Harry Potter is one of today’s most famous characters in children’s literature. Harry is not only immensely popular among children, but also young adults and adults have come to like the young wizard. Quidditch, Hogwarts and dementors, are familiar words to muggles, people without magic powers. J.K. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter books, is now one of the best-selling authors and even though she has announced that the last Harry Potter book has been written, people want more of Harry.
J.K. Rowling’s first Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, starts with Harry turning 11. In this book, Harry finds out that he is a wizard, he meets his friends, who will stand by him on all his quests in the books, and he has to fight Lord Voldemort for the first time in his life, something he will have to do in every sequel. Lord Voldemort, a dark wizard whose magic powers were taken away from him by Harry because of a spell that bounced back on him, tries to come back with all his powers in every book. Because Harry is the one that made Lord Voldemort lose his magical powers, Harry is the one who has to fight him. Rowling has chosen to let Harry age one year in every book. Because of this, Harry faces different age issues in every book. The reader is supposed to grow with Harry. Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone can easily be read by an 11-year-old, whereas Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallow, is not a children’s book any more but more appealing to (young) adults. Not only Harry ages, but so do his readers. The first books are fit for children because the storyline is a children’s story. The last four books have a darker character, Harry has to deal with dark magic and mature psychology. It is, therefore, interesting to see how the critics have reviewed the different books over the years. Although many reviews and articles that are related to Harry Potter can be found in American and Dutch newspapers, researchers have not looked into the question how the critics have responded to the books over the years. So the question that needs to be answered is whether American and Dutch critics respond to the Harry Potter books in the same way and whether they focus on the same aspects. Differences and similarities will be discussed. Furthermore, the development of the reviews will be discussed.
The first three Harry Potter books cover Harry’s life from his 11th to his 13th year. In these books, he is still a child. In the fourth book, Harry reaches the age of 14 and faces problems a normal 14-year-old boy would come across during puberty. There is a difference between the first three and the last four books, therefore, the division between the first three and the last four books will be used to examine the way critics responded to the books.
To answer the question how the two countries differ in their criticism, online articles of Dutch and American newspapers will be used. The American newspapers The New York Times and USA Today will be compared to the Dutch newspapers De Volkskrant and Trouw. The New York Times and De Volkskrant were chosen because they are both serious newspapers that focus on world issues. Trouw and USA Today were chosen because they are newspapers that show different perspectives than the other two newspapers. Furthermore, these newspapers have a wide range of articles available on the internet. Originally the newspaper AD was selected because this paper has more similarities with USA Today. Unfortunately, it is not possible to get hold of the older articles of AD, which made it difficult to get hold of the first Harry Potter reviews. The actual popularity of Harry Potter can be seen by the number of reviews written by the different newspapers. The New York Times has published over 2000 articles related to Harry Potter and USA Today published just over a thousand. De Volkskrant has published about 600 articles related to Harry Potter and Trouw around 500.
The articles used are not all reviews. Sometimes the newspapers published articles around the Harry Potter hype, but did not review the books separately. The table of publications shows when a review is an actual review of the book or an article that discusses the hype. Furthermore, two articles are discussed that do not review the books but discuss the beliefs of a group who believed Harry Potter was bad for children and should therefore be banned.
The table of publications shows that the articles published in The New York Times are twice as long as those in USA Today. Furthermore, The New York Times makes use of a Harry Potter coverage where all Harry Potter related articles can be found online. In the coverage official reviews have been selected that are different from other articles that were published around Harry Potter. The New York Times has a clear selection of articles that are related to Harry Potter and the hype, and the official reviews. The reviews of the other three newspapers have been received by use of the online database for newspapers LexisNexis. The two Dutch newspapers show more similarities than the American newspapers. De Volkskrant has a circulation of around 300.000 newspaper whereas Trouw has 105.000. Furthermore, Trouw is a newspaper that focuses on social backgrounds in their “de verdieping” quire . The difference in popularity of the American newspapers can be seen when looking at the daily circulation of the newspapers. The New York Times has a daily circulation of 1,000,000 whereas USA Today has around 2,200,000.
The original title Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone is rendered in Dutch as Harry Potter en de Steen der Wijzen. The American title Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone will be used throughout this analysis. The other titles have not been altered into American English. Wiebe Buddingh’ has translated the Harry Potter books into Dutch. He has chosen to make the names meaningful in Dutch, just as they are in English. Again, the English names will be used.
