Now What?
I always wondered what would happen when the series would be over.We wouldn't have anything to talk about. n here we are,still liking harry but with nothing to talk abt.but if harry potter would've been a classic (like the classics) it would've been analyzed and talked abt years afterwards too.so do you think it was over-rated? what would the fans do now that it's all over?
sit back and watch the money keep rolling in....
it usually takes a couple of generations for a book or film to be considered "classic" like i think a classic book is something by dickens, or victor hugo, etc.
these books will always be at the head of the line on recommendation lists, because their themes are timeless, and since almost all the action takes place in a parallel world, the future will take no toll on its' credibility.
Originally posted by emoboy13
i hope they rite another book where voldemort comes back from the dead and they just rite it about him taking over the worldalso hell kill harry and every1 else becuz he'll be the strongest
Right, well that's not going to happen. Why would hell kill Harry anyway he's been good, I'm sure Heaven would come to his rescue 😆
Originally posted by Saskaswan
J.K Rowling said she would "maybe" write up an encyclopedia about everything in the Harry Potter universe.
Yeah, only because someone else was writing a Harry Potter Encyclopedia and she saw a chance to make more money and sued them because she "was going to come out with one".
Originally posted by LanceWindu
Yeah, only because someone else was writing a Harry Potter Encyclopedia and she saw a chance to make more money and sued them because she "was going to come out with one".
I would still buy it, although the Harry Potter Wikis out there are most likely 10 times better than any encyclopedia she writes unless she adds new information.
Originally posted by siriuswriter
sit back and watch the money keep rolling in....it usually takes a couple of generations for a book or film to be considered "classic" like i think a classic book is something by dickens, or victor hugo, etc.
these books will always be at the head of the line on recommendation lists, because their themes are timeless, and since almost all the action takes place in a parallel world, the future will take no toll on its' credibility.
yeah i agree.
while hary potter is extremely popular, i don't think it's yet " classic"
the only reason that it's popular is because people are currently waiting for the new movie to come out.
give it a few years, it may be up with some of the dickens books
Originally posted by cpa_parkcity
It does take a while for a book to become a classic but I don't think Harry Potter will reach that. While it was a great series and be remembered, I think the audience was too young for it to become a classic.
I disagree only because the audience was much larger than what you are suggesting. Plus, children grow up and sometime still love what they did when they were younger. Hell, I consider Dr. Seuss books classic (love those stories). Harry Potter has every ability to be considered such if it maintains what it has with audiences. I think minimum for something to be classic is 25 years after being published.
I heard about the third book when I was twelve - someone did a book report on it and I was really confused as to why someone would name a character "Serious" and that there was an "angry" tree. But that was back in... oh... '95 or '96, so the first three books were out and not yet THE books to read. But then four, five, six, and seven I got on opening day.
But the first and second ones lend themselves to even younger audiences. It's not 'till three, or definitely four, that I started to feel that people who were younger shouldn't be reading about monsters with red eyes and no nose and big snakes and such.
Originally posted by siriuswriter
I heard about the third book when I was twelve - someone did a book report on it and I was really confused as to why someone would name a character "Serious" and that there was an "angry" tree. But that was back in... oh... '95 or '96, so the first three books were out and not yet THE books to read. But then four, five, six, and seven I got on opening day.But the first and second ones lend themselves to even younger audiences. It's not 'till three, or definitely four, that I started to feel that people who were younger shouldn't be reading about monsters with red eyes and no nose and big snakes and such.