Strollerderby : harry potter

Harry Potter Book Sells for $19K - Too Much?

JeanneSager — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 21:34:00 GMT

I love me some Hogwarts. But I don't know that I could ever love a children's book this much.

A rare copy of the first book in the Harry Potter series - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone here in the states, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone in author J.K. Rowling's native England, has sold for $19,120.

Autographed by Rowling, the first edition soft cover book was expected to fetch $12,000 at the auction in Texas, and the sale obviously exceeded the auction house's expectations. It's not actually the biggest blowout for Potter paraphernalia - an eight-hundred word prequel hand-written by Rowling sold for almost $50,000 last June to help an English writer's group and a charity for dyslexics.

But I confess I just don't get it - and not just in light of the current state of the economy. It's a children's book, and what crazy loon is going to let their kid flip through the pages of a $19,000 book? I'm one of those adults who went hogwild for Harry, but I still think books are to be read . . . not stared at on a shelf somewhere. When it comes to children's books in particular, I'm all the more inclined to say get them out there, get those kids reading!

What do you think? If you had the money, would you blow it on something like this?

Image: Amazon

Sasha and Malia See Hogwarts with Harry

JeanneSager — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:34:00 GMT

Money can't buy happiness, but your dad getting to be president?

Oh, come on, don't tell me that the scrutiny of every American matters much to Sasha and Malia this week. They just got an offer to tour Hogwarts with Harry Potter himself.

Apparently Brit Daniel Radcliffe is as taken with the first kids as those of us on this side of the pond.

It helps that he's a fan of their dad. Radcliffe told the Daily Beast, the new president represents "everything the rest of the world liked about America and now likes again.”

"What you love about England is all the old buildings and such. The traditions. I love that, too. But this is what we want from you," he said, before issuing his formal invitation to Sasha and Malia to act as their personal tourguide on a walk-through of Hogwarts.

As the school for witchcraft and wizardry doesn't exist (at least not as far as we Muggles know), the girls will be treated to a tour of the set of the newest movie in the series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, which begins filming in a few weeks.

Once they get over the thrill of meeting Harry, sitting down with Radcliffe could be good for the girls. He too became famous at a young age - almost overnight. And unlike their most recent visitors - the Jonas Brothers and Miley Cyrus - Radcliffe has weathered the storm to become an equally famous adult. Christened the world's most famous boy wizard at thirteen, Radcliffe has developed both his acting chops and his public face; even weathered the "controversy" of stripping down for Equus.

Pointing to the almost reclusive life of Amy Carter today and the cruel jokes made at Chelsea Clinton's expense, some have warned the Obama girls are in for a tough road ahead. With their shining personalities (and as far as we can tell two parents with good heads on their shoulders), I think they can weather the storm. But the advantages they have - the meetings with some of the stars that shine in their still young eyes - might just be what's best for them right now. Who better to let them know how to handle the life changes of the next four years than the kinds of kids who have been there, done that?

By the way - check out the interview with Daniel for a peek at the next installment in the Harry Potter series, due in June!

Image: People

Disney Bails on Narnia

Brett Singer — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 19:00:00 GMT

You won't be hearing the Chronic-WHAT?-cles of Narnia at the Mouse House any more.

The Hollywood Reporter is reporting (clunky sentence, sorry) that Disney has decided not to pick up the option to get involved with "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader", the third film in the series. The reasons are "budgetary and logistical", which sounds to me like code for, "the other films didn't make enough money and producing them was annoying, so why should do it again?" "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe", the first film in the series, grossed $745 million worldwide, whereas "Prince Caspian" took in "just $419 million," according to the Reporter. That still sounds like a lot of cabbage to me, but it's a big drop-off, and may not be enough to make risking more cash on a third film worthwhile.

Although I enjoyed the books when I was younger, and my son is starting to read them now, we haven't seen either movie yet. They didn't have that "must-see" effect on my kids that the Harry Potter films or "Iron Man" had. In fact, my son has expressed more interest in seeing a DVD-only release, "The Next Avengers", then he has in "Lion" or "Caspian."

Interestingly, "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" was scheduled for a May 2010 release, so talent was attached, plans were made, people had eaten a cheesecake and taken a nap, etc. (Random reference for you on Christmas Eve – don't say I never gave you anything.) Walden Media, which owns the rights to the C.S. Lewis stories, will shop around to try and find another partner for "Treader", but these flicks don't come cheap -- $180 million for "Lion", $200 million for "Caspian". With shrinking profits and a crummy economy, it will be interesting to see if another studio jumps in for "Treader."

