To think Harry Potter is not suitable reading for under 10s?

[lljkk]

I often read on MN that some child (age 5, 6, 7 etc.) has read HP.
Grand they have the technical skill - but how many have the maturity to grasp complicated plot?
And most of all, maturity to handle scarey bits and evil characters, esp. in the later books?
I know JKR intended the books for children the same age as HP in each book -- so first book for age 10, 2nd book for age 11, etc.

Am I only one thinks it's an inappropriate series for almost all little kids to read?

Discuss...

Oh, I also read The Exorcist at age 8. It gave me nightmares for months. Not recommended.

Agree with you Bozza, it was not a good thing as it wasted several hours of my life that will never be returned. Sob!

Of course, ginger beer.

jbj

I remember when I was 8 reading a 'mucky book' called 'I Susan' !!!

I also went through the 'Flowers in the Attic' genre!!

Agree with the person who said HP books are like ploughing through treacle.

My DD's preferred LOTR to HP from 8ish onwards.

DD2 (who is 10) has read a couple of Stephen King books - she loved them!

I'd hate to censor their reading TBH.

DS read it with me when the first one when he was about 8, and most of his class were also reading it.

That was garbled

DS read the first one with me when he was about 8, and most of his class were also reading it.

YABU... the earlier books are definitely fine for under-10s. (Can't speak for the later ones; neither I nor my dds have read them yet.) Dd1 (8) reads a lot of books aimed at over-10s... she likes the fantasy genre and I won't let her have things that deal with 'social issues' or realistic violence. She's fine with dragon-slayers and stuff!

I was another Agatha Christie fan at primary school. I loved them.

Meant to say, the book that has upset dd the most was an ORT book (!) in their 'non-fiction' series about child slavery in India.

Stephen King's "Eyes of the Dragon" is fantastic for those who enjoyed the later Harry Potter books. I'd say that was more likely for over 10s, because it's quite complex and rather long.

My dd1 is 7 and started on teh HP books at 6 (nearly 7) she is now on book 5. She loves them and can grasp the content, even though it is scarey. In fact the films IMHO are scarier than teh books. She has only watche dth first film so far. BUT I know how she is with films, suprising not so with books!!

I had a really good reading age as a kid and used to borrow my library books from the teenage section. I had my eyes opened to lots of things!

We also used to go and stay in holiday cottages where there were loads of women's magazines. I would merrily read all about AIDS, abortion, rape, anorexia...... I think harry potter is rather tame in comparison. It did not do me any harm.

Mrs Schadenfreude (great name BTW ) - we had a copy of Walter's "My Secret Life" (Victorian porn), as well Van de Velde's "Ideal Marriage", and a dreadful tome called "Diana - the secret life of a lesbian". These were all ancient books my Dad had picked up in antiquarian bookshops (we were a v.v. bookish family) and I suppose my parents assumed that they would go unnoiced amongst so many others.

Modern (well 1960's) rudery - lets see, Tropic of Cancer, John Updike's "Couples" and Gore Vidal's "Myra Beckinridge" amongst many others I've forgotten now. Mu mum also used to get "Forum" magazine which she ineffectually treid to hide from us.

See, we had to make our OWN fun in those days!

This is why a lot of people are against labelling children's books with an age.
I don't think that a DC who could manage to read it would bother if they didn't understand the plot.
I think that J K Rowling's idea was that people would grow up with the books and arrive at them as they matured, but now they are all available, that system doesn't work because they can finish one and go right onto the next.
I think that people under estimate the abilities of children. I was a book worm as a child, I expect that I read a lot of 'unsuitable' stuff. I didn't read it if I found it boring.

That's why I wouldn't worry about my nine year old reading the "older" HPs. They are boring (unless you think teenage angst over petty issues is interesting - maybe if you are a teenager you do though). I only got through number 5 and 6 because I speed read big chunks of them.

My ds has only just started to read for pleasure though, and at the moment I am still at the gentle encouragement phase (in that I pick out big stacks of books I think he will find easy enough to read and interesting/funny and surround his bed with them). He hasn't yet got to the point of raiding the bookshelves (can't wait though )

This story is quite funny though.

Why thank you, Mrs Flittersnoop. [simpers] I also read quite an explicit lesbian tome which I borrowed from my mother's bookshelf. Can't remember its name. She also used to read some series about slaves (gaudy cover, gold writing - you know the sort of thing) with names like "Mandingo". There was a lot of howsyerfather in those as well, in very explicit detail, lots of engorged members and stuff like that!

A far cry from Harry Potter, I must say.

I absolutely adore the HP series and can't wait for my LO to read them, but they are not all children's books - the first three are, but the rest aren't. What I don't understand is why people get narked off at this... I've seen so many people complain that they are too dark for children and blah blah. Well don't let them read it then, it's not JKR's responsibility to tailor her books to your child's needs. Gahh, it really gets my goat!

As an aside - I am 26 and I get nightmares having watched Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Angel (all of which I've watched repeatedly) - it's not what is actually in the program, I think it's more the fact that it's sci-fi/fantasy and it kick-starts the more creative parts of your brain. I don't doubt that a child could be effected the same by reading a HP book, after all, it takes quite an imagination to get fully into the books!

That's interesting lollipopmother... I find that with my dd it's just the opposite. She's fine with anything that's 'fantastical', but she gets upset by things which are realistic (I gave the eg earlier of a non-fiction book about child slaves, but she also cried in 'Anne of Green Gables' when Matthew dies, though when dragons/fairies/whatever die in the fantasy books she reads she's not bothered.)

Agree about it being up to parents to find books that suit their child, though. They are not all the same, after all. (Think dd2 will be spooked by a lot of the stuff that dd1 loves - at the moment she's still addicted to 'The Magic Puppy' volume three gazillion and ninety-two... the cuter and cuddlier the better!

HP might not be aimed at young children, but they are not aimed at adults (although I think JFK has been very happy to get the adult market too). I think that she did like the idea of children growing up with them, so the books get longer and less accessible for the eight year old who might like the first couple. But Harry never really grows up properly, even in the last one, when he is supposed to be 17/18. I guess her later books might be considered as young adult (that's where our local library puts them) but I would expect a really well written book aimed at the young adult market to have much more depth of character and ethical challenge than HP, and a much less trite end. I think that the film labeling of 12A is about right really, I can't see the final installments going any older than that.

bozza my ds has only ever had nightmares (more bad thoughts at bedtime really) from a visit to the earthquakes bit of the natural history museum. Films and books no problem!

Primula, my ds is the same...it developed his reading to no end, but he doesn't always give other books a chance.
Sometimes kids jusr need a hook...

My 6 YO started reading more a few weeks ago when my 14 year ols niece left some teenager-y magazines lying around.

For ds it was Harry Potter, for dd, the inexplicable lure of the Jonas Brothers...

or "Eyebrow Brothers" as we like to call them here...

I read the first book at ten and the others as they came out, so by the time the last one came out I was too old to appreciate it for any reason rather than finally finding out what happened at the end!!

It definately depends on the kids in question and it helps that because they take a while to read and so they can grow up with them, but I would guess most 8/9 year olds would be okay with the series as a whole. The first book is probably okay for younger kids too.

I honestly think kids have a remarkable ability to just gloss over things that we see as dark and difficult. I could not stop crying about the scene where Harry has 'I will not tell lies' cut into his arm magically be his teacher and won't tell anyone, but I was 17 and full of teenage angst. I don't think 8 year olds read it in the same way!

dd1 is 8 and read the first couple then they got 'too scary' (but she watches the films) but she like fluffy stuff anyway!

Yes, it was Asterix for my son. It just kick started him.