Age appropriateness..., What do you think the target age should be? |
 May 12 2009, 09:45 PM
Post
#31
|
|
Just Through the Brick Wall  Posts: 8 Joined: 4:02pm May 10, 2009  |
Any age at all!! It's a universal story- everyone gets something different about, I think.
I personally think that people around my age (I'm 19) were pretty lucky because we pretty much grew up with the books. I was eleven when the first movie came out (I was eight or so when the book first came out in the US but I didn't read it until the movie) and I was seventeen when Deathly Hallows was released. Nice timing XD -------------------- “Don’t put your wand there, boy!” roared Moody. “What if it ignited? Better wizards than you have lost buttocks, you know!” - Alastor Moody |
 |
  
 
|
|
May 16 2009, 12:08 PM
Post
#32
|
|
Being Eaten by the Pea Soup Posts: 33 Joined: 9:25pm May 14, 2009 Location: In Professor Lupin's Office, Chatting Over A Cup Of Tea About Books Recently Read. |
There's no specific age put on the Harry Potter books and if any government ever tried to do such a thing, I would be stuck in a state of stupid shock for the rest of my life.
--------------------  ~Proud Ravenpuff |
|
|
|
|
May 25 2009, 12:32 PM
Post
#33
|
|
Being Eaten by the Pea Soup Posts: 33 Joined: 9:39am February 3, 2007 |
Well, I think it depends more how imaginative the individual child is than how old or how mature. I haven't actually read Beedle, but I read all the HP books as they came out. CoS terrified me. I think it was the bodiless voice and the fact that if you saw it, you were dead straightaway. The rest of them were fine, but I was about 11 or so when I first read CoS, and I don't think I should have. There are some really terrifying scenes in HP, which could haunt any child with an active imagination. I don't think I would go back and NOT read CoS when it came out, because by that time, I'd read PS enough times to make it fall apart(!) but I think it's undeniable that HP, and fantasy in general, can be scary.
I don't think age should be limited, but parents should be very aware of what their children are reading. My parents had to take CoS away from me so I didn't read it late into the night, then lie awake in the dark thinking I could hear a hissing voice! -------------------- "There is nothing like looking, if you want to find something. You certainly usually find something, if you look, but it is not always quite the something you were after." - JRR Tolkien
|
|
|
|
|
May 31 2009, 11:18 AM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Getting Fitted for New Dress Robes Posts: 44 Joined: 2:59pm June 26, 2006 |
I think eight upwards is suitable. Some individual children under that age may be able to read them, depending on how sensitive or mature they are, but as a general rule children under eight would probably be upset by some parts. I think I probably would have been. I'm not sure I like the idea of putting a maximum age on them though. That's less about caution and more about judgement.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 14 2009, 10:29 PM
Post
#35
|
|
Monster Book Stacker Posts: 388 Joined: 3:02pm January 28, 2005 Location: Trying to find Platform 9 3/4 in Grand Central Station  |
It's kind of hard for me to judge because I think I, too, was in that perfect generation that grew up with the books: I started reading them when I was about 11 (in 1999), and I was 19 when the seventh book came out. So I was ready for all of them the same time they were ready for me, pretty much-OotP came out when I was 15, and I was equipped to deal with the book's darker tone just as 15 year old Harry was. So I think, ideally, kids should grow WITH the books, but now that we don't have to wait for the next release date, that's no longer possible. I'd say a good age to start reading the first books is around 9 or so, but I don't think anyone younger than 12 or 13 or would entirely get or appreciate the last few books. One could argue that an even older age is necessary to truly understand it. (I don't think I would have fully grasped or enjoyed the seventh book when I was 12, but at the time, GoF was just right.)
It makes me sad now to think that I'll never again be the same ages as my favorite characters as I read about them, and will never be able to identify with them in the same close kinship way that I used to because of that! -------------------- There are some things you can't share without ending up liking each other, and knocking out a twelve-foot mountain troll is one of them.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 19 2009, 03:58 PM
Post
#36
|
|
|
Just Through the Brick Wall Posts: 14 Joined: 7:17pm May 28, 2009 |
Well, books 5-7 should be YA (young adult), but the other ones are fine for kids. They're pretty good all around.
-------------------- "If you want to get the measure of a man, look at how he treats his inferiors, not his equals."