Source: Hollywood Reporter via Reuters

Image: Amazon

Are these toys sold out?

Working Parents Smackdown Part 2 – Dads With Jobs vs Moms With Jobs

Is Miley Cyrus' First Photo Shoot Creepy?

Name Guru Picks Eight Worst Celeb Kid Names of 2008 (Part 2)

Movie Review – "Delgo"

Et Tu, Scholastic?

editors — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 16:11:00 GMT

These two books came into the office the other day:The Girls’ Book of Glamour: A Guide to Being a Goddess and The Boys’ Book of Survival: How to Survive Anything, Anywhere. Ha-ha, we thought, how retro and ironic and . . . OMG, THEY ARE TOTALLY SERIOUS.

The jacket flap copy on the girls’ book: “Be confidant. Be glamorous. Be gorgeous . . . Be the goddess you were born to be!” On the boys’ book: “Be brave. Be prepared . . . Be a hero!”

Now, our son loves trucks, planes and dinosaurs. Our goddaughter loves tutus. BUT. STILL. Our son has been known to dance around in a skirt, and our goddaughter has been known to play with dinosaurs. The truck books do not say, “TRUCKS FOR BOYS.” They say, “TRUCKS TRUCKS TRUCKS. TRUCKS.”

We read both of these books to make sure they are as bad and reactionary as their covers suggested. In fact, they are worse.

Girls are instructed to “accessorize fabulously.” Boys are taught to “survive an avalanche.” Girls are told how to “give yourself a mini-facial.” Boys are given instructions for making a dugout canoe.

The major theme in the boy book: Be ready for anything! You’re a leader! (“How to Be a Good Leader,” p. 12) The girls’ theme: Be pretty! Also, friendly! (“How to Have the Best Manners,” p.81) And “jazz up” that “boring ponytail.”

For realz? This is the publishing house that gave us Hermione Granger? For shame. — Ada Calhoun

World Famous Atheist To Write Children's Book

Brett Singer — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 18:00:00 GMT

Richard Dawkins hates fairies. That's not a homosexual slur. He also hates "wizards and magic wands and things turning into other things." And he's not sure if children should be exposed to such ideas.

From the New York Times:

Having sufficiently inflamed the passions of his adult readers with “The God Delusion,” his treatise on rationalism and atheism, the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins…is writing a book for children. Dr. Dawkins said [the] book that would explore children’s relationships with fairy tales and encourage them to think about the world scientifically rather than mythologically. “I would like to know whether there’s any evidence that bringing children up to believe in spells and wizards and magic wands and things turning into other things — it is unscientific, I think it’s antiscientific…Whether that has a pernicious effect, I don’t know.”

It's important to note that the book does not have a publisher or release date, according to the New York Times. But Dawkins' "The God Delusion" has sold quite well, so if he does pen something along the lines of, "Stop Believing in Wizards You Dopey Kid" or "The Harry Potter Delusion", he'll probably find someone willing to print it.

The blog GBG Atheist News (GBG stands for "god be gone") has a post from 2007 that quotes Dawkins as saying, "i might try to do a children's book about how to think for yourself and how to ask questions about interesting topics and how you might go about answering them, Which might be subversive to religion but i don't think would be explicit about that" (apologies for punctuation; apparently this particular group of atheists don't capitalize the letter "I" and do whatever they feel like doing with commas). Dawkins recently said that Harry Potter and other stories "could have a 'pernicious' effect on children." (dailymail)

Interestingly, there are some people who dislike the Potter books because they feel they are anti-religious -- those who think it promotes witchcraft and/or Satanism and/or other evil things. (Like these fun folks who burned a pile of Potter books.)

Obviously if a child is 14 and still believes firmly that fairies exist, that might be a bit odd. But I think it's a parent's job to dispel any "delusions" before they become problematic. Heck, I believed in Santa Claus for the first few years of my life, and I'm Jewish. I turned out OK.

Source: nytimes
Image: dailymail

Is The Incredible Flying Baby Video Real?

Guy Changes Name to Captain Fantastic

Joe Biden Is Our First Catholic Vice President

Chicago Woman Lived With Dead Siblings For 20 Years

Woman Swings Crowbar At Trick Or Treaters

Smokers No Longer Allowed Foster Children

Banned Books Week: R.L. Stine's Goosebumps

JeanneSager — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:32:00 GMT

Before a boy wizard bounced him from his post, R.L. Stine was once the best-selling children's book author of all time. And while his scary stories reigned supreme in kids' hearts, they sat at number 16 on the American Library Association's most challenged books of the 1990s.

