geenoo Banned

If I went back to middle school, I would prefer P.K. Dick about a thousand times over that brain candy from Rowling.

What are you saying? Sorry, I thought I was talking to my peers. Go back to HP... (You Bartleboom, I bet my Sunday shoes that you've read HP from age 16 to 27... I’ll even bet my silk tie... now you’re bringing up 8-year-olds who should have to suffer through these 7 bricks! Yeah, right!)

I read Asimov's Foundation (four volumes) when I was in elementary school. And "How the Sea" by Smith in middle school. Who's the fool? Oh, you can read Mickey Mouse at sixteen, you know. You, for example, I think you have the complete collection.

With comment 66, Bartleboom, you fell back into the trap you had set for yourself. You had covered it so well that you stumbled right back in. Before HP, after HP... But please. Before HP there was King, there was Wilbur Smith, there was Stevenson, there was Asimov, there was Verne, there was Crichton... and a hundred others. Now Rowling has arrived and started all the kids on literature. And that's why the saga is wonderful! A rock-solid argument. The big shots who don’t read were there before and are still here now. Rowling hasn’t moved the needle an inch. Every era has had its favorite author for kids, and in the history of children's authors, Rowling certainly doesn’t rank first, nor even on the podium. Especially considering the reasons you brought up.

But then shall we talk about the title (and the cover)? "Da menalli."

Bartleboom, the sense of my j'accuse (well...) lies in the fact that it seems to me you have overly glorified this saga and this writer. Did we have to wait for Potter to pull children away from the PlayStation? Wasn't it enough to buy them a nice Journey to the Center of the Earth? The truth is that the books exist, and there are some amazing ones; you just have to read them. No, because if we think like that, we can easily say that even Dan Brown with The Da Vinci Code is great because he has pulled many adults away from the television. Alexander77, you really understand me.

Yes, Bartleboom, everything’s fine, but what does it matter what Tolkien or Rowling "wanted to do" in relation to the result? What does it matter if there are simpletons studying the lands of The Lord of the Rings (still in relation to the result, that is, to the book itself)? And I would add another consideration. Tolkien was one of the first, if not the first, to develop a fantasy novel so well. He gave it depth. I don’t quite agree with placing the two writers on the same level and even almost giving a preference to Rowling. And then, in between, there have also been other writers like King who developed the fantasy-horror theme perhaps even better. Bartleboom, from your intervention, it almost seems that the charm, the ease of reading, the likability of the character (and the author) directly influences the work. Never!!!

I know...

And here I am, having grown up with IT and the Dark Tower series...

Come on, I read the review, but if we keep going with these little red fists, the dialogue will inevitably come to a close...