To answer the question whether American and Dutch critics respond to the Harry Potter books in the same way, different reviews will be looked at. They will all be discussed separately to see how they developed over the years and whether the critics believed that the books have shown a darker character in the last four sequels. Firstly, the American reviews of the first three books will be discussed. Secondly, the same will be done with the Dutch reviews. Thirdly, a comparison will be made between these two countries. Afterwards, the reviews of the last four Harry Potter books will be discussed in the same order. Finally, an overview will be given of the main differences in development between the two countries. By looking at these different aspects a clear development will be detected in how critics in the United States and the Netherlands have received J.K Rowling’s successful Harry Potter books. The focus of the research will concentrate on the dates of publication of the reviews. Furthermore, the question whether the critics discuss the popularity amongst adults will be looked at. Moreover, because of the immense popularity Harry Potter has gained it is of interest to see whether the critics write about the hype or the contents of the book. Finally, the different reasons for critics to like Harry Potter should be detected.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
The United States received the Harry Potter books with great enthusiasm, as did the rest of the world. Within the United States many reviews have been written. Most reviews were very positive. However, there are certain groups that did not approve of the wizard world created by Rowling. In this chapter, the reviews of the first three Harry Potter books will be discussed. In the United States these books were respectively published in September 1998, June 1999 and September 1999. The Dutch translations of the books were published in August 1998, May 1999 and February 2000. These books were written for children. Nobody could have expected the books to become so popular among adults. J.K. Rowling’s books were not immediately popular in the United States. It took some time before J.K Rowling’s Harry Potter books became popular in the world. Not all books were reviewed by the newspapers. The New York Times does not have a review of the second Harry Potter book. There are a number of striking things that need special attention. Firstly, the reviews were all published relatively late. Secondly, most critics discuss the fact that adults read the books as well, even though the first three books are in fact children’s books. Thirdly, the critics discuss Harry Potter as a hype from the second book onwards. Fourthly, the critics try to explain why Harry is so popular. Firstly, the reviews published in the New York Times will be discussed. Secondly, the reviews from USA Today will be looked at. Lastly, the reviews from the two newspapers will be compared. In the table attached the exact dates of publication of the reviews can be found.
The most striking thing about Michael Winerip’s review of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone in The New York Times is that it was published six months after the book was published in the United States. Winerip does not discuss the question whether adults like the books as well. However, he does answer the question why he believes Harry is a loveable character. Winerip reviews children’s books for the New York Times. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone was first published in the United Kingdom in June 1997. However, in the United States the book was only published in September 1998. The review written by Michael Winerip was only published in 1999. It is striking that the book was reviewed this late, especially when one knows how popular the books were later on. However, this does not mean that Winerip is not enthusiastic about the book. The New York Times states that it is a children’s book, written for children between eight and twelve years. When the review was written, the world did not yet know Harry Potter. The review has 811 words and Winerip really discusses the book. He explains the plot and discusses the characters. Winerip writes in his review that: “Though all this hocus-pocus is delightful, the magic in the book is not the real magic of the book. Much like Roald Dahl, J. K. Rowling has a gift for keeping the emotions, fears and triumphs of her characters on a human scale, even while the supernatural is popping out all over” (par. 3). He states that although it is wonderful to escape into the world of magic, Rowling keeps the book human (par. 3). Harry is an ordinary boy, not different from other children; only he happens to be a wizard and not just any wizard, the only wizard ever to escape the spell used by Lord Voldemort to kill his opponents. However, Harry still struggles with the fears that any boy struggles with, according to Winerip. Furthermore, Harry is fears his first school day and is scared that he will not be able to make friends. These aspects make him a real character, just like any other boy. Although Winerip is mostly positive, he also has some criticism. He states that “throughout most of the book, the characters are impressively three-dimensional (occasionally four-dimensional!) and move along seamlessly through the narrative. However, a few times in the last four chapters, the storytelling begins to sputter, and there are twists I found irritating and contrived” (par. 8). However, he must add that Rowling has done something quite special. Overall the review is very positive.
