your list.  See if they  match mine.  

Till next time... happy reading.