The kids loved him. The parents loved to hate him. To be honest, I've never been a fan. He's been writing teen and child books since the the mid-1980s, so ostensibly I could have picked one up at the library over the years. I don't remember any. I do remember picking up a Goosebumps paperback a few years ago - my Harry Potter obsession serving as a gateway back into childhood literature in my adult years. What struck me wasn't how clever the book was or how I couldn't put it down - I could have left it just as quickly as I'd taken it - but that I finally understood why my little brother always had a tough time getting these back to the library on time. It was right up any preteen boy's alley. Which is exactly what makes people's attempts over the years to have them removed from library shelves such a travesty.

Getting kids to read as they enter the tween years - especially boys - can at times be like pulling teeth. A study funded by Scholastic in 2006 showed 40 percent of kids between the ages of 5 and 8 are "high frequency readers" who read for fun every day. That number drops to 29 percent of kids in the 9 to 11 range and even lower as they get older. Separating the genders, the study found boys are three times more likely than girls to say reading for fun is "not at all important."

Ironically, one mom speaking out in an 1997 CNN story about a parental movement to get Goosebumps pulled from the shelves at her local school admitted her son only read for school reports before he started picking up Stine's novels. "And I had to force him to do that," she said. Excuse the Homer Simpson moment, but . . . DOH!

If you want to encourage kids to read, you let them do it. You give them books or magazines that interest them. They can be reading absolute drivel and still learn vocabulary, sentence structure, grammar. Yes, they're a little scary - which is why they've been challenged over the years. But a generation of boys growing up without books on their shelves is enough to give me nightmares.

Image: Amazon

Banned Books Week: Shel Silverstein

Banned Books Week: Kama Sutra for Kids

Banned Books Week: Little Women

Banned Books Week: In the Night Kitchen

Banned Books Week: Sarah Palin

Banned Books Week: "And Tango Makes Three"

J.K. Rowling Takes Copyright Lessons from Professor Umbridge

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:00:00 GMT

Apparently being the highest earning novelist of all time doesn't stop you from getting a case of distraught writer's block at the thought of fan publishing an encyclopedic reference guide to the world you created.

Steven Vander Ark's Harry Potter Lexicon went online 1999, and was wildly popular. Rowling even reported being fond of it and checking it herself while out writing. But once he got a contract to publish it as a book she cried foul and, with the kind assistance of Time Warner, sued. Vander Ark's publisher's lawyer argued that it fell under fair use of copyrighted material for reference books, but he lost (though was assigned the minimum possible penalty).

Intellectual property lawyer Paul Rapp has a few things to say to Rowling—and the judge. Specifically, he thinks the ruling is on sketchy legal and moral grounds and "contribute[s] to the paralyzing uncertainty artists face when they have an opportunity to create something new out of fragments of our culture."

I agree with Rapp. I do understand that she had plans to do her own encyclopedia, and that it would be annoying if a fan beat her to it, but is that a reason to get all sickly-dancing-kitten about the letter of the law over the spirit? Besides which, clearly hers would still sell, since it would have tons of original background info a fan wouldn't have access to.

I can see getting persnickety about spoilers. But isn't it the height of praise to have your fictional world considered worthy of its own reference book, in your lifetime? Worth, even, relaxing a little on maximizing your future billions?

Related Posts:

Warner Brothers Sues Over Hari Puttar Film

Naked Harry Potter pics hit the web

Brett Singer — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 14:00:00 GMT

Let's call it – The Full Muggle.

Some intrepid theatergoer snapped blurry cameraphone shots of Daniel Radcliffe nekkid onstage in 'Equus', currently on Broadway at the Broadhurst Theatre. Here are a couple of the pics:

Some fans that are flipping out over this. Some comments from the Daily News article:

The snapshot shows Radcliffe, 19, standing totally naked in front of co-star Anna Camp, who is also bare to the bone.
The scandal surrounding the teenage star's nudity has helped ticket sales with advance box office receipts topping $3 million.
Fans buying tickets vented their outrage at the sneaky snapper.
"They're turning art into pornography," said stage technician Rachel Juozapaitis, 27.
…
"Someone has violated his privacy," said Susan Zimmerman, 32, an NYU graduate student.

Um, not exactly. Someone – admittedly, someone kinda pervy – took pictures of something happened on a Broadway stage and posted them online. Porn? Violation of privacy? I don't think so.

