Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone

Jump to Comments

Title: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
Author: J.K. Rowling
Publication Date: 1997
Genre: Fiction, Young Adult
Count for Year: 54

How I discovered

Pleeeeeeaaaaaaseeeee. How I discovered it? It was like a whirlwind when it first appeared into which we all were taken– like Elijah in his chariot (to use a metaphor that might seem inappropriate to some of those who objected to the book on religious grounds)– to heaven, box office heaven, that is, for Ms. Rowling.

My wife devoured the books when they first came out, but I just never get around to reading them. However, when I learned Banned Books Week was last week, I thought it only appropriate that I read this one as part of my own Personal Banned Books Week Challenge (said with a movie voice-over voice, of course), and on a Sunday especially in light of St. Joseph School in Wakefield, Mass, because the theme of witchcraft and sorcery were deemed inappropriate for a Catholic school. As a Catholic, I felt obliged to read it on a Sunday.

The setup

Harry Potter has never been the star of a Quidditch team, scoring points while riding a broom far above the ground. He knows no spells, has never helped to hatch a dragon, and has never worn a cloak of invisibility.

All he knows is a miserable life with the Dursleys, his horrible aunt and uncle, and their abominable son, Dudley– a great big swollen spoiled bully. Harry’s room is a tiny closet at the foot of the stairs, and he hasn’t had a birthday party in eleven years.

But all that is about to change when a mysterious letter arrives by owl messenger: a letter with an invitation to an incredible place that Harry– and anyone who reads about him– will find unforgettable.

For it’s there that he finds not only friends, aerial sports, and magic in everything from classes to meals, but a great destiny that’s been awaiting for him…if Harry can survive the encounter.

– from the bookjacket

One of the owners of the bookstore where I work mentioned this week that 99.9 percent of the time the book is better than the movie on which the book is based. I happen to think that he probably is right, as I think back to the movies based off books I have seen, and in almost all cases, the authors provide a depth of character and description that a director cannot pull off in a movie, no matter his budget nor time length of the movie. So…

…no surprise here then when I read this book, the first thing with which I was impressed was even the  difference between the first scene of the movie and the beginning of the book. In the book, readers are first greeted by a description of Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, Harry’s uncle and aunt, whereas in the movie, the first scene is of Albus Dumbledore putting out the lights on the Dursley’s streets. For me, even this one sentence shows how the book provided more detail than the movie:

Mr. Dursley was the director of a firm called Grunnings, which made drills [emphasis mine].

Now while I may be wrong about this, I don’t remember that detail in the movie. It is a minor thing, naturally, but still even that impressed me– and then as over the next few pages before the reader even meets Dumbledore, Professor McGonagall and Hagrid, the reader is drawn into the strangeness of the story by a cat reading a map and a sign, people in cloaks and last but not least, television reports of owls flying during the day.

Of course, in hindsight, after seeing the movies and being steeped in the Harry Potter mythology, it all makes sense– but think about reading that first chapter, which I’m sure many of you reading this did, for the first time without those filters on your eyes. What a glorious way to draw the reader into the story, and, of course, as the story goes, it becomes more and more intriguing– and unlike anything you’ve read in fantasy or children’s literature.

As my wife mentioned to me the other day is how incredible it is that Rowling created a fantasy world in which no way seemed derivative of anything that had come previously — even though I’m sure the uber-Harry Potter geeks could show you what she might have used as source material. (Now ironically, it is hard not to find everything derivative of Rowling’s work.)

The only disappointing thing for me is that I had seen the movie, so I knew some of the “surprises” that were to come, for example, where Voldemort was. However, I still could appreciate how Rowling tricked the reader into thinking one character was “the bad guy” when really it was the one you don’t expect that is “the bad guy.” (Aside: If ever there was perfect casting, it was Alan Rickman in the role of Snape.)

My final analysis: 4/5, good, but not great, because I did know some of the story and also my view is a little bit skewed thanks to my wife who has told me the story gets better as it goes. (Her favorite: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire).

11 Comments

Filed under Authors P-T, Book reviews, Books, Fiction, Titles P-T

Tags: Banned Books Week, book reviews, Books, Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone, J.K. Rowling, Lit Flicks Challenge