Scan barcode
A review by anl2633
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone by J.K. Rowling
5.0
So the first experience I had with this book was a very long time ago, probably around 2nd or 3rd grade when I was 7/8 years old. I think it was right at the time when Deathly Hallows was coming out and the world was raving. I found the Sorcerer's Stone, a beautiful hardcover edition, in a box with some of my dad's old books when we moved houses. I have vague memories of reading the first few chapters in his truck while we were going through a car wash. The book was packed away again soon after that and, to this day, I have no idea what happened to it or where it could be. I was still pretty young at the time so I didn't really take a lot of it in anyway, but it was still fascinating to read and look at the illustrations.
Luckily my dad also owned the paperback version too (I guess he forgot he already owned a copy) which managed to stay on the bookshelf in his office for a long time. I think around 4th or 5th grade (around the time the Half Blood Prince movie came out) I was given the next three books in the series by a friend of my mom's, so I dedicated myself to reading the first one to completion. I read the paperback book from my dad's study, and instantly fell in love with Harry and the world. I carried those books around with me everywhere I went in fear that I'd finish one and not have the next ones immediately with me to dive into.
I re-read the first book again in 7th grade after the second Deathly Hallows movie was released. This time it was enjoyable for me, just not memorable in any way. I think I rushed too much through it, intent on getting through the first few books and maybe the whole series so I could say that I'd read every Harry Potter book. And maybe then I'd fit in with everyone else who grew up with the books and had wands and knew what all the spells and things were. I'll blame that on how awful middle school was and the fact that I sort of fell out of love with reading around that time. I mostly enjoyed the book, but I felt that it was too "childish" for me and boring. I think I felt threatened by everyone else around me who read really "sophisticated and long" (rolling my eyes here) YA books and Classics.
Nearly every summer and Christmas afterwards, I would get clockwork urges to either read the entire series or binge-watch the films. The latter was always my go-to since I could rope my mom into dedicating an entire Saturday and Sunday to knocking them out one by one with me. It wasn't until the Spring semester of my Freshman year at college that I picked up the first one again for an assignment. Again, I didn't really get into it. It was for class and I had to read it in a short amount of time and everyone was ruining it for me with their spiels about its lack of sexuality and diversity.
This is my fourth time reading the first book and I can't even begin to express how relieved and grateful I am that the magic is still there. This time reading was incredibly nostalgic for me. It felt like my first time reading the book, flying through the pages with a sense of wonder and awe for such an amazing world. There were tons of things I didn't pick up on as a kid that I do as an adult.
And I can say without a doubt that J.K. Rowling is an especially talented and unique writer. Some can blame her success on the alignment of the planets- a boom of births after the seventies and the rapid expansion of technology nestled right up against the line between the 20th and 21st century. But I think her talent at creativity and writing has more merit than just "getting lucky".
Rowling is incredibly self aware in this novel, and I've never really picked up on that as much as I did reading it for a 4th time. Characters, plot, and growth have a continuity that kind of blows my mind. I don't think I've ever read from someone else that has quite as much flair for subtle continuity than Rowling does. This is why I'm calling it talent rather than luck. There's a feeling of purpose behind these details rather than just happy accidents. Small details really hit the mark for me. For example, Harry and Ron's first meeting on the train. There are the background observations that Ron is wearing ragged clothing and is part of a family where he's neither the oldest or youngest child. There are details given to us through dialogue. Ron tells Harry that everything he owns has been passed down to him by his older brothers. Scabbers, his wand, and his robes. And throughout the book, these details continue to pop up in various ways. Ron's old chess set comes from his grandfather. The Weasley's are kinda viewed as the "rednecks” of the wizarding world, "country hicks with no money and a ton of kids" (not trying to normalize/define!). And this comes to a head when Ron is standing before the Mirror of Erised and seeing himself as Head Boy and Quidditch Champion. "Ronald Weasley, who has always been overshadowed by his brothers, sees himself standing alone, the best of all of them." The details that have been carried throughout the story to this moment now make this sentence seem that much more poignant and powerful.
Too many authors fail to understand and, subsequently, shape their characters correctly. There is no continuity in many of the books I've read. The details are sparse and seem to be thrown in casually and carelessly; as if the author realized that their characters were falling flat halfway through edits and they just tossed some things in in the hopes that this patchwork effort wouldn't be noticeable by the readers. And boy is it noticeable. Rowling, rather, carries her characters through the story. Little details, little sparks of the character come together as the story progresses, and light to fan the flames where moments like the Mirror of Erised become all the more striking. There's no surprise when the characters do grow.