"It's just wrong, he still has to do some more Harry Potter films for the kids."
…
"He didn't sign up for this, now it's for all time, forever on the Internet. What about all the Harry Potter children?"

Ah, yes. The children. Methinks very young children are unlikely to surf to these shots on their own, and I don't think any parent will show them to their kids. Even if they did (which would be nuts), there's not much to see. (That's a comment on the photo quality, not Mr. Radcliffe's, um, bangers and mash, as they say in the U.K.)

As for "he didn't sign on for this," the play calls for his character to be fully nude, and if he thought that someone wouldn't take pictures of it, Daniel needs to get out more. So, you know, sure, it's kinda lame, but the level of fan outrage is a bit kooky.

So why did I post it here? Honestly? I just wanted to use the phrase "The Full Muggle." Sorry.

Go to this site if you want to see all the pics.(Link via the Daily News.)

Source/image: nydailynews

non-naked pic: telegraph.co.uk

Awww…a baby otter…

Step on a Crack, Updated

5 reasons it's a good thing I had boys

Grand Theft Auto player saves family

I can tell how much you orgasm because of how you walk

Queens woman pregnant with sextuplets

Teaching Evolution as Theory not fact

25 Great Children's TV Shows That Aren't On DVD

Warner Bros. sues over Hari Puttar film

Brett Singer — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:00:00 GMT

A Bollywood film producer has madea movie called. "Hari Puttar - A Comedy of Terrors." Warner Bros. thinks "Hari Puttar" sounds too much like their cash cow, "Harry Potter", so they've sued, going so far as to seek a preliminary injunction to prevent the movie from opening on September 12.

CNN spoke to one of the producers, Munish Purii, who denies any link to J.K. Rowling's boy wizard. "There is absolutely nothing to link 'Hari Puttar' with 'Harry Potter."' Apparently, "Hari is a common name in India and 'puttar' is Punabji for son."

The plot of "Putar" actually sounds much more like "Home Alone."

Hari Prasad Dhoonda…or ‘Hari Puttar’, as he is fondly called, is a bright 10 year old who has recently moved from India to the UK with his parents…His father, Prof. Dhoonda is assigned to work on a secret project with the Defense Forces at a remote location in the UK…Within days of their arrival in London, Hari's aunt and uncle DK visit the Dhoonda residence with their own as well DK's boss' children. Suddenly, the house is filled with the effervescence of no less than ten kids. At this point, everything goes for a spin for ‘Hari Puttar’. Not only is he thrown out of his room to accommodate the girls, he is also ragged and ridiculed by all the other kids for being too naïve. ‘Hari Puttar’ suddenly feels unwanted, undermined and unappreciated. To top it, even as DK arranges a vacation for the entire family, one night before they take off, Hari's mother sends him off to the attic bedroom as a punishment for no big fault of his. As luck would have it, the next morning, the whole family leaves in a tearing hurry, forgetting that they have left something integral behind - Namely Hari and his little cousin Tuk Tuk…

That's straight from glamsham.com; apologies for the occasional broken English.

So apart from the title, you have an annoying Aunt and Uncle (shades of Vernon and Petunia Dursley) and a kid being thrown in the attic as punishment for something that wasn't his fault (that one is a bit of a stretch.) You do not, however, have a boy wizard or anything like that. But there is that name, and its not parody, which in theory makes it OK (I'm not a lawyer but I did appear on The People's Court once, so that makes me an expert… NOT.)

Some of the comments on glamsham.com are hysterical. A sampling:

While I agree with everyone else about the similarities between this movie and Home Alone, I'd rather watch something like that than something that involves witchcraft and teaches children how to actually perform spells. I'm not sure what was in the minds of the creators of Harry Potter, but all I see is corruption aimed toward the minds of our youth!

Ah yes. The old "J.K. Rowling is a Satanist who only wants to send our children to Hell." Good times, good times.

Source: CNN
Image: glamsham.com

Read more:

Creepiest spam message ever: we have your kids

Do kids do better on tests if they get paid?

Mr. Rogers Talking Keychain

J.K. Rowling Takes Copyright Lessons from Professor Umbridge

Why the puppy games are better than the Olympics

8 year old blues guitarist not allowed to play in bars

Nastia Luikin's mom watches from the stands (video)

It all started when Mary needed a laxative

5 ways to get revenge on your kids

Oy vey, Miley showed her tuchas again

Old Jonas Brothers CD priceless

Harry Potter and the Schlong of Broadway

Brett Singer — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:00:00 GMT

Daniel Radcliffe, aka Harry Potter, is coming to Broadway this September to star in "Equus." If you're not familiar with the play, it involves a boy, his therapist, and the horse that the boy is, um, sexually attracted to.

