Am I the only person who has NOT read any of the Harry Potter books

[LynneSin]

Look, I know they're great books and wonderful stories for kids and even adults to read. But I think a bad case of food poisoning would be a better way to spend my time than reading these books.

And not only have I not read the books, I haven't seen any of the movies in their entirity (I have HBO so it's inevitable that I have caught a few moments here and there - usually because I can't find the remote control)

So am I alone?

[bicentennial_baby]

1. Me!

and not planning on it anytime in the future...

[shoelace414]

2. you are the only one in all of USA.

[teach1st]

3. My students love 'em...

...and I'm clueless about the books. I should read them, but haven't been able to get beyond the first few pages.

[GOPisEvil]

4. Never read a one.

Not my cup of tea.

[meegbear]

5. Potter-free here!

My old downstairs neighbor was a mega-Potter fan, even having her neice and friends over to have Potter themed partied.

Fortunately, it never permiated upstairs. Maybe someday I'll read them, but they'll have to be the British versions.

[terrya]

6. I have no interest in reading any of the Potter books. n/t

[Imalittleteapot]

7. You are not alone.

Everyone I know has read the books or seen the movies. I can not participate in their conversations about Harry's adventures. Having fallen asleep, after a grueling day, in the first "Star Wars", I may be the only person I know who hasn't seen all of the S W movies. Further more, I haven't seen Lord of the Rings.

[Cerridwen]

8. I haven't.

Though I have caught one of the movies. It made such an impression I can't remember which it was.

[johnnie]

9. I haven't

I never read the books or seen the movies. I don't think they are crap or anything, the kids like that stuff and that's cool. I know some adults who have read them and they liked them. I don't feel there is any need to put that stuff down. I know of some fundies who refuse to let their children see the movies or read the books, so I guess I am for more Potter books and movies.

[sniffa]

10. i haven't

i won't even see the movies.

[Jara sang]

11. I haven't read any of them either.

My fundamentalist upbringing won't allow it. Also, Pat Robertson won't allow it.

[LynneSin]

13. I thought you were a freeper troll

:hide:


(j/k - you know we :loveya: you!)

[Heidi]

12. I haven't read them either.

I may, one day, just to catch up on pop culture (ie, why they're so popular) but I don't have much interest in that type of literature. I haven't seen the films, either. :shrug:

[kedrys]

14. Not by a long shot

Never read any of the books, have no desire whatsoever to read any of the books, and only saw the first movie on cable by accident (I did think it was rather nifty).

[noonwitch]

15. I haven't read them, but I have watched the movies on HBO

They're kids' books.

[LiberalEsto]

16. I haven't, either

and am not planning to.

[GalleryGod]

17. I've found two books to be quite good and the movies delightful

It might surprise you how many college students tote "Harry" around as recreational reading. That's how I read the first one, a student loaned it to me.:pals:

[hyphenate]

18. I know a lot of people who haven't read them

but to each his own. I read them beginning in 2000, because someone was talking about them, and I enjoy reading what many consider juveniles, so I picked them up one at a time.

I found out that the so-called category of "juvenile" doesn't really fit the books--they work on various levels some of which children and adolescents won't understand or comprehend. On the other hand, they're the kind of books that you could read years later and find stuff that you didn't see the first time through.

The Hobbit, for example (by JRR Tolkien), was written as a child's story, but with the addition of the epic LOTR, Tolkien went from children's fantasy to full blown adult subjects. The same can be said of CS Lewis's Narnia series--the Chronicles are able to work on more than one level, some of which are far too sophisticated than the children who read them. Again, you are talking classics, but I do believe that Harry Potter will survive to become a major classic in the future, because it "works." And any literature that can entice children away from their Gameboys, PS2 systems, television, computer gaming and other time wasters is worth its existence.

Many of the people I know who won't read them are Xtian fundies who object to the use of magic and other falderal. They are too damned stubborn to even look at the stories to see in what capacity the characters are using "witchcraft" and "wizardry" and are zealots without evidence on what makes the books tick. As usual, it's these "watchdog" groups who take what are essentially great novels and classify them by their idiotic notions that somehow involving magic is evil.

I think that a lot of people are just not into fantasy or science fiction, and haven't read because of that. I would suggest, however, that those who haven't read any of them at least sit down with the first one and read as much as you can stand. For most people, the thought that perhaps this young boy, who has been continually treated like shit by his adoptive parents (his aunt and uncle) is finally getting the upper hand is exhilarating, because most people can understand a message of triumph and identify with it.