Forever a Potter Fan

 

 

Image source: Found it on Pinterest!

It was Christmas Day 12 years ago when the first three Harry Potter books were waiting under the tree for me to unwrap.

My mom worked at a junior high in the library and was forever buying books for me to read, which I didn't mind as I was quite the little book worm (just like her).

Although the books were originally my presents, it wasn't too much later that my mom, three sisters and one of my brothers had read them as well--and before I had even finished the first book, as it took me forever to get into it (you know, the pre-Hogwarts, Dursleys chapters).

But once I entered through the gates of Hogwarts with Harry, I was hooked. I gobbled up every word J.K. Rowling wrote down in those first three books, and as a family, we waited impatiently for the fourth to come out that summer.

I recently looked at a blog post from novelnovice.com about how this year was the year that Harry Potter (kinda) ended. That's when I got the idea for this post.

You see, I've delved into many realms of the Harry Potter fandom, some seen and some very secretively hidden (so as not to frighten my friends and family). I've read the books more times than I can remember. I've watched the movies so much that I can quote them almost word for word (especially the first two). I've wrocked out to Wizard Rock with the best of them, listened to podcasts, surfed the fansites, and even delved into the art of fan fiction (both reading and writing it, both along the lines of the hidden part of my Potterness).

Image Source: novelnovice.com

I bawled like a baby throughout the last movie and endured the teasing and taunting from my brother-in-law for months afterward because of it (in fact, he mentions it every time I visit). I even stayed up late to get into the beta version of Pottermore, which turned out to be a real dud, although I did have confirmed to me that I am for sure a Ravenclaw.

I have been a faithful Potter fan since that day I opened those first three books under the Christmas tree and I probably will be one until the day I die.

I think what makes the story so endearing to me is that just a few years after I received those first three books, I started relating to Harry in real life. I lost both of my parents by the time I was 14, and although I wasn't facing an evil dark wizard, I was facing the same struggle of living a life without parents. In fact, I think part of the reason why I hate book five so much is because Harry's angst mirrored so much of my own.

When you're a teen, you feel like no one understands you; throw in the fact that both of your parents are dead and it doesn't seem too far-fetched.

I also clung to these books too much because it was my mom who introduced me to them, and she loved the story just as much as I did. In fact, book five was one of the last books she read the summer that she passed away. I almost feel like my being a Harry Potter fan is a tribute to her.

So although this may have been the year that Harry Potter pretty much ended, it will never have ended for me. I will forever be a Potter fan.

It's just like Rowling said, "The stories we love do live in us forever..."

Connecting to Classic Literature

*Even though the class I was keeping this blog for is over, I decided that I love this subject too much to just give up on it. 

I love reading the classics: from Shakespeare to Dickinson, I revel in it. If I don't necessarily love a work, I can at least appreciate the work and effort that authors put into a work and their talent.

In high school, however, this was another story. My romance with classic literature did not begin until I started my first literature course as an English major. In high school I dreaded reading most of what was considered "classic."

For example, when I was a junior in high school, I had to read The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne by myself when I moved up to my new high school in Oregon. This was because my classmates were reading Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck which I had read the year before and had not read The Scarlet Letter yet. I had to trudge through Hawthorne's confusing style by myself, without anyone to discuss it with, and after about the fourth chapter, I gave up and started spark noting. To those in my grade that I talked to, none of them really liked The Scarlet Letter either.

Last year, I decided to try to read it again. This was because I needed to read a novel for my advanced analysis and research class for my final research paper. I thought that it would be good to read The Scarlet Letter because I would undoubtedly have to teach it someday.

I was surprised when I actually enjoyed reading the novel. I loved Hawthorne's writing style and I found it easy to analyze. But this was because I had learned how to analyze literature. As a high school student, I didn't know what I was doing, and I couldn't appreciate the novel.

I think this is a problem that we face in English classes in public schools today. The literature that we force upon our students isn't necessarily at their level, and they end up hating it because they don't understand it.