Plus, Daniel gets to show the world his birthday suit. Its Full Frontal Muggle, girls!

Now, will there be a massive public outcry, the way there was with Miley and her seemingly never-ending supply of vaguely suggestive photos?

Nah. This is "art." If Daniel were to be photographed nude in Hyde Park with his special someone, that would be one thing. But stripping down and showing the world "Harry Potter Jr." in a play is something else. It's not like he has a choice, the script actually calls for his character to take it all off. (Besides, we think it's time to lay off Miley, but that's a topic for another post.)

That said, it's entirely possible that some unsuspecting parents will bring their little ones to the theater and be shocked – shocked! – at what they see. When the play "Take Me Out" was on Broadway a few years ago, a woman brought a little league team to see what she thought was a pleasant little baseball play. When she arrived, one of the ushers tried to warn her that the play might not be what she thought it was. Pish-tosh, she scoffed. But when the shower scene started – featuring a row of naked Broadway actors soaping each other up – she charged out of the theater, team in tow, and demanded her money back.

"Avenue Q" has a disclaimer that tells people the show features 'full puppet nudity'; this is meant to discourage parents from bringing their Sesame Street-aged spawn to a show that features a song called 'The Internet is for Porn.'

Despite the fact that it should be obvious to anyone that "Equus" is not for kids, methinks the producers of the show may want to make an effort to educate Radcliffe's wizard loving public so as to avoid any unpleasantness. (Insert a really bad "wand" joke here.)

image: telegraph.co.uk

Book #666 of the Harry Potter Series

makeitadouble — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:30:00 GMT

Each generation has had to contend with the dark whispers of Satan cunningly hidden in everyday items of popular culture. For my generation growing up in the 80’s it was the subliminal Satanic backmasking in heavy metal music that brainwashed and influenced many teenagers into performing immoral oftentimes self-destructive acts of deviance and depravity like getting to second base with your girlfriend, growing a mullet and a cheesy moustache and even wearing a white tuxedo to the junior AND senior prom. Evil, pure evil.

In the 70’s the Devil was pervasive as the “demonic child” in movies like The Omen, The Exorcist, Rosemary’s Baby and Herbie the Love Bug while in the 60’s he was disguised as Lyndon B. Johnson, but the children of the new millennium have to contend with a wickedness far worse than trying to match a red cummerbund to your date’s corsage or figuring out how to undo the damn hook and eye clasp of her bra with one hand.

In an article entitled “The Double Face of Harry Potter” published this week in the Vatican’s official newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, the Catholic Church and Pope Benedict XVI claimed Harry Potter is driving kids to Satanism. (Are we there yet? No. Are we there yet? No. I have to go to the bathroom. Well you should have gone before we left.) In fact, the Church went so far as to accuse JK Rowling's hero of encouraging young readers to become Satan worshippers.

Despite the publisher’s rebuttal reminding the Holy Pontiff and his congregation that Harry Potter’s long-running battle against the evil Voldemort is proof that he is a force for good, the article goes on to accuse Harry of New Age Spirituality that leads to an “unhealthy interest” in the devil. Is there a healthy interest in the Devil I’m not aware of? Perhaps something I can put on my toast in the morning that isn’t loaded down with all that fire and brimstone, something like “I Can’t Believe it’s not Satan”.

"We are told that... some things are not bad in themselves if used for a good purpose: violence becomes good, if in the right hands and the right people and maybe in the right dose.” The article reads, “Thus Harry Potter proposes a wrong and malicious image of the hero, an unreligious one." Right, because Christianity would never use violence to justify a struggle for a supreme cause. *Cough Crusades* Sorry, I’ve got a little hypocrisy caught in my throat.

When Rowling’s best-seller Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows was released last year the Vatican was quick to label her books as immoral and that they “...transmit a vision of the world and the human being full of deep mistakes and dangerous suggestions, even more seductive since it is mixed with half-truths.” A book about the imperfections of humanity that seduces people with vague promises and half-truths? That sounds really familiar.

Listen Vatican, nobody’s worshipping Satan because they read Harry Potter. The series has inspired millions of children who otherwise might not have picked a book to read, but not just to read to WANT to read. The books are about right over wrong, good over evil, standing up for what you believe in, being a true friend and yes, about wizardry, casting spells and performing magic. I don’t think we have to break out the Holy Water and start chanting “The Power of Christ Compels You” quite yet.

