to be seriously irritated that "reading Harry Potter" has...

[seeker]

...become a bench mark for good reading in younger children?

Yes, in order to decode Harry Potter you do have to be a very competent reader. But the themes and ideas in the books - particularly the later ones - are entirely inappropriate and largely incomprehensible for KS1 children, and anyway there is a world of better written, age appropriate for good readers of this age to get their teeth into without adding to grip Rowling has on childrens' fiction.

Seeker- children relate to Harry Potter. I disagree that its incomprehensible. My DS1 is a very poor reader and as a result wont try to read any book that he doesnt have to.
But he will listen to Harry Potter audio books for hours. He completly understands all the complicated threads running through the series.

Why do we have to live in a society where every thing our kids do or read has to come back to enriching their education. Harry Potter is escapism and as you say, a children's fiction book.

Who cares if there is better written books out there. Dont you think there is enough pressure on ten year olds without dictating that they read Moby Dick as opposed to Harry Potter for a little light reading.

My DD (13) is a very compitant reader and is currently trawling herself through as many vampire related books as she can after reading the Twilight series. I suppose she shouldnt be allowed to enjoy these books either and keep to the books she reads in school such as Of Mice and Men, To Kill a Mockingbird etc.

surely it's a bench mark because everyone has read them or seems motivated to do so, therefore not having done so may indicate a problem with reading levels.

though i personally did enjoy them, and never much quailed at the quality of the writing, they're just rollicking adventures with good friends.

Anything that gets children reading and excited by books is ok in my book! Ds1 particularly loved Horrid Henry, which wouldn't be my tome of choice for him, but that's what he wanted to read. He now reads a much bigger range (he's 8, Y4), including Narnia, Dr Who books, Greek myths, Rosemary Sutcliffe etc etc.

Dd (6, Y2) loves Enid Blyton and Noel Streatfeild, but I imagine she will start reading Harry Potter fairly soon - she has been talking about it. By which I don't mean she will be 'ready' to read it in terms of reading ability, she has been reading harder books for ages, but that she will ask to read them, which is more important imo.

I agree that Harry potter books really aren't appropriate content wise for key stage 1 childen or even early ks2 to be honest.

Decoding level might be for some but esp the later books have some older themes that don't seem suitable for 6 and 7 year olds.

My 7 year old can read Harry potter in terms of the reading, but I would prefer other books for now. She agrees anyway. There are so many good more she appropriate books out there for this age range.

I think I'll have a while I mull over this one.

But then my Mum was probably eating while I read Kazantzakis aged 9.

oh, just finished reading Philosophers stone to my 4 and 6 year old.

Couldn't spot any 'difficult' themes so far and made a pleasant chege from the Enid Blyton rut we were in.

I was in my 30's before I twigged the Narnia stories are all about religion.
children take a book on the level they can cope with. A good book should be multi levelled.

Out of interest what themes and ideas do you think are inappropriate for young children.

Snow White, Hansel and Gretel, Little Mermaid have some tricky themes and ideas which we encourage our preschoolers to run with.

I am not sure I undestand what you mean OP. Do you think it is stupid to consider reading Harry Potter as the ultimate achievement for a child (if that is the case I do tend to agree with you) or do you just think HP stories are not suitable for children? (I have not really got an opinion on that as I am a ferm believer that every parents have a good idea of what is or not suitable for their own child)

Thing is, if you are going to have a benchmark at all, something where you are sure other people will understand what you are talking about, then it will have to be something hugely popular and possibly over-hyped. This does not mean that the children of the parents using the benchmark are not reading anything else. It's the lowest common denominator.

Philosopher's Stone, I agree, is suitable for almost any age. But the later ones, with the hand being chopped off, and stuff like that are not at all appropriate for younger ones. (IMHO)

And no, I'm not suggesting that it's Harry Potter or Moby Dick - I'm not sure how anyone read that into my post. I/m saying that there are lots of well written, age appropriate, exciting, funny (and escapist) books that AREN"T Harry Potter!

Shame that your 13 year old regards more 'serious" books as suitable for school only, teamcullen. Mine is inclined to do the same - I'm working on it!

I think the first 3 HPs are OK for KS1 personally.

The issue is - I think - that HP books are well known, so it's a 'benchmark' that people recognise. In the past you might have identified a child's reading ability by saying they were reading Narnia books independently. But nowadays many people would have little concept of the 'level' of those books.

Both my boys have actually self-censored with inappropriate books. ds1 read the first Alex Rider book quite young, but then stopped reading the series at the point (I can't remember where it is), when there was more mention of teenage issues - girls, etc., as he simply wasn't interested. I think he did similar with HP too actually.

