tht was written by some "excuse the french" jackass critic...
a good critic tells of the positives in the books/films/..
a bad critic is some little depressed man/woman who looks into films/books for the negatives is people thought harry potter was a lie or a fraud it simply wouldnt be as successful as it has been!
When you look at it from the perspective of the critic it could be argued but harry potter is not just about his skills and abilitys its an exciting story . And saying harry is just the same as ron and hermione maybe correct but harry has a destiny a prophecy for him not for hermione an ron..that is what makes him special and i am insulted by this persons lies!!
>> He can only do it instinctively.) When Harry stabs a basilisk in Chamber of Secrets, Rowling writes that he did it "without thinking, without considering, as though he had meant to do it all along." <<
Actually this was written with regards to Harry stabbing the Horcrux.
I dunn why you guys are so unhappy. This article- written 3 years ago- is absolutely right. Potter himself admits as much in the later books- that everything he achieved was either as a result of teamwork or luck. It is why he hates his hero status.
What makes Harry the focus of the book is not his super-powers or ability to destroy evil single-handed; it is his courage, tenacity and loyalty to his friends. That is why when these qualities are fading in Order of the Phoenix, Potter is in serious trouble, and he pays for it.
At the end of Half-Blood Prince, Potter makes a conscious dcision to try and be a hero for real. No-one can pamper him any more.
The guy who wrote this article is spot on, he just didn't know it was a deliberate part of Potter's set-up by Rowling.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
but the point is really tht this guy has probably read other reviews or only just skim read the books..you cant read a harry potter book and say "ooh its a fraud , because its not about some normal boy, in a normal school ..the guy misses the bckround ...its different from any other book i've ever read ....the basis may be the same?? but all books are like tht ....they have theyr own categories thrillers horror fantasy etc but jk has made harry potter her own she has done something amazing so how someone can say that jk and harry potter is a fraud is beyond belief!!how many other books have any of you read tht is similar to harry potter?? its a new breed... its not the same story as other books its tottally different ...jk has surrounded harry potter with reality!! she makes it sound real an realistic and not just magic everwhere there are connections and although there are strange characters theres still a sense of reality within her books i argue the case that jk rowlings book is like any other she is an amazing author ,..if harry potter was a fraud other critics would have said also tht is merely the view of one!! which i dont think should be taken seriously because this guy/women obviously hasnt done his job well!!
That article is bull. Yes, it can make some really good points, but who ever wrote that article has really wasted their time. The book is named after Harry because it's showing life events of Harry Potter. Sure, it could've been named something else, but it's Harry's life. Points that he sees and he feels. Man, do you all agree with me or not?
err...I just want to say this...HARRY POTTER IS REAL!!! I found that article highly amusing. Obviously that guy has no life but he has a point...there was a period where I didn't like Harry as a character because he was...well, he had everything minus he's parnets.
__________________ If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever. - O' Brien
Last edited by MistressofSnape on Oct 21st, 2005 at 06:27 PM
GRRRR---->i hate tht feckin critic.!!!!
The point which was pointed out by babysooner is tht its about events in harrys life , things harrys done, what harry is!!
its about him.... the critic would probs complain still if the title was "ronald weasley" filled with stories about harry...
the guy would say the opposite thing if tht was the case theres no win win answer from this guy/women ..
ok, i use to hate Harry Potter, i read the first book and i had hated it. it was boring, a drag, who cares about some boy who lost his parents? who cares that he has the worse life in the world? i mean, that could be a whole book by itself without the magic and Voldemort in it.
Gender: Female Location: in a double decker bus...
I thought that was a pretty good article. it just depends on your personal views. I never really like the main characters of the stories, I prefer the secondary characters, because they are unrenowned heroes
KMC Community Forums
"Harry Potter is a Fraud"
Oct 19th, 2005 02:11 AM
He's here, he's queer...! 
