|
On June 13 2004 01:38 baal wrote: A Best seller is a crappy book, a book that is so simple with no real substance will sell a lot but will suck for any decent smart and educated reader.
Ever heard of this nifty thing called 'Logic'? You should use it sometime.
|
Austin10831 Posts
It's funny, Itch. You say Harry Potter is a book for juveniles, yet I read Jack London books when I was in fifth and sixth grade...
|
u know, a lot of the "classics" are simply outdated "low art". shakespeare never meant to appease academia. he was writing to please the rabble. the same can be said of most novels in general. they wanted to sell tickets/copies. the same of older films. that doesn't mean there is no substance to them, of course. the point is that the standard for "substance" changes over the years. in 100 years harry potter could be something english teachers force people to read. you really dont know.
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
OH MY GOD PEOPLE CAN"T HAVE THEIR OWN OPINIONS WTF ?
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
On June 13 2004 01:20 Commander[SB] wrote: Show nested quote +On June 12 2004 19:44 ItchReliever wrote: So I guess Harry Potter is good because you say it is? Stfu, stop beating a dead horse, you ignorant idiot. your arguements suck because you say a book needs to be sophisticated to be 'good' If you read my posts, you would realize that this is not true.
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
The entire point of this thread is that it may be your opinion that they are mediocre but the way you presented your opinion was matter-of-factly. Also, the majority of people who were saying they didn't like HP wasn't the issue, the issue was when some were saying people who do like it are idiots and lack sophistication as in baal's post or that we are losers like HovZ said, not to mention Servolisk's. It wouldn't be such a big thing if you hadn't presented your opinion as definite truth.
|
But it is a "definite truth" that Harry Potter lacks sophistication. This is not a matter of opinion.
I don't care if you guys like Harry Potter or not though, and I never said I did in this thread either. I'm not stupid enough to judge a person's character and intellect by what books they read.
|
On June 13 2004 22:20 ItchReliever wrote: I'm not stupid enough to judge a person's character and intellect by what books they read.
... character no, intellect sure.
|
On June 13 2004 01:39 Commander[SB] wrote: Show nested quote +On June 13 2004 01:38 baal wrote: A Best seller is a crappy book, a book that is so simple with no real substance will sell a lot but will suck for any decent smart and educated reader. Ever heard of this nifty thing called 'Logic'? You should use it sometime.
oh plz teach me harry -_________-;
|
On June 13 2004 22:25 Kobayashi wrote: Show nested quote +On June 13 2004 22:20 ItchReliever wrote: I'm not stupid enough to judge a person's character and intellect by what books they read.
... character no, intellect sure. It's a one-way street. If a person reads heavy literature, then they are probably smart. But a person doesn't have to like reading to be smart.
I can like reading Harry Potter and still be a smart person.
|
On June 13 2004 22:34 baal wrote: Show nested quote +On June 13 2004 01:39 Commander[SB] wrote: On June 13 2004 01:38 baal wrote: A Best seller is a crappy book, a book that is so simple with no real substance will sell a lot but will suck for any decent smart and educated reader. Ever heard of this nifty thing called 'Logic'? You should use it sometime. oh plz teach me harry -_________-;
Ok. But I am expensive.
Now I have to go fucking drag up Itch's old posts to prove his dumbass wrong.
|
On June 05 2004 10:24 ItchReliever wrote: Show nested quote +On June 05 2004 10:00 EAGER-beaver wrote: So much harry potter bashing. Books 1 & 2 are for kids. 3 and onwards are for an older crowd and are incredible literary pieces. lmao. They're all clearly aimed at kids. LOOK AT THE DICTION. Show nested quote +They're incredibly entertaining books, and the 4th one ranks high on my best book of all time list. Keep in mind this is not coming from a teeny bopper who's still struggling with puberty and the opinions of others, but a 20 year old who's been an avid reader his entire life, having grown up on Stephen King, Bernard Cornwell, and just about every classic you can think of, I've read. Despite that, this "kid crap" as most of you think, ranks among the best in literature. Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if most of you would rather whatch the latest in reality tv from fox than read a book, so my opinions are lost entirely upon you. From a guy who has supposedly been an avid reader all his life, I find it very weird that you regard Harry Potter so highly. You are a unique case for sure if you have in fact "grown up on just about every classic that [I can] think of" and still think this. In my opinion though, Harry Potter lacks the many components that would qualify it as a good book.
You first say.
Than you say:
and even if it would lack sophistication, then that still doesnt make it a bad book.
So which is it? A good book or a bad book? Make up your fucking mind.
edit: Ok itch I am wrong about some things. I rushed through your posts and mis-understood them the first time. You just say everything 'matter-of-factly' and you can't seem to make up your fucking mind.
|
It's very obvious that I don't think Harry Potter is a very good book. But I also made it exceedingly clear that Harry Potter is not a horrible book either. And if you actually read my posts, you would have noticed that I keep mentioning that Harry Potter is an average book of mediocre quality.
Commander, you are one of the most imbecilic people that I had the displeasure of meeting online.
|
On June 14 2004 00:48 Commander[SB] wrote: edit: Ok itch I am wrong about some things. I rushed through your posts and mis-understood them the first time. You just say everything 'matter-of-factly' and you can't seem to make up your fucking mind. specify
|
On June 14 2004 01:02 ItchReliever wrote: It's very obvious that I don't think Harry Potter is a very good book. But I also made it exceedingly clear that Harry Potter is not a horrible book either. And if you actually read my posts, you would have noticed that I keep mentioning that Harry Potter is an average book of mediocre quality.
Commander, you are one of the most imbecilic people that I had the displeasure of meeting online.
same.
|
On June 14 2004 01:04 ItchReliever wrote: Show nested quote +On June 14 2004 00:48 Commander[SB] wrote: edit: Ok itch I am wrong about some things. I rushed through your posts and mis-understood them the first time. You just say everything 'matter-of-factly' and you can't seem to make up your fucking mind. specify
No.
|
|
|
|
|