I think back to my freshman year of high school. I absolutely loved To Kill a Mockingbird, like many other high school students do, because Harper Lee's narrator Scout is easy to understand and the writing style is clear. However, later in the year we read Charles Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities. Talk about a snooze fest (I did read Hard Times last year and enjoyed it, but again, I was considerably older and had been trained in how to analyze difficult literature).

Why do we ask our students to read classics that are difficult for even some college students to understand? It's ridiculous that we expect high school students to read literature that they may not appreciate or understand until they are older.

In my opinion, we need to teach classics that are age-appropriate, not that they can handle the certain situations that happen in the stories (for instance, adultery in The Scarlet Letter) but that the level and writing style can be understood.

I recently created a teaching unit for my American Literature class on Naturalism. I used short stories by Jack London and The Red Badge of Courage because I believe that the writing styles are simple, and it also made it possible to relate Naturalism to high school students. For instance, I compared Man vs. Wild and The Office "Survivorman" episode to "To Build a Fire" by Jack London. How awesome would it have been for you as a high school student to have your teacher compare classic literature to a television show you watch all the time?

Classic should be taught in high school or even junior high, but they should be taught at a certain time, when the students can understand the literature. If that means they don't read it until high school, then that's fine. In other words, those lists of novels that high school students should read to be ready for college are complete bull.

What I deem to be age appropriate classic literature:

-Peter Pan
-Alice's Adventures Through Wonderland
-To Kill a Mockingbird
-The Great Gatsby
-The Lord of the Flies
-The Red Badge of Courage
-Some Shakespeare plays (I say some, because some of the concepts and the language is hard to understand. Connect it to the students' lives, and it will help them understand it better)

There are plenty of other titles as well. The biggest thing in teaching classics I have learned so far is making it fun and interesting for students. Because otherwise it is just going to seem old and boring.

"Now a Major Motion Picture"--just like every other published novel

    

image source: fanpop.com

Young adult novels have been in the pop culture news recently with the release of the newest Twilight Saga movie and the trailer release for the Hunger Games adaptation.

I've started pondering a bit about the almost instantaneous assumption that readers have that if a book is popular, there will be a movie adaptation. We see this not only with YA literature, but with adult fiction novels as well. But there is truth in my theory, because there does seem to be a correlation between a book's popularity and an adaptation being made.

This has not just been going on recently, but in years passed as well. John Steinbeck's novels Of Mice and Men and The Grapes of Wrath were adapted for the big screen (and the stage) within years of being published.

There is a slight difference however between these adaptations and more recent adaptations. Steinbeck's novels are considered to be literary classics and the adaptations were beneficial to the general public. The timelessness of the stories is what made them popular.

We see almost the complete opposite with adaptations today, especially with YA literature. If a book is popular with teens, production companies battle over who gets those film rights. It does not matter if the book is good, substantive, timeless material. It just has to be interesting and popular.

I think that is why we haven't seen adaptations of great YA novels like Lois Lowry's The Giver or Laurie Halse Anderson's Wintergirls. Although these books have material that can make a teen think or provides them with realistic, timeless situations, they haven't been as popular with the teenage audience as books by Stephenie Meyer, Suzanne Collins and J.K. Rowling.

But do we need all of these adaptations? Does putting a novel on the big screen take away the element of imagination that many readers relish? I think there is a certain point, and I think as a society we have reached it. It is ridiculous that any book that is popular and reaches #1 on the New York Times bestseller list is becoming a film. Not only does it detract from the reader's imagination, but it has also caused a bit of laziness in the film industry. New, innovative story ideas for films have taken a seat on the bench while adaptations have become the star athletes in the film world.

I'm not saying all film adaptations of novels are bad. Peter Jackson created great adaptations of the Lord of the Rings  trilogy that are much easier and painless to watch than reading J.R.R. Tolkein's excessive description.

I think we need to step back and think about why an adaptation is made and if there is any need for a certain novel to be made into a film. Because doing so just gives teenagers another excuse to say "I'll just watch the movie" instead of delving into the book themselves.