To be worried about the number of 6 year olds reading Harry Potter?

[mydogeatsnutstoo]

My dd is 6, nearly 7. I think she is quite a bright child, she is creative and outgoing and quite athletic. Her school reports always suggest she is doing well.

However, I have been worried that she has not taken to reading as I thought she would - I was one of these precocious and avid readers as a child and she is just not! ( and not for want of opportunity, loads of books in house, taken to library a lit etc). She is on level 2b reading book which I think is about right for year 2 but definitely not Harry Potter level! Getting her to read in itself can be a trial, although she has spurts of interest and improvement though would not sit down and read a book herself very often.

I am trying not to push her but will be v disappointed if she doesn't like reading! Please tell me that there are other bright 6 year olds at this stage not reading The Hobbit (as my friend's daughter apparently has!) and that they can suddenly just 'get it' a bit later!

[Sallystyle]

Ohhh I loved The Wishing Chair. My favourite book as a child.

Im now going to buy it for dd so I can read it.

[multivac]

Also very much agree with whatdosue. If a six-year-old is enjoying Harry Potter then I really don't think it matters whether or not he is also angsting over the precise nature of Severus' relationship with Lily, or whatever else gets Potterphiles excited. Or whether it's Significant Literature in the first place.

I took our ten-year-olds to see Sherlock Holmes in Hamlet the other month. Did they understand the subtle layers of metaphor and psychological intrigue, or follow all the intricacies of the language? Of course not. Did they enjoy the story and the spectacle? Yup. Next time, they'll unpeel more meaning. Probably.

[TeaAndCake]

U2 we also read all of the Faraway Tree books. He absolutely loved those too!

Brings back loads of memories from childhood.

[multivac]

The Faraway Tree days were good days .

Best memories, though, were probably sharing Danny, Champion of the World, and Stig of the Dump, all tucked up in one big bed...

sighs wistfully

[PoorFannyRobin]

OP, as a so-called educator who taught many very bright to quite brilliant students on the secondary level, I can assure you that there are vast numbers (the vast majority) of bright children who are not reading Harry Potter at the age of six. And it's not a matter of HP's being appropriate or inappropriate; it's a matter of the intellectual and emotional maturity level of the average six-year-old. If six-year-olds, on the whole, had the desire and ability to just pick up a Harry Potter novel and read away on their own with comprehension what a wonderful world it would be! And, really, some children love to get lost in the imaginary world of a book (I did) and a few may read The Iliad and The Odyssey for fun, but many just don't or develop the desire to read much later. I recall one student who explained to me, with his lip kind of curling up at the very thought of it, that he didn't read . . . fiction (!), but I digress. Anyway, OP, I don't think you really need to be concerned or worry about this!

[PoorFannyRobin]

And, just to be clear, I'm NOT indicating that there are not six-year-olds who can read and comprehend HP books.

[FuckOffJeffrey]

I find it hard to believe loads of 6 year olds are reading the HP books. 7/8 year olds maybe but at 6 I would think its a bit much. I think the first Harry potter book would maybe be ok story wise for a 6/7 year old but I don't think it's very well written and as an adult I found it to be quite clumsy in places (although I did find the writing improved with each book).

I agree with others that Rohld Dahl is great for your daughters age range (6/7). I also enjoyed the goosebumps books, the Eloise book series and books like Charlotte's Web and the sheep-pig around that age. I also had an extensive collection of Ladybird Well loved tales and read them many times over (I still have these and plan to pass them onto DD when she is ready). I did read the Hobbit at 7 and found it quite boring and to be honest a lot of it I just didn't get.

[MistressDeeCee]

Aged 4, younger DD announced that she hated reading. She said it again a couple of years later. She's never been an avid reader but elder DD myself & OH are, so there were always books around the house. She's at Uni now. Still doesn't seem to LOVE reading..although she manages well enough with what she has to read for Uni. But thats fine - at times a book will catch here imagination and she will read it. At 6 years old there were a good few books I couldn't get her to read. But it doesn't matter now. She's 20 now, not having read a really wide range of books doesnt seem to have done her any harm. As hard as it can be for some to accept, not every child is going to be into books.

OP you may find your DD changes as she grows more, and begins to appreciate certain books. Never wise to compare to others, each at their own pace

[mercifulTehlu]

Also, it's not as if the avid readers are ONLY reading HP. Some posters are saying 'Oh no, they'd be better off reading Horrid Henry/ Roald Dahl at their age' as if you couldn't like all of these and more. Mine had read most of Roald Dahl when they started HP. Ds liked HH for a while but got bored after a couple of them.
DS was quite turned off reading because he finds the school reading books boring and too easy. HP has turned him into a bookworm like his sister. They can both read in the car, lucky things. I feel sick after half a page!