Seeker- Just for the record, my DD really enjoyed "To Kill a Mockingbird", but she wouldnt have got as much out of it, had she of picked it up at the library. She enjoyed it because they studied the reality behind the story, the same could be said for Anne Frank or The boy in the striped pajamas.

But the reason that she will sit for hours reading, is largly because of the enjoyment she has had reading the Harry Potter series. We have queued up at 8am in the morning on the realise day of a new HP book.

If a child picks up one book which they really enjoy, they are much more likely to go on and enjoy and read other books. That is a benchmark in itself!

I was thinking the other day - I read a huge amount when I was a child. In my pre-teens I was reading teenage books (Forever by Judy Blume sticks in the mind), and in my early teens I was reading all sorts of adult books. In the school holidays, I practically lived in the library.

I read classics and crap (Mills and Boon), and not once did I think to hide what I was reading, or did my mum ever comment.

I'm not sure that books can be inappropriate in the way that films or computer games can be.

I think books can be inappropriate, but only in fairly extreme cases.

As a teenager I read lots of horror books, and the last one I read was Stephen King's the Stand. I found it very disturbing - I'm not sure exactly why - and even now it makes me shudder to think of it, even though (25 years on) I can remember very little about it.

I also read Flowers in the Attic at a fairly tender and impressionable age, and I don't think that was an entirely healthy thing to do.

Aaaah Flowers in the Attic ..... sooo romantic

oh yes me too, it was passed aroudn our primary school with some reverence. and all the later, even more explicit, ones.

o gosh, flowers in the attic...... if my mother had known what that one was about i can only imagine the fallout i then went and read some of her other books and they made FITA look possitively sweet and innocent!

as for the op... i read the hobbit at 9 which was utterly terrifying at that age but it gave me a life long love of fantasy and did me no major harm

yanbu Seeker, but I expect I'm the only one?

Boy, I can think of A LOT of books that are inappropriate for DC. DD (8yo, very good reader) was asking about Anne Frank last night, and NO WAY do I want her to read that yet... leaving aside the horrific historical background, it can't be appreciated properly AFAIC by someone so young.

I hate DC reading books before they are truly mature enough to enjoy them properly. The first HP book might have been properly appreciated by DC from age 7, but when somebody talks about their child plowing thru not only first HP but the other books in the series at age 3-4yo... I just don't believe that a child that young has enough life experience to get out of those books what the readers are supposed to get out of them.

What's the point when they are still quite happy reading Enid Blyton or Rainbow Fairies, Astrosaurs or even a ruddy Encyclopedia?

I'm not overly bothered by the themes and ideas. I don't like them, because I don't like that sort of thing. DS hasn't read them because he doesn't either, and he is a bit of a sensitive flower

I'm nore amused at the way they have become a benchmark. Reading Harry Potter by the time they leave reception has certainly become the norm on G&T type threads.

I think there's a lot of inverse snobbery sloching around the potter books tbh

they may not be Great Literature but they have got lots and lots of kids reading who weren't bothered about books before, especially little boys

and my 7yo (who has AS and is a whizz at some things/shoite at others, and if you think I'm showing off you can go piss up a rope) has read Goblet of Fire and thoroughly enjoyed it, understood and relished the ideas and themes and I am pleased he has read it. He also reads other material including the Mr Men, the Highway Code, Horrid Henry, Sophie's World and various restaurant menus - some age appropriate, some perhaps not entirely. But if he was bored, he'd put it down, so I don't police his reading beyond excluding really adult horrific or pornographic stuff.

YANBU

The first book was aimed at YR6 children and the books aged with the children in the books.

My DS started reading them in yr5 when he was 10 and read most of them as they came out, HP was the only fiction he would read until he was 13. DD read them in YR6 and then read the whole set 5 times in as many months. She was one of those children who did have the capability of reading them at 5/6 but wasn't interested and I wouldn't have encouraged her.

I always feel sad when famous 5 etc are relegated to KS1 as well

Reading the Hobbit at 9 isn't particularly young, our teacher read it to us in primary when we were yr5 (or 3rd yr juniors in old money)

YANBU not becasue I agree that the book is not appropriate I think it is fine.

However, I am rather sick of standing next to various people who announce "Tarquin of course is exceptionally gifted he read Harry Potter at four" Slight exageration but not much. I am also fed up of the woman at an after school activity we go to who has a five year old who carries The Order of the Phoenix around all the time. Why you would need to make a point of having your kid read it while waiting for five mins before their class ?

There are tons of other books that are brilliant and yet it is still always Harry Potter.

I think the language is quite basic compared with some other books in the 9 - 12 range.

Don't think that you can make a sweeping generalisation as to the appropriateness of the themes in Harry Potter, as some DCs will be more sensitive than others.

We had a book club aged 8ish at primary school where there were umpteen chidren's horror books on sale (Pan perhaps?). Terrified the living daylights out of me, but I kept going back for more...