- Sirius Black |
|
|
|
|
Jun 19 2009, 07:57 PM
Post
#37
|
|
Gambol and Japes' Research Department Posts: 1,387 Joined: 6:16pm June 18, 2007 Location: Gryffindor Quidditch Team tryouts  |
this thread quite interests me, all the posts on here are great!
lots of things came to mind so i'll start with the original question and then move on to my ramblings, please bear with me  QUOTE(JohannMdlAmerica @ Dec 7 2008, 03:21 PM)  Today, I was at a bookstore. Attached to the price tag for Beedle was a comment tag: "Juvenile fiction, age appropriate for 6-12 year olds." I'll agree for some. There's at least one that is certainly upper teen by my thought. I'd like your thoughts  JMA like most of you guys have said, i think it depends; if the child is a bit affected by stories that have a little "gore" like The Wizard's Hairy Heart, then i would say, in a very generalizing way, that that same child should be fine reading the story at around ages 8-10. by this time i am pretty sure there wouldnt be a problem, unless the child has suffered a previous trauma. on the other hand, if there is no such sensibility (and i dont mean this in a bad way, it might look like im suggesting the poor kid has no soul  ), then 6 is a pretty good age. less then that, it might be hard, even, to grasp the morals in stories like The Fountain Of Fair Fortune. also DD's notes should be taken into account, and tho for the most part they fit with the above situations, and basically we see a lot of his humorous personality, there is some depth of thought that needs to be understood by the reader. of course, if the child has read the series then theres nothing at all in Beedle that could possibly be inappropriate. and as to a max age limit, there shouldnt be one at all! like has been previously pointed out, HP has got fans from all ages, and its a very enjoyable book, no matter the age. some of you said, and i agree, that this whole reading level/age appropriateness depends on the maturity of the reader, and in some cases the parents. QUOTE(MichaelCorner @ Dec 7 2008, 04:57 PM) It all comes down to parents. If a child is not ready to read all or part of the book, it is the job of the parent (or another adult) to regulate that. i remember reading The Mists Of Avalon when i was around 10-11. my mom had already read the books (they are several volumes, four i think, i know i got one of those books that comes with all of them together), and ive always looked forward to challenging reads. i pretty much read the book on my own. previously id read several King Arthur stories and i liked the way it was pretty much the same story but from a very different perspective and a female pov. when i didnt understand some bit very well i would go to my mom, and she helped me out with it. the more mature content wasnt a big deal. like, id never talked to my parents about that type of stuff at that age, but i grew up where i knew what was right and what was wrong, and what was for me and what wasnt. i dont know if that makes sense, dont think it does  im having a hard time conveying this into words, lol. i guess what i mean is i saw the difference between what was in the books, and the characters in the books, and myself.couple years later i read the books again, and found that i could follow the storyline with more easiness, as would happen once more when i re-read it at the age i am now. i think that in a certain level, its good, or should i say, it helps, to be introduced to some things a little earlier, if theres a maturity level that applies. nice topic  -------------------- |
|
|
|
|
Jun 19 2009, 08:28 PM
Post
#38
|
|
|
Eeylops Owl Cage Cleaner Posts: 228 Joined: 9:37am April 29, 2007 Location: Under THE invisibility cloak with Harry... |
Firstly, I don't think that censoring the ages at which someone can or should read is appropriate. My opinion on Beedle is that if you've read the Harry Potter series, Beedle the Bard is appropriate for you.
The scene at the end of GoF, when Pettigrew cuts off his arm is nearly as gruesome as the Warlock's Hairy Heart, as are (though I am merely echoing those who posted before me here) many muggle fairy tales, in their original forms. Ultimately, what it comes down to is the child. No kid would read Beedle just for the sake of reading Beedle -- they would have to be motivated, begining with by a love of Harry Potter, and to truly develop a love of Harry Potter (a real attachment that is) they would most likely have to read up through GoF, by which time they are ready for Beedle mentally. In any other case, the book was either given as some sort of gift, regardless of whether of not the child has read Harry Potter, and it is the parent's job to determine the appropriateness, or the child shows interest only after reading the highly relevant Deathly Hallows, in which case it should not be an issue. My 2 cents. <3 -------------------- Dumbledore's Army: Still Recruting
Why Are You Worrying About You-Know-Who? You Should Be Worrying About U-No-Poo-- The Constipation Sensation That's Gripping The Nation |
|
|
|
|
Jun 21 2009, 08:51 PM
Post
#39
|
|
Knight Bus Driver in Training Posts: 594 Joined: 10:05pm August 1, 2007 Location: Having a Butterbeer at the Three Broomsticks |
I think the Harry Potter books get more mature you keep reading. I read the 1st book in first grade. By the 7th book there was cursing and sexual innuendos.
-------------------- LUPIN FAN FOR LIFE
Harry- "Death's got an invisibility cloak?" Ron - "So he can sneak up on people. He gets bored of running at them, flapping his arms and shrieking." |
|
|
|
