Chicagoist: Harry Potter Deliciousness

Albanyparkour

Wed, 06 Aug 2008 10:51:44 -0600

Hi I'm an American and I read Childern's books and go to conferences on them and it has no connection to who we elected to be president, Wait, you know how to read? One of the most popular books of the last 100 years was Tom Sawyer, a children's book. By the by, Harry Potter is ENORMOUS in Great Britain. Which is, as Eddie Izzard instructed, where the history comes from. I'd be far more alarmed about "Dancing with the Stars" impact on the American intellect than people reading huge, cleverly written and witty books.

happyfunball

Wed, 06 Aug 2008 10:45:02 -0600

@Spook: A geek is someone who waited in line all night for a Star Wars movie or Harry Potter book or iPhone. A nerd is someone with the launch codes downloaded into their laptop and can give you the chemical formula to tylenol without looking. Your "dates" (are you sure they were women?) are probably mislabeled geeks.

Spook

Wed, 06 Aug 2008 10:36:11 -0600

Hi I'm an American and I read Childern's books and go to conferences on them and it has no connection to who we elected to be president, it also has no connection to the increased popularity of the red eye like publicans because every thing exists in a vacuum, see? Its not more proof the fact that Americans are taking more stupid peoples than ever before. jerks

bunnybear

Wed, 06 Aug 2008 09:54:37 -0600

I made a mistake in using an "a" instead of "the." I apologize. I then further clarified my point. If you look at this thread I think you'll find that my statement (clarified for its original intent) is one of the least "carping" on here.

Albanyparkour

Wed, 06 Aug 2008 09:31:03 -0600

I'm not making a blanket statement knocking all literary conferences. Lighten up. Actually you wrote It's one thing to enjoy a book, another to go to a conference about it. Which is pretty much the definition of a blanket statement. Since you don't specify anything while making a broad generalization. I'd recommend reading more books instead of carping about people who enjoy them.

bunnybear

Wed, 06 Aug 2008 07:07:03 -0600

I made a simple point specific to the thread it was posted on. Criticism of attendees of Harry Potter conferences should not be equated with criticism of readers of Harry Potter books. One group is a subset of the other. I'm not making a blanket statement knocking all literary conferences. Lighten up.

A

Tue, 05 Aug 2008 21:17:40 -0600

Oh really, bunnybear? Last time I checked, there were thousands of literary conferences held this year alone, attended by hundreds of thousands of people--- readers, teachers, fans, media, blog commenters, etc. You just wrote perhaps the dumbest thing I've read all day. bunnybear.

bunnybear

Tue, 05 Aug 2008 17:19:37 -0600

It's one thing to enjoy a book, another to go to a conference about it.

Albanyparkour

Tue, 05 Aug 2008 16:19:40 -0600

Wow. That's ALOT of hate for kids books there boys. They are kids books, remember, simple ripping yarns that have literally changed publishing. Kids lining up at MIDNIGHT for a BOOK? Come on now, that's quite cool. The literary snobbish seem to think that if you read Harry Potter you're some kind of sub-literate prole. Nonsense. Kids who read (and adults) don't just read ONE book, they become READERS. Further, the idea that somehow only Salman Rushdie or Cormac McCarthy or Tom Wolfe are worth your time is hogwash. That's like saying that the only good kind of ice cream is vanilla and anyone who eats mint chocolate chip is an idiot. Before you go worshipping at the grave of Harold Blood (whom Neil Gaiman perfectly labeled "A twerp") think of the book that got you interested in reading as a child. Have you read it lately? You might be surprised at how affecting, touching, scary or moving it might be now. Jerks.

Spook

Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:19:58 -0600

I hate this whole nerd fad. Nerds use to be "under cover" smart people. Now its just about a fashion statement. I go on dates with women who call themselves "nerds" and when I ask them about what makes them nerdy,they draw a blank. They have no interests that require them to spend significant amounts of time reading on, nor are they in general well read. Oh and Harry Potter books may or may not be for Nerdy kids, but adults who read them are as "nerdy" as adults who get dressed up and go to ren fairs in Indiana but perhaps a little smarter, perhaps.

HateBrianClub

Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:02:03 -0600

Albanyparkour, I don't know if someone who's a Harry Potter fan can be considered bookish anymore than someone who's into Steven Segal movies can be considered a cinema buff. I inadvertently stumbled into a Harry Potter book release a few years back and it was crawling with dorks, dweebs, nerds and spazzes, though that may say more about Indiana than JK Rowling aficionados. I'm sure there are some good looking muggles out there, certainly more than Trekies, but in any event, this will be a hot spot for interesting characters.

Albanyparkour

Tue, 05 Aug 2008 13:37:48 -0600

Nicholas: Unlike Star Trek or Star Wars, Harry Potter has a sizeable, and often attractive, female following. Nerdy bookish girls are made of joy.

Nicholas

Tue, 05 Aug 2008 13:04:23 -0600

Good time to go Nerd spotting.