Unless you think it’ll help me unclasp a bra faster.

Hello Kitty for Your Hello Kitty and Other Undercover Sex Gifts

Kelly Mills — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 22:33:00 GMT

I know many of you are struggling with a big dilemma this holiday: You'd like to get your partner a sexy sex toy gift, but you'd also like him or her to be able to open the present with the rest of the family. And you'd like to avoid the fiasco of a few years back, when you gave her that black corset and she opened the present in front of her parents and turned bright red. Look, I've got your back. Here's a couple sex gifts that will slide right under the radar of the family, and no one will know what a naughty holiday it is and stuff. And I should add that when I asked the other Derbys for ideas, I got much more personal information about them than I ever really wanted.

4. The Hello Kitty "shoulder massager". The NY Times reported that this popular item is being re-released, so that cute little mouthless cat with the pink bow will be available to "relieve aching shoulder muscles" and, um, other stuff. Only drawback: the kids may want to play with this one, which could be awkward. Same goes for the Harry Potter vibrating broomstick.

3. James Bond figurine. Mike, who is a litle bit obsessed with Daniel Craig, pointed us towards this one. His limbs can be posed in all kinds of ways. Mike says the gun vibrates, but I think that's just wishful thinking on his part. Yes, the kids might wanna play with this one too, but I think that would be inadvisable and unsanitary. And please don't ask me how you use this.

2. The Liberator pillow. As Rachel says, it could be passed off as helpful with back problems, kind of an ergonomic thing. I personally am afraid of what could go wrong on the Scoop, and the Cube baffles me, but I most of you are much more gymnastic than me.

My top pick? 1. The iGallop. Actually, Brookstone is just loaded with chairs and massagers and things of that nature that I believe are probably satisfying in many ways, but nothing tops the iGallop. You know, its for exercise. Just watch the video. You mount the iGallop and ride your way to core and inner thigh strength, holding on with your knees for deal life, letting your noble steed tone and sculpt you...Whoa Nellie. I always wanted a pony.

Potter Training

Matt Wood — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:41:00 GMT

An underperforming school in the UK has jumped to the top of the rankings after instituting a Harry Potter-themed curriculum. Robert Mellors Primary and Nursery in Arnold, Nottinghamshire went from the bottom 25 percent of schools to the top five percent after students chose this year's Hogwarts theme. It went over much better than curricula used in previous years, like the Titanic, Africa, Princes and Princesses, and the disastrous "Spanish Inquisition Burnin' for Learnin'" term.

Administrators said the curriculum did wonders for kids' motivation and interest in learning. Students were divided into Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, and Slytherin, natch, and they waved wands during lessons. Each subject was based on a hook into one of the Potter books, like in "maths" (love that British English) where students used spells to perform equations. Students also wrote plays based on J.K. Rowling's work, studied geography through the round lenses of Harry's travels, and conducted science experiments as if it were a Potions class (minus the greasy Snape, hopefully).

I was always a dork so I liked school anyway, but that sounds awesome. Honestly, if the visa process weren't such a pain, I'd send my kid to school there right now.

When Fictional Characters Come Out Of the Closet

Kelly Mills — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:01:00 GMT

I went on vacay (with accompanying media blackout) for the weekend, and when I got back I was stunned to hear about J.K. Rowling's announcement that Dumbledore is gay. See, I totally thought that Winnie the Pooh would be the first children's book character to be outed. Other than that, the news about the Hogwarts headmaster just makes me love Rowling and the Harry Potter books even more than I did before, and it also makes me understand the Grindelwald thing a little better... I know, I just lost anyone who hasn't kept up with the series.

But here's something fans and non-fans alike might not be too surprised to learn: Conservatives and fundamentalists who thought the books were the work of the devil before now have yet another reason to hiss whenever they see wizard robes. Straight-up whackadoo Laura Mallory had loads to shriek on the subject, including, "The kids are being introduced to a cult [ed: occult?] and witchcraft practices," and "A homosexual lifestyle is a harmful one," she added. "That's proven, medically." I so want to go up to her and pretend to hex her, just for fun.

Oh, would it be too much to hope that we'll now get more kids' books with gay characters, and it'll just be par for the course, not a big thing?

Crafty: Handmade Wands for Your Little Wizards

Patti — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:28:00 GMT

Crafting a wand, as you can imagine, is not an easy task. It takes effort to get the magic just right. Lucky for you, the fine folks at Dad Can Do have you covered with detailed instructions on how to make your little Harry and Hermione the wands of their dreams. Older kids will be able to get right in there and help with this one, younger kids will pretty much be relegated to rolling the paper that forms the wand's base. But the finished product is pretty freaking magical.