[squizita]

If a six-year-old is enjoying Harry Potter then I really don't think it matters whether or not he is also angsting over the precise nature of Severus' relationship with Lily, or whatever else gets Potterphiles excited.

In my experience the 'not understanding' when a child is pushed towards something much too hard is more fundamental than this. As in, they can't explain back to you his initial journey to Hogwarts including all the factual details and basic inferences like there being a magical platform. This is sometimes disguised by having seen the film.

It is very hard to actually enjoy a story when you can't understand the main plot.

As people keep saying YES, THERE ARE SOME 6 YEAR OLDS WHO CAN HANDLE HARRY POTTER but in competitive middle class areas, where parents need a clever book to name check and compare there are many more who have been given copies of Harry Potter by their parents, and don't necessarily enjoy or even read it.

A bit like the student mate I had who kept a copy of "War And Peace" and some angst rock on his CD player as it helped with him image (with girls) but was really more of a Stephen King and hair metal guy! It didn't mean no one on campus was studying literature or music ... just not him.

[squizita]

...reading this thread I am reminded of how internet forums are blamed for lowering inference levels because of their culture.
Expecting adults whom presumably hold GCSE or O level English (so can infer and comprehend) to have to 'spell out' that when they say some/not all 6 year olds can read HP, they mean ALL 6 YEAR OLDS CAN'T AND ARE STOOOPID. Clearly very few posters are saying this. Clearly those who are saying the very moderate and accurate fact that well under 50% of 6 year olds can handle HP are describing themselves as both teachers and parents (so can see both the large and small scale situation).
The needless pedantry and willful misinterpretation - that causes users to have to add a second post clarifying what was pretty damn clear in their main post so people won't jump on them - is unhelpful and ironic considering we are discussing reading skills. Pretending not to have them in order to 'win'.

[multivac]

My kids wouldn't have carried on with the books if they couldn't understand the basic plot and premise. Why would any child? It wouldn't be enjoyable.

And again, why is Harry Potter, in particular, supposed to be a 'clever' book? Is it because the later volumes are long? I certainly didn't force JK Rowling on my children, or give a toss about whether or not, let alone at what age, they read her (Douglas Adams, yes...)

[WhattodoSue]

"squizita" on reading your post I feel like we've been reading different threads.

My reading of this thread is that:

a) Everyone is agreed it IS possible that some children would be reading Harry Potter at aged 6.

However, some people are suggesting that this 'some' is such a small number because

b) Harry Potter is so damn difficult to read that the HUGE majority of 6 year olds couldn't possibly read it

AND therefore

c) a child has to be extraordinarily exceptional to read it

Now, if b) and c) are true, then the logical leap that people are taking is that:

d) There are too many people on this website 'claiming' that their children read Harry Potter at 6

And therefore:

e) Parents are lying, or exaggerating

f) The children can't possibly understand what they are reading

g) the children are being 'forced' to read it so that parents can claim their child is reading it.

So, where people are disagreeing, as far as I can see isn't on point a), it is on point b & c, and therefore on points d-g.

Harry Potter (from book 3-4 onwards) is challenging because
g) The books are long
h) They do use some challenging words

But, based on my direct experience of a 6 year old who IS reading it and enjoying it (because I agree with "multivac" that I don't think many children would bother if they weren't), my child as a case study should be enough to disprove c). I know she is not extraordinarily exceptional. Her school would look at me with such disdain if I ever suggested she was (they would think I was insane). She is a bright child, but she doesn't stand out in her class OTHER than the fact that she is enjoying Harry Potter. I would say she is enjoying it because she loves a good story, she isn't worried about not understanding every single word if she has the understanding of the plot (this is my guess). She also likes a challenge.

I don't think that b) is necessarily true. It doesn't mean HP is for every child. There are some children who aren't going to be so up for a reading challenge, and who don't become so engrossed in books. But those things do not make my daughter exceptional. There will also be some children who focus really carefully on the detail and who want to understand every word. That isn't my child, but that is a talent in itself. My guess is that those children might not enjoy reading something that is a little challenging. However, if b) isn't true, it becomes more plausible that more children are trying it. As I have said before, I do not think that reading and enjoying a book are at all related to full understanding.

