=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= EDline Vol. 8, no. 89 (8 September 2003) Editorial mailing list (digest version) Published by the Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Contents: Q & A [2yq] Harry Potter redux [Offshoot of [2yk] Keeping a text's local flavor] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ---[2]-- Q & A -------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sept 2003 From: Jane Lyle, jlyle@indiana.edu Judyth Mermelstein wrote: > The decision that children in the U.S. would be too stupid to > learn what "philosopher's stone" means was just more proof > (as if one needed it) that Corporate America thinks of itself > (and presumably its own children) as the only intelligent > humans in the U.S., with everyone else in a sort of retarded > underclass. This is at least the tenth time that someone on this list (and others, too) has stated that the film was given a different title because the powers-that-be considered U.S. kids "too stupid" to understand the original title. Yet no one has ever offered any proof that this was indeed the reason for the change--that it wasn't simply a marketing decision, or even an arbitrary decision by some head honcho. Judyth, you have made this claim on several occasions. Can you please cite the relevant source, where the person who made that decision gave as his or her reason the lagging intelligence of American kids? ---------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sept 2003 From: David Ibbetson, isserlis@rogers.com Jane Lyle wrote: > the film was given a different title because the powers-that-be > be considered U.S. kids "too stupid" to understand the original > title. Yet no one has ever offered any proof that this was > indeed the reason for the change The changes were made in the US edition of the book before anybody was seriously thinking of films. The decision that *was* made by US film people was to base the films on the US versions. By then "Sorcerer's stone" was established in North America. Incidentally what do the translations into many languages use? At times I wonder whether, if Philosopher's Stone" had been used, the book would have had so much trouble with religious extremists. ---------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sept 2003 From: Judy Stein, jstein@panix.com Samantha Wauchope wrote: > My question is, why are a group of adults, and editors at that, > even interested in a successful but not particularly original > kids' book. I find it hard to believe many of us would have any > reason to read HP books. Well, HP *is* a publishing phenomenon, and many of us work in publishing, so it's of general interest at least from that perspective. Other than that, it's been a takeoff point for a discussion of regional/national differences in terminology and the related issue of what kinds of translations of the differences are necessary for material written for one audience and then published for another. ---------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sept 2003 From: Samantha Wauchope, swauchope@fuschia.net Sorry, Judy, I didn't mean to direct my criticism towards you, or towards anyone in particular. I'm just a bit fed up with the seriousness with which HP is discussed, and threw in my comments as a reply to the message at the top of my edline box. HP is definitely a publishing phenomenon, and we'd all like to get our hands on a piece of that action, but it's no literary phenomenon. As far as the discussion on dialects goes, it is relevant and interesting. But since when has changing the title of the movie version of a book aimed at eight year olds been of relevance to editors? The argument that this somehow shows that US producers are making a judgment about viewers' intelligence falls flat when you look at how many US films are given entirely new titles in the French versions - unless we can extrapolate that the French film distributors think their viewers are thicker than those in the US. ---------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sept 2003 From: David Ibbetson, isserlis@rogers.com The books are being read by all ages. They are even available with special "adult" dustcovers. The film-makers have followed a decision that was made by a publisher (or more likely by a junior editor) before filming, what was then, one book had been thought of. The changes have been used as a peg for a widespread discussion of the desirability of producing national versions of novels. It would seem that librarians and editors dislike this practice, which complicates their lives, but publishers believe the practice increases sales, and it's their decision. ---------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sept 2003 From: Kathleen Much, kathleen@casbs.stanford.edu Samantha Wauchope opined: > it hard to believe many of us would have any reason to read HP > books. Well, I do. I have a 5-year-old grandson who adores Harry Potter. I bought all the books in England as they were published, so as to give Justin the authentic language of J.K. Rowling. Just got back with the latest doorstop. So far, this single example of an American