How old were your DC when they read / watched Harry Potter?

[StuckInPollyannaMode]

DDs are 7, and I'm coming under a fair amount of pressure for them to read and watch at least the first book and film. Many of their classmates have watched the first three films.

Should I cave and let them read / watch it? The first one at least.

I was a school librarian when the later books were published and there was always a lot of competition to borrow them, but I always used to talk to the kids about the books when they brought them back, and you could tell that a lot of them, especially the younger ones, hadn't actually read it, or properly understood it.

I can see two sides of this. I suspect during the Harry Potter craze, as you say, competition was part of it and some children just wanted to 'read' HP because they'd heard of it.

But I don't understand what is bad about reading a book and not understanding all of it? I had an older brother who was precocious (I wasn't) and a mum who loved reading aloud, and so I listened to whatever my mum was reading aloud with him, and that way I got a lot of stories when I was far 'too young to understand'.

I don't think it was bad for me. I think the opposite. I got to grow up slowly with those stories, re-reading them and learning more. I think it's actually what made me a keen reader - because I was never scared of not understanding a book first time round, and it never unsettled me when I came across words I didn't know or a description I couldn't follow.

So when, much later, I came to read things like Shakespeare for school, it felt fine - it never bothered me that I wasn't really grasping 'all' of Hamlet or 'all' of Pride and Prejudice.

I still feel like that. I'm always going to come across books I need to re-read.

I think the problem with reading things 'too' early is because then they are 'done'. Particularly with schools using accelerated reader, rereading books is not encouraged because the child has already completed the quiz and therefore they never get the most from the book.

My Dd could probably have managed the vocab in the later books at 8 years old but she wouldn't be able to relate to the teenage angst, as well as some of the other themes and elements that are inferred from the text through experience within them that adds so much to the stories, when you miss out those parts the book will be less enjoyable.

But I don't understand what is bad about reading a book and not understanding all of it?

I completely agree. I was a precocious reader and there was so much I didn't fully understand - what was Pilgrim's Progress in Little Women? What on Earth were they on about in their Pickwick club? The same with What Katy Did, I only had the faintest idea about where and when it was set when I read it. And the crucial plot points of some sci fi short stories I read when I was seven or eight completely passed me by, I realised later on. But the characters and the things they did stayed with me, the places and feelings and emotions, the context taught me many new words and concepts, and on re-reading many times I gradually became more aware of things that I had missed the first time around.

On the other hand, I used to listen to children read at my son's primary school, year 4, and a few were reading the later Harry Potters. One boy in particular could only read every fourth or fifth word and couldn't explain anything that had happened when asked. So I did wonder quite how much he was getting from it.

And to get around to answering the OP's question DS1 was seven when he started the first book, he read the first three then decided he was too young for the next lot, and read them probably when he was nine or ten. I encouraged him and his brother not see the films until they had read the books.

I had a school librarian tell me Harry Potter was inappropriate for children under 14 once!

Go for it with book 1. The problem is from book 3/4 onwards they do get darker. I think for a lot of parents “they’ve read all the Harry Potter books” is there for maximum brag points.

I held DD off the finals ones until she was 9 then people in her class kept telling her spoilers so I gave her the rest of them (which we had in the house from when I read them in my 20s!)

I think the problem with reading things 'too' early is because then they are 'done'. Particularly with schools using accelerated reader, rereading books is not encouraged because the child has already completed the quiz and therefore they never get the most from the book.

Oh, that's so sad! But what is 'accelerated reader'? You read the book, do a quiz, and then what - you're not meant to look at it again? I'd just ignore that shit and get it out of the library for a second read.

@TinyMetalBirds - I wonder if that's a difference between reading and being read to? For some kids it takes a long time for reading to become easy enough that it doesn't take all your concentration (if that makes sense). Whereas perhaps if it was read aloud, they'd get it?

I remember my primary school teacher holding us all absolutely spellbound by Goodnight Mr Tom (which is, I would say, more complex in language than the first Harry Potter, and certainly longer). We were totally drawn in. But I'm sure not all of us would have read the book independently, cover to cover, and got as much out of it.

But I have vested interests here. I re-read books so much as an adult and otherwise I'd spent even more of a fortune on new ones.

My 3.5 year old has seen the first four films. I fast forward a couple of bits in GoF and he doesn't like Voldemort when he's in the back of Quirrels head but that's it. He likes listening to the philosophers stone audiobook.

He's currently playing "magic" upstairs, which mainly seems to consist of shouting "spellyarmus!" And knocking things over.

I haven’t read them myself and my 7 yr old is showing no interest so we’ll start them as/when they are interested with the book being read prior to the film being watched. I don’t think it will be for a few years based on his current interests.

Am I the only one a little shocked at 3 year olds watching the films or being read the books?! Surely they aren’t the target age group for HP I honestly cannot imagine my children when they were 3 being interested in listening or watching. Of course every child is different and maybe elder siblings involved but still 3

My friends 6 year old has been left during lockdown to work his way through ALL the films ALONE. I’m sorry but I am judging that (yes that makes me a poor friend!!). Surely a 6yr old needs to discuss the themes or have an adult on hand if they aren’t sure about something. I think the films past 3/4 are far too old for them also judging by what i’ve read. This child has also been having nightmares but apparently it’s unrelated. They are reading the books to them now.

I just feel it’s a boast/competition now as to how quickly these children are reading or watching things. Why the rush?

I agree with PPs - books first. Our year 3s are reading the book at school at the moment. My DD is slightly younger, a confident reader and is OBSESSED with HP so reads the books independently. She's watched the first 3 films too.