I will admit, yes, that her characters are built on few traits rather than many. But perhaps this is also a mark of talent rather than luck. The children are 11. Complex traits can come later when complex experiences arise. As of this book, Harry, Ron, and Hermione are young and just beginning their lives as wizards and witch. I won't fault Rowling for not making her characters more than they need to be when her audience was always intended to be younger.
This book, again, was nostalgic in many ways. The world building is absolutely brilliant. It really draws you in. You want to learn more, see more, and experience more. The magic is just as wonderful as it was when I was a kid. I had to stop myself multiple times while reading from going outside to hunt down a stick that I could wave around and pretend to be casting spells like I'm 8 again. 'Yes, I'm an adult woman waving a stick at you. No, I'm not crazy. Now fall on the ground paralyzed. I've literally just stupefyed you, didn't you hear?'
A more pleasant surprise came toward the end of the novel when Dumbledore was handing out final points to Ron, Hermione, Harry, and Neville. As a kid, I never paid much attention to this scene. I was glad that Slytherin lost the House Cup and Harry was given enough points to show everyone else at Hogwarts that he took on Voldemort again and that they should regret ever ostracizing him for losing so many points before. But this time as an adult, I nearly choked up as soon as Dumbledore started saying, "There are all kinds of courage..." to Neville. Don't ask me why. I still don't know, but apparently it was enough to give me an overwhelming sense of warmth. Sometimes small acts of bravery are the most moving.
I think another mark of growth for me as a reader and person was my identifying with some of the older characters in the novel. When I was young, I would get very angry and defensive of Harry after McGonagall punishes him even after he did the right thing. I was very concerned with the justice of it all and blamed McGonagall so fiercely for causing Harry to be ostracized by his peers. The whole school blamed him for losing so many points, and when that hurt him, I felt an overwhelming sense of justice. Harry didn't deserve that punishment! McGonagall was in the wrong! Fast forward now and I really understand where she's coming from. As an adult it’s easy to see that Harry just stumbles down from the astronomy tower late at night and gets 3 other students in trouble with him. Even though he had done a good thing ensuring Norbet was safe, McGonagall certainly doesn’t know, and so, the punishment is kind of deserved. Harry also isn't responsible for Hagrid. There were other ways to fix the problem that didn't involve Harry breaking rules. But again, not an attack on the author, but a recognition that this would appeal more to the sense of justice that kids have. Kids have imaginations that demand action and excitement. As adults, we're a bit more reticent to get angry when someone is rightfully punished for breaking the rules.
Also the childish humor in this book was so refreshing! I've read some pretty dark and adult stuff this year, and I honestly surprised myself laughing aloud at some of the jokes that were meant for kids rather than people my own age. Perhaps it was the nostalgia. Perhaps I did a better job of channeling my inner kid. Either way, everything was great.
I think as an adult the points system confused me way more than it probably should’ve. But I mean, Harry and Ron defeat a Mountain Troll and receive 5 points each for their house. Later, Harry is caught sneaking around at night after delivering Norbert and loses 50 points...and somehow that doesn’t seem to add up? The points system is kind of crackpot guesswork, but whatever, I guess. Wizards.
The Dursleys are the The Dursleys. Mean and abusive people that I definitely do NOT support in any way, shape, or form. I did, however, sort of understand where part of their cruelty stems from: fear. I mean, if you think about it, Petunia is terrified of her witch sister and almost rightfully so. Lily gets straight-up murdered by the most evil wizard the world has ever seen. At the beginning of the novel The Dursleys had been living alone and away from the influence of magic, only to be suddenly held responsible for the son of a sister that was murdered in an awfully brutal way. Isn’t that just a tiny bit concerning? This again doesn’t defend the years of abuse they put Harry through, but being forced into the world of magic even just a bit could ruffle the feathers of anyone I think. Magic is as terrifying as it is wonderful. And while the Dursleys’ cruelty is by no means right, it does have some roots in fear, and so I didn’t hate them as much as I did when I was a child.
