Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is the American name for the first book in the J. K. Rowling Harry Potter fantasy series. Fun books, these, and worth reading. This was a re-read for me -I think my third, maybe.
from the dust jacket:
Harry Potter has never been the star of a Quidditch team, scoring points while riding a broom far above the ground. He knows no spells, has never helped to hatch a dragon, and has never worn a cloak of invisibility.The Guardian reviewer says, "I can read this book over and over again. From the very beginning until the end J.K. Rowling has me gripped!" Publisher's Weekly opens a positive review with this: "Readers are in for a delightful romp with this award-winning debut from a British author who dances in the footsteps of P.L. Travers and Roald Dahl." Kirkus Reviews has a positive review.
All he knows is a miserable life with the Dursleys, his horrible aunt and uncle, and their abominable son, Dudley -a great big swollen spoiled bully. Harry’s room is a tiny closet at the foot of the stairs, and he hasn’t had a birthday party in eleven years.
But all that is about to change when a mysterious letter arrives by owl messenger: a letter with an invitation to an incredible place that Harry -and anyone who reads about him- will find unforgettable.
For it's there that he finds not only friends, aerial sports, and magic in everything from classes to meals, but a great destiny that's been waiting for him... if Harry can survive the encounter.
I am a huge fan of the Harry Potter books. I've never understood why the American copies changed the lead book's title.ReplyDelete
We apparently couldn't be trusted to understand what a "philosopher's stone" might be, and they were afraid we'd think philosophy was involved and be put off. There were other translations made from British to American English, too. from Wikipedia: "Scholastic's Arthur Levine thought that "philosopher" sounded too archaic for readers and after some discussion ..., the American edition was published in September 1998 under the title Rowling suggested, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. Rowling later said that she regretted this change and would have fought it if she had been in a stronger position at the time. Philip Nel has pointed out that the change lost the connection with alchemy" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_and_the_Philosopher%27s_Stone#U.S._publication_and_receptionDelete
The Young One and I tried to read the series when it first came out. It didn't capture our attention.ReplyDelete
One of my three loved all the books, etc., while the other two never finished the series.Delete
I could never get into the movies I liked the first two but after I didn't like them I wonder if I would enjoy the books better the theme is so funReplyDelete
My older son said watching the movies without having read the books made for a confusing experience for him. Some of the books are stronger than others, but the first one is an easy read so would be easy to look into.Delete
I may check 0ut the first books-after I finish the Outlander books, and another favorite time traveler author I love has a new book coming out this week-so I will be reading that one soon tooDelete
So many books, so little time lol It's impossible! And I do like re-reading, too.Delete
You are thinking like me on this one. My goal this year is to reread all 7, and I just finished 2. They are great, aren't they? I know I read the first one I think 3 times also.ReplyDelete
They are great fun! I'm glad they did as good a job with the movies as they did. They'd have been so easy to get wrong.Delete
I read the first 2 books and then the library was missing 3-5 so I gave up. perhaps I'll try again sometime, because they were enjoyable.ReplyDelete
We ended up getting them used for cheap. Every used outlet here had lots of copies.Delete
I love all of the Harry Potter books, and loved the films, too. ValerieReplyDelete
My husband and daughter are the biggest fans here, but we have all the books and all the DVDs and strong opinions about all the controversies ;)Delete
Had long comment I lost. Too tired to repeat, but I lost interest in the books but did watch the movies--even though they were less and less interesting as they got darker and darker.ReplyDelete
I've read the books until the end of the last of the original series but don't have any interest in her others or in her bizarre intrusion of her own after-the-fact interpretations. If she wants to portray a character a certain way she needs to do that in her writing and not by telling us now years later what she _meant_ to be writing. I agree that the films have some weak spots....Delete