Two months later, the second Harry Potter review was published the New York Times. The second article is not a review but an article about the popularity of Harry Potter. The article discusses adults that like the Harry Potter books, which is interesting since it is a children’s book. Furthermore, it discusses Harry Potter as a hype. It does not go into the question why people like Harry. Even though the second Harry Potter book had not been published in America yet, there was a great demand for it and American citizens had been ordering the book through British on-line bookshops (par. 4). It is interesting that the article discusses the immense popularity of J.K Rowling’s books because the first book was reviewed so late. Harry Potter had suddenly become popular. It also discusses J.K. Rowling’s background. The readers are given more information about the author. The popularity of the books is also discussed. According to the article, the world is noisy and it is difficult to bring a children’s book the readers’ attention (par. 18). The article furthermore writes for the first time about adult readers of the books. Even though the books are written for children, mothers and daughters, fathers and sons are reading the same books (pars. 20, 21).
The first book review that can be found in the New York Times about the second Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, unfortunately shows an empty document on The New York Times website. After contact with The New York Times, it was discovered that the review could not be purchased. Therefore, the first article on this book written by the New York Times cannot be reviewed together with the other articles.
In September 1999 Rowling published her third Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. Yet again Harry has to face Lord Voldemort and conquer problems a normal 13-year-old boy does not experience. The review was published on September 5 1999 and written by Gregory Maguire. The review was published immediately after the book had been published. Maguire discusses Harry as a hype and also writes about the popularity among adults. Furthermore, he tries to answer the question why adults like the book. One of things that Maguire says is interesting. He states: “So far, in terms of plot, the books do nothing very new, but they do it brilliantly” (par. 2). He especially likes the books because in every book the readers find out more about Harry. He also writes about the fact that young and old readers as well as boys and girls like the books. He states that this requires analysis. Maguire compares Rowling to great writers such as C.S. Lewis and Lewis Carroll. It seems as if Maguire is trying to come up with an explanation why Harry is so popular. He believes that all boys and girls are trying to fit in the herd and there are few novels, according to him, that discuss this matter. Because Harry is this ordinary boy struggling with his own fears, children can relate to him. As did Lewis Carroll in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, Rowling has also created a fantasy world with an ordinary child who struggles with problems a young child comes across.
The reviews that have been reviewed so far are the official Harry Potter reviews that appeared in the book section of the New York Times. All reviews were positive about Rowling’s way of writing a children’s fantasy novel. The most striking things are that the first review appeared six months after the book was published. However, the later reviews were published soon after the books were published. It is striking that already the second review discusses the question whether the books are written for both children and adults. Although the reviews are placed in the children’s books section, the reviews discuss the popularity among adults as well. In the review of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban Maguire states that “The books have attracted legions of grown-up readers as well” (par. 2). The Harry Potter hype really started at that moment. Rowling was writing a book a year when the review was published, but Maguire predicts that at the publication of the last book “J. K. Rowling will have achieved what people who love the best children's books have long laboured after: breaking the spell of adult condescension that brands as merely cute, insignificant, second-rate the heartiest and best of children's literature” (par. 8).
Only a month after the first Harry Potter book had been published in the United States, the first review could be read in the USA Today. Cathy Hainer does write that adults like the books, but does not try to explain this. Hainer does not argue the hype around Harry. She is positive about Rowling’s first book. She also clearly states that “you don’t have to be a wizard or a kid to appreciate the spell cast by Harry Potter” (par. 12), saying that adults are also under the Harry Potter spell. She does not wonder why adults like the Harry Potter books. Another thing Hainer tries to do is to compare Harry Potter with other child characters, such as Roald Dahl’s Charlie in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, who was also able to grow beyond himself with the help of somewhat strange characters (par. 12). Throughout Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, Harry meets other (magical) people who help him throughout his journey. The most striking thing, however, is the fact that Hainer already in this first review speaks of the interest adults show in the book. Where The New York Times did not see the popularity among adults until the third book, USA Today starts the first review with the quote: “There’s nothing fun about the aging process. The belly sags. The memory goes bad. But no amount of gray hair need end the pleasure of reading children’s books” (par. 1). Furthermore, Hainer writes about Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone that “Stories aimed for young readers are often guileless, seeking fun for fun’s sake. Yet they can be just as witty, suspenseful and thought-provoking as adult reads, minus the angst” (par. 2). Hainer already predicts here that not only children can enjoy the Harry Potter books.
