On Dec 21, 2011, at 6:50 PM, Graham Watson wrote:

> I am with you on the Harry Potter issue. He certainly did seem to be in over 
> his head and always came out on top by pure luck, or by someone else bigger 
> and stronger stepping in, not my idea of a hero. And the wand trick did not 
> do much for me either. Power should always come from within and if you are 
> going to use a wand, then it should be merely an extension of your own power. 
> I think JK came up with a really cool concept, but her writing made it a bit 
> bland for me.
>  
> But on your description of Magician and Silverthorn I am not there with you. 
> I loved both of them, and I thought they were excellent books with enough in 
> them to keep me going and going. Magician was an awesome introduction to 
> Midkemia. And Silverthorn, I just loved the hopelessness felt by the 
> characters. That for me was what made it the best. The characters felt 
> overwhelmed, over matched and hopeless, and yet they continued to strive and 
> win through. But Darkness was definitely the ultimate end to that adventure. 
> I know I will be really sad when Pugs story comes to an end. Just to make it 
> last a bit longer I have went back and am rereading Magician. Am about half 
> way through. But I wanted to read them all again so that everything was fresh 
> when I finally picked up crown imperiled.
>  
> Graham Watson
>  
>  

I have no idea why you're emails are coming in such monster large type fonts.

Anyway,  you may fairly criticize any writer on how well/poorly he/she did the 
job.  That's what taste is about as well as your tolerance of/enjoyment 
of/disapproval of various styles, tropes, genre's, etc.

IMHO, you are not entitled to criticize an artists because they view the world 
differently than you.  That's what art is about, sharing a perspective with 
others.  Saying that a work is flawed because a magician uses a wand is like 
saying Elvis Presley was a lousy singer because he didn't sing opera.  If you 
don't care for a certain trope, that's fine. Boy with a wand is hardly original 
with J.K. Rowling.  It wasn't original with Walt Disney when he did Sorcerer's 
Apprentice, either.  But it's a fair choice.  

Best, R.E.F.
----
www.crydee.com

Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by 
stupidity.





Reply via email to