All-in-all, I’m really enjoying my Harry Potter re-read as an adult and seeing how my opinions of certain things have evolved over time. I’m looking forward to reading the next few books and hopefully getting that same sense of nostalgia again. And then book 5 will be the first of the series that I have never read, so it will be interesting to see how I might respond.
Quotes:
“Humans do have a knack for choosing precisely those things which are worst for them”
“It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live, remember that”
Luckily my dad also owned the paperback version too (I guess he forgot he already owned a copy) which managed to stay on the bookshelf in his office for a long time. I think around 4th or 5th grade (around the time the Half Blood Prince movie came out) I was given the next three books in the series by a friend of my mom's, so I dedicated myself to reading the first one to completion. I read the paperback book from my dad's study, and instantly fell in love with Harry and the world. I carried those books around with me everywhere I went in fear that I'd finish one and not have the next ones immediately with me to dive into.
I re-read the first book again in 7th grade after the second Deathly Hallows movie was released. This time it was enjoyable for me, just not memorable in any way. I think I rushed too much through it, intent on getting through the first few books and maybe the whole series so I could say that I'd read every Harry Potter book. And maybe then I'd fit in with everyone else who grew up with the books and had wands and knew what all the spells and things were. I'll blame that on how awful middle school was and the fact that I sort of fell out of love with reading around that time. I mostly enjoyed the book, but I felt that it was too "childish" for me and boring. I think I felt threatened by everyone else around me who read really "sophisticated and long" (rolling my eyes here) YA books and Classics.
Nearly every summer and Christmas afterwards, I would get clockwork urges to either read the entire series or binge-watch the films. The latter was always my go-to since I could rope my mom into dedicating an entire Saturday and Sunday to knocking them out one by one with me. It wasn't until the Spring semester of my Freshman year at college that I picked up the first one again for an assignment. Again, I didn't really get into it. It was for class and I had to read it in a short amount of time and everyone was ruining it for me with their spiels about its lack of sexuality and diversity.
This is my fourth time reading the first book and I can't even begin to express how relieved and grateful I am that the magic is still there. This time reading was incredibly nostalgic for me. It felt like my first time reading the book, flying through the pages with a sense of wonder and awe for such an amazing world. There were tons of things I didn't pick up on as a kid that I do as an adult.
And I can say without a doubt that J.K. Rowling is an especially talented and unique writer. Some can blame her success on the alignment of the planets- a boom of births after the seventies and the rapid expansion of technology nestled right up against the line between the 20th and 21st century. But I think her talent at creativity and writing has more merit than just "getting lucky".
Rowling is incredibly self aware in this novel, and I've never really picked up on that as much as I did reading it for a 4th time. Characters, plot, and growth have a continuity that kind of blows my mind. I don't think I've ever read from someone else that has quite as much flair for subtle continuity than Rowling does. This is why I'm calling it talent rather than luck. There's a feeling of purpose behind these details rather than just happy accidents. Small details really hit the mark for me. For example, Harry and Ron's first meeting on the train. There are the background observations that Ron is wearing ragged clothing and is part of a family where he's neither the oldest or youngest child. There are details given to us through dialogue. Ron tells Harry that everything he owns has been passed down to him by his older brothers. Scabbers, his wand, and his robes. And throughout the book, these details continue to pop up in various ways. Ron's old chess set comes from his grandfather. The Weasley's are kinda viewed as the "rednecks” of the wizarding world, "country hicks with no money and a ton of kids" (not trying to normalize/define!). And this comes to a head when Ron is standing before the Mirror of Erised and seeing himself as Head Boy and Quidditch Champion. "Ronald Weasley, who has always been overshadowed by his brothers, sees himself standing alone, the best of all of them." The details that have been carried throughout the story to this moment now make this sentence seem that much more poignant and powerful.
Too many authors fail to understand and, subsequently, shape their characters correctly. There is no continuity in many of the books I've read. The details are sparse and seem to be thrown in casually and carelessly; as if the author realized that their characters were falling flat halfway through edits and they just tossed some things in in the hopes that this patchwork effort wouldn't be noticeable by the readers. And boy is it noticeable. Rowling, rather, carries her characters through the story. Little details, little sparks of the character come together as the story progresses, and light to fan the flames where moments like the Mirror of Erised become all the more striking. There's no surprise when the characters do grow.
