Cornelia Funke, Lemony Snicket, Louis Sachar, JK Rowling, Jonathan Stroud, Rick Riordan and the like are the reasons I don't look down on kids book. I enjoyed it when I was younger and I still when when going back to it older.

Now the teen stuff on the other hand...well luckily they're redeemed by graphic novels.

Mwamba wrote:Now the teen stuff on the other hand...well luckily they're redeemed by graphic novels.

Haha. Yes. In my dictionary, teen stuff is equal to romance. One starts to think teenagers have no other job. And, in that case, I was never a teenager.

FuzzyLobster wrote:Oohkay, got it.

They've already ordered the book at my library; managed to be the first one to place a hold. :D

What the hell. My library system is larger than London's and we didn't even get Heroes of the Valley until a year after it was released. ><

I'm going to order mine via amazon. Or I might just go out to buy it.

MwahaAHAHAHA. Maybe there's some Stroud fans among our librarians?

Sentynel wrote:I think the problem is more with adults who refuse to even consider things because they're categorised as "children's". I mean, you can see why the books are labelled that by the marketers - they don't want to put kids (or more accurately, kids' parents, in my experience - it never bothered me reading adults' books...) off them. One of the things I think Harry Potter did quite well was making it more socially acceptable for adults to be reading kids' books.

This. Same problem occurs with animated movies and sci-fi/fantasy (though in the case of the latter it's got nothing to do with them being labelled as being for kids). Personally I think that there's a lot of books that both children and adults can read, while on the other hand I think that kids can deal with more serious issues than people give them credit for.

One thing that doesn't help this is the amount of adult writers who write children's books like children are stupid (again, same problem with television shows and movies *cough*Disneychannel*cough*). Then everyone gets the idea that "for kids" means "terribly written" and "insipid." Writers like the ones Mwamba mentions are good exceptions.

And yeeaaah, lets not get started on teen novels. Really I think most people would be better off just moving up to adult novels when they hit 14 or so. Well, most adult novels. :P

FuzzyLobster wrote:

Sentynel wrote:I think the problem is more with adults who refuse to even consider things because they're categorised as "children's". I mean, you can see why the books are labelled that by the marketers - they don't want to put kids (or more accurately, kids' parents, in my experience - it never bothered me reading adults' books...) off them. One of the things I think Harry Potter did quite well was making it more socially acceptable for adults to be reading kids' books.

This. Same problem occurs with animated movies and sci-fi/fantasy (though in the case of the latter it's got nothing to do with them being labelled as being for kids). Personally I think that there's a lot of books that both children and adults can read, while on the other hand I think that kids can deal with more serious issues than people give them credit for.

One thing that doesn't help this is the amount of adult writers who write children's books like children are stupid (again, same problem with television shows and movies *cough*Disneychannel*cough*). Then everyone gets the idea that "for kids" means "terribly written" and "insipid." Writers like the ones Mwamba mentions are good exceptions.

And yeeaaah, lets not get started on teen novels. Really I think most people would be better off just moving up to adult novels when they hit 14 or so. Well, most adult novels. :P

Please. Teen novels...surely you mean the giant shrines to That Rag Which Must Not Be Named Twilight and its myriad knockoffs with poor representations of the supernatural creatures they're trying to represent?

The whole thing with Disney's failure seems to be that it is now treating its audience--children, in many cases--like they're extremely stupid. And the fact that Mr. Stroud does not do that--along with the lovely aforementioned authors--might be one of the reasons we love him and dear old Bart so much.

I do hope that he doesn't subconsciously dumb down his style though. This is one of the greatest fears I have regarding The Ring of Solomon. I mean, looking at the way McCafery went...

DeskRage wrote:I do hope that he doesn't subconsciously dumb down his style though. This is one of the greatest fears I have regarding The Ring of Solomon. I mean, looking at the way McCafery went...

For what it's worth, our contact with the publishers' publicity department has read it and says it's awesome.

DeskRage wrote:Please. Teen novels...surely you mean the giant shrines to That Rag Which Must Not Be Named Twilight and its myriad knockoffs with poor representations of the supernatural creatures they're trying to represent?

Well, not all but yeah. I hear The Hunger Games is pretty good, as well as Cory Doctorow's stuff.

We have a contact!? SINCE WHEN?

Nobody ever tells me these things. :P

AAAAA! That is amazing! We're so official as to have a contact? Epic.

Well. At the very least, that is some consolation.

FuzzyLobster wrote:We have a contact!? SINCE WHEN?

Nobody ever tells me these things. :P

http://bartiforums.com/topic/6628634/1/
It's right there in the first post...

DeskRage wrote:AAAAA! That is amazing! We're so official as to have a contact? Epic.

The author comes here to answer questions, and you're excited about the publicity department? =p

Ohhhh, misunderstood what you said there, sorry.

Didn't actually have nightmares (haven't since Jurassic Park when I was little), thinking of how they'd appear in the movie brought a grin to my face. Particularly Nouda himself, towards the end, in the Crystal Palace... Oof.

Also, books that must not be named. Yay.

Im kinda scared of not really really liking the book, like being enthralled with it. Weird, cause Im a major fan. I want to love it so badly

You will love it. It is STROUD we are talking about.
And, would the publishers' publicity dept care to give us some hints? We could start discussing theories then *rubs hands gleefully* and create topics related to it in this sub-forum.

Eee! That would be fantastic. Theories are so very fun to build. We've only got sixty-seven days to do it now, after all.

I usually don't go for hints or leaks before a book is released. Sometimes, I don't even read the back cover... :sun:

I like being suprised through the book itself.

Well, the rest of us could continue doing it even longer till we all read the books. The Brits would have to keep quiet and not discuss anything here. Good luck with it =p.
But yeah, I guess they will create topics and put "spoiler warnings" and enjoy their discussions there.

---

Edit: This post was in response to DeskRage's post.

Spoil me and suffer my wrath.

Just ask 7P. :P

Boo spoilers. Like those jerks who started reading the finale pages out loud when they got their HP books. And there were still a long line. Rudeness.

You know what happened to me on that day? My sister's friend called me up at 7 am in the morning (just some time after I got that book) and screamed in the phone before I could say anything, "Harry doesn't die! It came in the paper! He even has children...". I screamed back and banged the phone down. I then tried to convince myself that I had dreamed the call, that the information in the paper was wrong, that the girl got it all wrong and so on.
I think she has been slightly scared of me ever since.

Hahaha. For me, my friend looked up the ending on the internet and started telling me and I started yelling random crap so I wouldn't hear. His little brother came into the room then and now, every time he sees me, he yells the same interesting words I said.

PS. He's four.