My DC are 6 and 8. They've both watched the first two films but I'd have to vet the third one as DS can be a bit sensitive to scary stuff - I had to stop half way through reading the third book to him as it all got too emotional and he couldn't deal with it.

DD (6) had read the first two books at the start of lockdown and became obsessed - re-reading them night after night. She begged to be allowed to read the third and I said a wary OK but she had to stop if it was too much for her. She did read it all and says she wasn't scared of it, but neither of them are allowed past book 3 for now. There's plenty of other stuff out there. DD has the Worst Witch series, and we've read Charmed Life (Diane Wynne Jones) together, and she's into the Naughtiest Girl in the School which scratches her boarding-school itch!

DD (7) has read books 1-5; she wakes up earlier than us, and found 4 and 5 on the bookshelves; I didn't realise we needed to check what was there. We don't (currently) own 6 and 7, and I've refused to get them yet. She would find even the first film utterly terrifying, so hasn't watched any of them.

Am I the only one a little shocked at 3 year olds watching the films or being read the books?! Surely they aren’t the target age group for HP confused I honestly cannot imagine my children when they were 3 being interested in listening or watching. Of course every child is different and maybe elder siblings involved but still 3

I can only speak for us but no older siblings here, both me and my sister enjoy HP though. The first film was on in the background when he was about 2.9 and he asked for it to be put on again (and then we watched in back to back eleventy billion times) and then moved on to the second, third and more recently fourth film. I think that will be as far as we go for some time film wise as they get quite dark after that. He has the merchandise (dolls and a costume) and would like to go see the Hogwarts Express "in real life" at the WB studios.

Obviously a lot of it goes over his head but he enjoys the magic spells, the mild peril aspect and the fact that it's kids being the hero I think. He wouldn't engage with it if he didn't enjoy it.

Mine were 28 and 32 if I recall correctly.

I'd agree there is no rush and there are loads of other books and films ideal for younger children. We had the books for ages and my kids showed very little interest in primary school even though lots of friends were obsessed. They now like them. My middle child is 12 and rereads them constantly. My 10 year old voracious reader has read them all but still enjoys the Worst Witch too.
I'm another one who insists we all read books before seeing the film. Most books are better than their film adaptations.

Ds is 9 and read them earlier this year. He had the set for Xmas. It took a while for him to try them (no illustrations!) but once he did he quietly read all of them. He's repeated them 3 times so far. I would have kept the last 3 back but he had read them before I realised. We're reading them together slowly now so we can sort out bits he didn't get by himself.
Once he'd read the books I was happy to start on the films. We've done 3 now.

Worth remembering that the first book won the smarties prize for the age 9-11 age group category. They've become so famous that younger kids want to read them but they weren't written for 6-7 year olds, even the early ones.

I'm holding off with DD until at least 7, but hopefully more like 8 or 9.

DD is almost 8 and we've just started reading the illustrated first book together.

I read less than a chapter a night and she's not allowed to read ahead - otherwise she would have finished it already and I want her to take her time over it and ask questions.

She had seen the first film but that doesn't seem to have put her off the book.

I'm going to drag them all out and put gaps between them.

@SarahandQuack - when I said 'not properly understood' I meant that they couldn't even tell me the most basic things about what happened.

Am I the only one a little shocked at 3 year olds watching the films or being read the books?!

But what's shocking about it?

I let DD watch Frozen. It's a similar length, and covers emotional issues very similar to those in the first Harry Potter (dead parents, family rifts, sadness, monsters and deception - but also bonding, making friends, magic and adventure).

If you mean one is a cartoon and one is not, sure, you have me there. But that's the only difference I can see.

I have been reading them to DS (just 8) for about a year. Only the first 4 though, I don't think he could cope with the later ones.

We agreed he could watch the films only after we'd read the books, so he's watched the first 3. I said he needs to be older for the remainder.

Sorry, I posted without reading fully.

@RustyBear - well, that sounds boring for the child, definitely. All I meant to get at was that for most little children, what they can read mechanically is behind what they can understand/retain when heard. It's a tangent really, sorry.

Crikey. I just checked, and Frozen is not the same length as HP 1.

I guess it just feels like it.

My ds has watched the first 3 films at 7. Watched the first at 5. He doesnt get phased at all by scary stuff so I knew he would be ok. My 4 year old isnt allowed to watch and probably won't at 7 unless he changes a lot as he is more sensitive.

My 7 year old has the books but I dont think quite has the confidence to read them but will soon.

Both kids are obsessed with the lego Harry Potter game so can give an overview of all films but will not be allowed to watch them until much older.

DD started reading HP age 7, she’s a good reader and was definitely able to understand the first 3 books. By part way through the fourth book however she decided it was too scary (and I think also too long, and too many words she didn’t know) and has put it down and gone back to slightly younger books.

Never seen the films, she still prefers animations to live action films.

I’m not sure about not allowing books on the basis they are scary, as we can’t always tell what a particular child will be scared by. There are two books I remember being terrified by as a child. Neither of them was obviously particularly scary, in fact one was supposed to be funny, it just caught the wrong bit of my imagination for some reason.

DS is 8. He hasn’t watched any of them. He has read all but the last one. And has re-read them many times over. He’s a voracious reader who reads widely though. Currently he’s making his way through the Mr Lemoncello series (they are American) and has also enjoyed Pages and Co.
At the same time that he was reading HP he was also obsessed by the Jack Stalwart series and read them obsessively.