So, I'm fundamentally disagreeing with your assessment. Personally, I that points e-g are as unlikely as the super exceptional child, because really, why would anyone bother? Particularly on an anonymous site.

As far as I am concerned, the vast majority of posters have not been exhibiting "needless pedantry and willful misinterpretation".

But that's just my interpretation.

[WhattodoSue]

I used " " instead of ** - I should be wearing my glasses

[UsedtobeFeckless]

Hah!

I was on a pre-school PTA with a woman who claimed her 4 year old daughter could read HP in Latin ... She was so far up herself it was rather impressive and livened up the cake stall no end!

[WhattodoSue]

Oh, and just to make totally clear, I don't think she is average in her reading habits, but I don't think her reading habits make her a genius. And, given that she isn't average in her reading habits, and she isn't a genius, I don't think people should worry about their own children reading HP or not, simply because it isn't really an indicator of much (except in my daughters case, fondness of a challenge, love of a good story, an obsessive bias for all books related to boarding schools and yes, a good reading ability).

[WhattodoSue]

UsedtobeFeckless I'm not saying there can't be totally insane parents who pathologically lie about everything, just that it is as unusual as the ridiculously high ability ones.

[SongOfTheLark]

Ive just bought DD (8) an avid reader, the boxset of HP for christmas. She's seen all the movies and is fine with them and asked to read the books. TBH I dont see her reading past the first 3 books in the series for another couple of years and that's fine, there's no hurry. wouldnt have occurred to me to let her or encourage her to read the books when she was 6 too young to really "get" them I'd have thought and a bit of a waste. Nothing worse than getting books far too old for children because by the time its appropriate for them to read they've been hanging round the house so long they're no longer interesting.

[fresta]

I disagree with the opinion that understanding is unimportant. Few children will enjoy reading a book that they cannot understand or make sense of. I have met children who treat reading as a mechanical skill, and they plough through books regardless of their understanding. When questioned though it is obvious that they are just decoding, and not engaging with the story. The joy of reading for most adults and children is the ability of a book to transport and immerse you in story, this cannot be achieved if you are reading a book where much of it is beyond your comprehension. The experience which a child brings to a book is as important as being able to read the words in terms of comprehension. This is why generally 6 year olds wouldn't be able to enjoy the later Harry Potter stories. In fact I'm not sure why anyone thinks that the final books in the series are even suitable for any 6 year old, the films are classified as being suitable for age 12, and the levels of violence, death, and loss are such that any 6 year old who is comprehending the story would most likely be unable to rationalize this. After all, it doesn't matter how bright your 6 year old is, they still have only had 6 years experience of life, the same as a less able child, and are no more likely to be emotionally experienced enough to understand the feelings expressed in a book.

[MERLYPUSSEDOFF]

My (nearly 8's) just 'got' it. One loves fact books, the yukkier the better (think bogies and dead things), and the other one loves Horrid Henry, Secret 7, and has just started HP and Artemis Fowl.

[WhattodoSue]

Fresta it isn't that understanding is unimportant, it is simply that not everybody has to have the same level of understanding of a particular book to enjoy it.

Everyone brings their own experience to a book. The experience of a 6 year old is going to be considerably less than that of a 16 year old or a 36 year old. As has been said above, they might not understand the dynamics of the relationship between Snape, Lily, and HP's Dad, but that doesn't mean they can't understand and enjoy the basic story. Also, they may not understand the level of despair and sadness that the Dementors are supposed to create. But actually, in the books themselves the point is made that they have such a negative impact on Harry compared to the other children because he has experienced more loss. But, the point is that just because they don't have a maximum understanding of the underlying themes, it doesn't mean they can't get pleasure from the books.

And, the films are 12 rated, but the books are not. Personally, I wouldn't let my children see beyond the first film at the moment. I think that the films take it beyond a childs experience and add in details of an adults, and for my children, I would rather wait until they are a little older.

[multivac]

"Few children will enjoy reading a book that they cannot understand or make sense of"

Exactly. And fewer still will continue to turn the pages of such a book once they realise that's what they are holding.

[multivac]

Also, we don't, traditionally, have a problem introducing notions of 'violence, death and loss' to the very youngest children through stories, rhymes and songs. It's part of how we learn what it means to be human, and mortal.

[BathshebaDarkstone]

She sounds quite normal for her age, don't worry!

[ExConstance]

My DS1 read Harry Potter at 6, but it was the first book which was recently published. WE then avidly awaited each new book as it was published which was very good as he was considerably older and had better understanding when the series came closer to the end and the topics became darker.