Odds and Ends

[cactuswatcher]

Our local newspaper critic panned Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, complaining that overall there wasn't enough action and that when there was action, there was too much violence for little kids. He made it pretty clear he's tired of the series. Personally I thought the book was a step up after a couple of dullish ones. I guess time will tell about the movie.

I've been reading Alison Weir's latest history, Queen Isabella, about Edward II of England's wife. Mostly she's trying to show that the 'old girl' wasn't as bad as everyone has said she was, meaning she probably didn't have much to do with killing Edward. Weir even makes it clear she'd rather believe that Edward actually survived and was shipped out of the country to live out his life in anonymity. That doesn't seem much more than another of the lurid and fantastic stories people dreamed up at the time to explain his sudden death/disappearance, but Weir clearly would like to believe it. The most interesting thing in the book is the interaction of the various nobles all of whom are out for for personal enrichment and whose approval and disapproval of the monarch is almost entirely based on how much more they can get. Edward II was clearly a hideously bad king. Isabella was clearly a little better as regent, but not generous enough to satisfy the nobles. Her son Edward III seems to have understood the game better, and at least gave the nobility the hope of getting richer and had far less grief from them than his parents did.

I enjoy Alison Weir's style and I'm very happy that she's continuing to write more about the women in English history. Her interest in genealogy makes it easier to sort out a sea of people referred to in most histories only by their titles (which sometimes changed at the whim of the king).

Comments

[masqthephlsphr.livejournal.com]

People again assuming Harry Potter "is for kids." Well, it's a natural assumption, I suppose. But Goblet of Fire and the books that come after it are full of politics and intrigue, and Goblet in particular is set-up to splatter readers with a dose of reality. You're set up to see a fun, exciting sporting contest between school kids, and in the end, the contestant that should have won is brutally killed in front of Harry and he has to face off with the murderer.

As to how they pulled off the movie version of the book, well, as you say, that's a separate question, but anyone who's read the book knows the story doesn't end well.

[cactuswatcher.livejournal.com]

I agree. This reviewer should recognize that the audience (as well as the characters) is supposed to be maturing. This installment is not for small children and never was supposed to be.

[masqthephlsphr.livejournal.com]

Yeah, if a kid is old enough to read the entire book, s/he can see the film. But I still think kids under 13 should have their parents there to talk it over with afterwards.

[cactuswatcher.livejournal.com]

I think some parents may not understand that the books are intended to be read one per year, and that may cause problems. Certainly the kids just now old enough to read the first book won't understand that. I have to wonder if that natural lack of patience may not harm the lasting power of the series; very young kids getting bored with the romance and scared of the rougher violence of the later books.

[masqthephlsphr.livejournal.com]

Not to mention the later books are each two inches thick.

; )

[ann1962]

Exactly.