Muggle Magic: "Survival Spells for Parents and Other Caregivers"

Alisyn — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 08:11:00 GMT

Whether or not there are witches and wizards living among us, the fact remains that we could all use a little more magic in our everyday lives. Especially those of us who often find ourselves at the mercy of small children, wishing that we had just one more hand, one more hour in the day, one magic spell to silence the whining/get them to take a bath/help them learn to love sharing.

Which is why I, for one, was ecstatic when Mombian published the heretofore unpublished charms and spells of an unknown witch or wizard in King's Cross Station, collectively called Parent Hex: Survival Spells for Parents and Other Caregivers. Finally - parenting is as easy as the flick of a wand! Uh... anyone know where I can get a wand?

Spells and charms include:

Cocodissimulatio Charm: Causes any food to taste like chocolate.
Mucosus Recessum Charm: Causes nasal excretions to withdraw into a person’s nose.
Fabulam Repetopeto Charm: Causes a book to read itself out loud over and over. Skillful wizards can make it inaudible to themselves.
Vestitus Prudens Spell: Makes the victim appear to be wearing long pants and a sweater, although the person is unaware of the change.
Altitudo Monitio Charm: Causes flashing lights and a loud hooting sound to occur whenever the victim is near a dropoff like a staircase or cliff.
Dormitus Spell: Makes the victim fall asleep. An advanced spell, mastered by only a few.

[Via Mombian and ParentHacks]

Too Young for Harry Potter?

Karen Murphy — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:53:00 GMT

It should come as no surprise by now to learn that my kids haven't read Harry Potter. I've been operating under the thumb-rule that the protagonist's age should roughly match that of the reader, give or take a couple of years, and depending of course on the book. So my older son is 11 and I figured this was the year for him to begin reading the first couple of Harrys.

But I'm on the protective side. I admit it. So when is it right for kids to begin reading books that have more mature themes? I'm not necessarily talking sex here, but what about just plain life? Divorce, loneliness, parental alcoholism, poverty, bullying, depression... I could go on and on here. But with Harry Potter we're talking (mostly) fantasy and fun and playfulness. And with those elements I think that the books become more approachable. I'm still not going to read it to my seven-year-old, but I'm not going to throw Every Flavor Beans at you if you read it to yours.

Here's an insightful article detailing reasons to expose, or choose not to, your child to Harry. Although it's definitely leaning in the "yes" direction, the "if they get scared they'll get over it" camp. Which I'm not so good with unless they're willing to come to my house and comfort my kids in the middle of the night when they have nightmares.

What about you? Harry or not? And at what age?

Bookshelf: Rediscovering Potter Alternatives

Karen Murphy — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 18:39:00 GMT

I've already made it clear I'm not a huge fan of Harry Potter (I know! sacrilege!). I mean, it was fine and all, but it didn't grab me. Plus, truth be told, I do tend to resist the madding crowds when it comes to trends and all. Which explains my nose ring and tattoo, hallmarks of, um, lots of people. Okay, so I may not be as unique as I thought I was.

But! Maybe your kid never got into the Harry Potter thing either and is looking for alternatives. My 11-year-old son was actually going to read the first book for the first time this year but we couldn't find it, victim perhaps of two cross-country moves in two years. Oh well. He can still read these:

Holes, by Louis Sachar, a novel about kids in a juvenile detention camp. Much better than it sounds, and my kid liked it.

Because of Winn Dixie, by Kate DiCamillo, a coming of age novel about truth. He liked this one too.

Bridge to Terabithia, Katherine Paterson's novel about friendship, imagination, and growing up. I can't say enough about this one; in fact I think I'll read it again myself.

The Island of Horses, by Ellis Dillon, a story of boys and horses in Ireland.

The Doll People, by Ann M.M. Martin and Laura Godwin. Dolls come to life in the night and have a mystery. We read this one aloud as a family.

Dragon Rider, by Cornelia Funke. What's not to like? Dragons, alchemists, an orphaned boy: this one's got everything.

And of course, The Hobbit. Need more ideas? Here's a bunch more.

Ashamed to Be Seen Reading Potter? There's Help for That

Patti — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 13:39:00 GMT

Maybe your plan is to curl up today with your fresh copy of Deathly Hallows and power through until you discover which spoilers were true and which were faked, in the privacy of your own home. Maybe you don't care if you're caught reading juvenile fiction and you're going to take your copy everywhere you go until your kids back off a little and let you finish it. But maybe you've got a giant pole up your bum about the possibility of looking less-than-sophisticated in front of other people, and if so, for you, these printable alternative book jackets.