I will admit, yes, that her characters are built on few traits rather than many. But perhaps this is also a mark of talent rather than luck. The children are 11. Complex traits can come later when complex experiences arise. As of this book, Harry, Ron, and Hermione are young and just beginning their lives as wizards and witch. I won't fault Rowling for not making her characters more than they need to be when her audience was always intended to be younger.
This book, again, was nostalgic in many ways. The world building is absolutely brilliant. It really draws you in. You want to learn more, see more, and experience more. The magic is just as wonderful as it was when I was a kid. I had to stop myself multiple times while reading from going outside to hunt down a stick that I could wave around and pretend to be casting spells like I'm 8 again. 'Yes, I'm an adult woman waving a stick at you. No, I'm not crazy. Now fall on the ground paralyzed. I've literally just stupefyed you, didn't you hear?'
A more pleasant surprise came toward the end of the novel when Dumbledore was handing out final points to Ron, Hermione, Harry, and Neville. As a kid, I never paid much attention to this scene. I was glad that Slytherin lost the House Cup and Harry was given enough points to show everyone else at Hogwarts that he took on Voldemort again and that they should regret ever ostracizing him for losing so many points before. But this time as an adult, I nearly choked up as soon as Dumbledore started saying, "There are all kinds of courage..." to Neville. Don't ask me why. I still don't know, but apparently it was enough to give me an overwhelming sense of warmth. Sometimes small acts of bravery are the most moving.
I think another mark of growth for me as a reader and person was my identifying with some of the older characters in the novel. When I was young, I would get very angry and defensive of Harry after McGonagall punishes him even after he did the right thing. I was very concerned with the justice of it all and blamed McGonagall so fiercely for causing Harry to be ostracized by his peers. The whole school blamed him for losing so many points, and when that hurt him, I felt an overwhelming sense of justice. Harry didn't deserve that punishment! McGonagall was in the wrong! Fast forward now and I really understand where she's coming from. As an adult it’s easy to see that Harry just stumbles down from the astronomy tower late at night and gets 3 other students in trouble with him. Even though he had done a good thing ensuring Norbet was safe, McGonagall certainly doesn’t know, and so, the punishment is kind of deserved. Harry also isn't responsible for Hagrid. There were other ways to fix the problem that didn't involve Harry breaking rules. But again, not an attack on the author, but a recognition that this would appeal more to the sense of justice that kids have. Kids have imaginations that demand action and excitement. As adults, we're a bit more reticent to get angry when someone is rightfully punished for breaking the rules.
Also the childish humor in this book was so refreshing! I've read some pretty dark and adult stuff this year, and I honestly surprised myself laughing aloud at some of the jokes that were meant for kids rather than people my own age. Perhaps it was the nostalgia. Perhaps I did a better job of channeling my inner kid. Either way, everything was great.
I think as an adult the points system confused me way more than it probably should’ve. But I mean, Harry and Ron defeat a Mountain Troll and receive 5 points each for their house. Later, Harry is caught sneaking around at night after delivering Norbert and loses 50 points...and somehow that doesn’t seem to add up? The points system is kind of crackpot guesswork, but whatever, I guess. Wizards.
The Dursleys are the The Dursleys. Mean and abusive people that I definitely do NOT support in any way, shape, or form. I did, however, sort of understand where part of their cruelty stems from: fear. I mean, if you think about it, Petunia is terrified of her witch sister and almost rightfully so. Lily gets straight-up murdered by the most evil wizard the world has ever seen. At the beginning of the novel The Dursleys had been living alone and away from the influence of magic, only to be suddenly held responsible for the son of a sister that was murdered in an awfully brutal way. Isn’t that just a tiny bit concerning? This again doesn’t defend the years of abuse they put Harry through, but being forced into the world of magic even just a bit could ruffle the feathers of anyone I think. Magic is as terrifying as it is wonderful. And while the Dursleys’ cruelty is by no means right, it does have some roots in fear, and so I didn’t hate them as much as I did when I was a child.
All-in-all, I’m really enjoying my Harry Potter re-read as an adult and seeing how my opinions of certain things have evolved over time. I’m looking forward to reading the next few books and hopefully getting that same sense of nostalgia again. And then book 5 will be the first of the series that I have never read, so it will be interesting to see how I might respond.
Quotes:
“Humans do have a knack for choosing precisely those things which are worst for them”
“It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live, remember that”