kid has had no trouble at all understanding British English. (Nor did I when I was small and reading British books.) I did explain that a "torch" in England was a "flashlight" in America, so he wouldn't think it was OK for children to run around with fire. ---------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sept 2003 From: Ron Griffiths, rongriffiths@supanet.com Kathleen Much wrote: > Well, I do. I have a 5-year-old grandson who adores Harry > Potter. I bought all the books in England as they were > published, so as to give Justin the authentic language I wish more parents and grandparents had your perspective on literature and encouraged children to learn through reading. It may be a small thing, but little pieces make up the whole and will produce a child with a balanced and tolerant view on life with regard to differences in culture and language. ---------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sept 2003 From: Judy Stein, jstein@panix.com Samantha Wauchope wrote: > HP is definitely a publishing phenomenon I haven't read any of the books, but I did read a sample chapter on Amazon.com; I was singularly unimpressed. HP's appeal is obviously not in the quality of the writing, but then neither was that of the Nancy Drew-type series of yore. ---------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Sept 2003 From: Jane Ornauer, jreditor@aol.com I don't know about people in the UK but the Harry Potter books have been phenomenally successful with adults in the US, as well as with kids. Mystery fans seems to love them. ---------------------- Date: Sat, 6 Sept 2003 From: Esther Shchory, eshchory@nonstop.net.il From a personal stand point, having just read book number 5 and she is amazingly accurate in portraying a 15 year old's anger and frustration. I doubt she wants to write literature as she is trying to identify with children HP's age, which for the first book was 11.  There is a certain item in number 5 that I thought unnecessary and should have been removed by a good editor but otherwise both her style of writing, characterization and plotting are much tighter than most teen fiction, even some of the award-winning books I read lately (And I can't name them because they were that forgettable) have been very flabby or lost steam before the end, that I think there is very good reason to read HP and take notes. Here it translates roughly as the clever people's stone. ---------------------- Date: Sat, 6 Sept 2003 From: Ian Kingston, i.kingston@ntlworld.com David Ibbetson wrote: > Incidentally what do the translations into many languages use? I have a copy of the French edition: 'Harry Potter a L'Ecole des Sorciers'. This very neatly sidesteps the whole issue. Many names are changed in the book, sometimes oddly and sometimes for obvious reasons. Examples escape me at the moment. Maybe we should consider the US editions as translations into another language and try to take a more neutral approach to such changes. ---------------------- Date: Sat, 6 Sept 2003 From: David Ibbetson, isserlis@rogers.com From what I hear, read and see Harry Potter is doing exceedingly well among adults and children in the UK and Canada. My main objection to Order of the Phoenix is its bulk. It would have been more manageable on thinner paper or as two volumes. India paper seems to have disappeared from the market without an economic replacement. ---------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Sept 2003 From: Anna McCormack, mccormack@goulburn.net.au Samantha Wauchope wrote: > My question is, why are a group of adults, and editors at that, > even interested in a successful but not particularly original > kids' book. I find it hard to believe many of us would have any > reason to read HP books. I'd rather read Harry Potter than glitzy adult fiction featuring beautiful people behaving in astoundingly ugly ways. That's the stuff that I can't see any reason to read. But you're partly right: HP isn't particularly original. What IS original is the volume of the synthesis: Rowling has weighed out a great number of tried-and-true elements that make good story, blended them well, baked them in an oven of easily accessible language, and served with a smile. ---------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Sept 2003 From: Steve Rickaby, srickaby@wordmongers.demon.co.uk Well here's one reason why my partner - actually a senior English teacher, not an editor - did so: to try and crack the secret of what makes them popular, and then make herself affluent in early retirement by doing the same ;-) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= END OF EDline 8.89 E-mail address for posting messages or replies: < edline-digest@electriceditors.net > Admin page: < http://www.electriceditors.net/edline/admin.htm > ** The views expressed in this mailing list are strictly those of the individual contributors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the moderators or of the Electric Editors. ** Articles (c) 2003, by individual contributors Design (c) 1996--2003 Iain Brown Compilation (c) 2003 Iain Brown / The Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=