WHICH! I hasten to add, are NSFW or for little eyes, so don't even click that if you don't want to explain why your screen has f-bombs all over it. And don't bring your book jacket of choice to the break room, or like, church. Having your boss, kids, or friendly neighborhood priest catch you with a copy of F*** Wars: A Futuristic Thriller By Dr. Almir T. Lovedoom would be way worse than having them catch you crying over the death of [redacted].

I won't be using these myself. My mother got dressed up to camp out and get her copy at midnight, so I'm genetically immune to Potter-related shame.

You, Too, Can Lick Harry Potter

Karen Murphy — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:52:00 GMT

Harry Potter is more popular than the Beatles. And since the Beatles were more popular than Jesus, that makes Harry Potter more popular than...

...really? Harry Potter?

It's true. Pre-orders of the new Harry Potter stamps through Britain's Royal Mail eclipsed pre-orders of the Beatles stamps that went on sale in January. The Potter stamps will depict the covers of the various books as well as the crests of Hogwart's and its four houses. I have no idea what I just said. But maybe you know! And if you can't make it down to one of the Royal Mail's 40,000 post offices, you can always buy the stamps online. Maybe here? Yes, I would try here.

Call me cynical, but I think that the issue of these stamps might have something to do with some... book that's coming out. You think?

Harry Potter Minor Characters

Kelly Mills — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:01:00 GMT

Part of what makes the Harry Potter books so great are the fully-formed lesser characters. Who knew when we started that bumbling Neville would have such a painful past? Or that Malfoy would have a couple sympathetic moments? Savvymoms did this nice top ten list of some of the best of the bit people.

I totally agree on many, and adore Professor McGonagall and those Weasley twins. I also have a real squishy lovey spot for Snape, and I keep hoping a little redemption is on the horizon (though with Rowling, there's certainly no guarantee.) But I'd cut Luna (irritating) and Dobby (twice as irritating) in favor of Lupin, who I just can't get enough of, and Fleur Delacour, who surprised even Mrs. Weasley with how she isn't so shallow after all. Did I miss anyone key?

And for the record, none of these players will make anyone read, and they are all really mouthpieces of Satan.

YouTube Goodness: Welcome Back, Potter

Stefania Pomponi Butler (CityMama) — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:10:00 GMT

Mr. Pot-tare is all grown up and teaching high school in Brooklyn.

Am I the Only One who thinks Harry Potter Makes Kids Read More?

Sarah, Goon Squad Sarah — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:19:00 GMT

You know, I have championed J.K. Rowling and her Harry Potter books before. I strongly believe that anything that makes kids want to read a book is good. Well, maybe not The Anarchist Cookbook - but pretty much anything else.

Well now that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is about to be released, articles in The New York Times and The Boston Globe and on SFGate.com are insisting that Harry and his friends don't make kids read any more. They just read these books and then stop.

Look, I don't mean to be a dick about this but isn't seven books still better than zero? If Rowling could write faster then these same kids would be reading like crazy. I still believe that this is a good thing. While I can't yet speak on The Deathly Hollows, I have read all of the rest of them and most of them were excellent. Let's be happy that these guys are getting excited about any books. They could be excited about the release of the new Celine Dion album or something else equally loud and annoying.

What's Better Than Reading a Harry Potter Book? This Is.

Karen Murphy — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 15:54:00 GMT

Okay, so I'm not a big Harry Potter fan. So sue me. I read the first book; I get the idea. But in the grand tradition of songs that will remain forever stuck in your head (you can thank me now), I bring you....Potter Puppet Pals:

What Harry Potter Can Teach Kids

Sarah, Goon Squad Sarah — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:02:00 GMT

First of all I would like to say that I am a Harry Potter fan. I have read every one of the books and I have seen every one of the movies (I prefer the books). Second of all I would like to add that I am hugely in favor of anything that will get kids in the habit of reading for pleasure. I have no concerns that reading about Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry will turn my children to the occult.

So, besides just teaching kids to enjoy reading J.K. Rowling also gives kids lessons that they don't even know they are learning. Suzanne Tobias wrote an article that was posted on Kansas.com listing things that children learn by reading the Harry Potter novels. These things include Latin, French, mythology and astrology. Neat, huh?

Of course, the New York Times had to go and ruin my theory on Harry Potter making kids read more. Hmph.