The second review in the USA Today was published on May 27 1999. Again Hainer is the critic responsible for the review. In this review, the focus is on the fact that adults like the books. She does not discuss the hype and does not try to answer the question why Harry is popular. In the last sentence of the review Hainer shows her opinion by stating that “Rowling has created a hero as resourceful, brave and loyal as Luke Skywalker himself” (par. 13). It is interesting that Hainer compares Harry to another great hero such as Luke Skywalker. Hainer discusses the fact that adults read the books as well. According to Hainer, Rowling addresses issues that children will read as amusement. She writes that whereas adults see the issues of racism and suspicion of strangers as major themes in the book, younger readers, or those looking for mere entertainment, will not detect this. She states: “But younger readers and those looking for the simple pleasures of a delightful read will be thrilled to be back at the fabulously witchy world of Hogwarts” (par. 12). This is in line with what she states in the first review, where she already predicts that the book is not written for pure entertainment and children only. Hainer stays positive in this second review and summarises the plot.
The third review, that of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is again written by Cathy Hainer. Again the popularity among adults is the main focus of the review. She writes that in this third book “younger readers might want some guidance from parents or older siblings” (par. 8). The theme and plot of the book become more complicated and the storyline may not be understood by the young readers. While “the book whizzes along” (par. 8), older readers find out that there is more to Harry’s past and that he learns more about his own past and his magical powers as he matures.
The reviews that have been discussed here are all written by Cathy Hainer. The reviews are positive and a line can be found. Hainer discusses the popularity of Harry Potter among adults more than she discusses any other subject.
The most striking finding in The New York Times and USA Today are the dates of publication of the reviews. The New York Times published its first review six months after the book had been published in the United States. USA Today published the first review only a month after the book was published and published the other reviews immediately after the books had been published. The New York Times does not have a review of the second Harry Potter book, but the third review came fast. The reviews from both The New York Times and USA Today are positive and most reviews discuss the brilliance of J.K. Rowling. The critics are not surprised that Rowling’s third Harry Potter book is again a bestseller. However, it is striking that most critics discuss the fact that although Harry Potter is originally a children’s book, the popularity among adults is tremendous. This is especially interesting because these first three books are originally children’s books written and intended for children until the age of 13. It is also interesting to look at the other articles in the different newspapers, because striking articles can be found. Judy Blume wrote an article for The New York Times that was published in October 1999 with the title “Is Harry Potter Evil?” Blume discusses the fact that in America some groups of people are very critical about the Harry Potter books and believe that the books should be removed from the classrooms. The author writes: “I knew this was coming. The only surprise is that it took so long -- as long as it took for the zealots who claim they're protecting children from evil (and evil can be found lurking everywhere these days) to discover that children actually like these books. If children are excited about a book, it must be suspect” (par. 3). This one sentence shows the opinion of the author. Parents were trying to protect their children from the evil world. In their eyes Harry Potter makes children believe they can be witches and wizards. Blume says that “the perceived danger is fantasy” (par. 4). The entire article screams sarcasm. Blume does not understand why people in their right mind would want to ban the Harry Potter books. Blume is mocking those who believe that Rowling or Potter himself incite bad behaviour in children. USA Today, on the other hand, does not have these controversial articles. The most interesting fact presented above is the late publication of the first articles. Furthermore, both newspapers discuss the popularity Harry Potter has gained among adults as well as younger readers. Moreover, both The New York Times and USA Today are speaking of a hype. The answer to the question why Harry is so popular is often answered to the fact that Harry is an ordinary boy with magic powers to whom children are able to relate.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
The first three Harry Potter books were received with great enthusiasm in the Netherlands. Many reviews have been written on the wizard boy. Two Dutch newspapers will be compared in this chapter. The first newspaper that will be looked at is De Volkskrant. The second newspaper is Trouw. The first striking thing is that both newspapers have not published official reviews of all the books. Trouw and De Volskrant both published one review. Although the other articles are related to Harry Potter, they do not review the book. Secondly, the articles were published after the Dutch translation had been published in the Netherlands. However, the first article that is related to Harry Potter appeared almost a year after the Dutch translation had been published. Furthermore, the issue of adults liking the books is discussed, but the critics do not come up with an explanation for this, which is different from the American critics who tried to answer the question why adults like the books. It is interesting that the newspapers seem to be more interested in the hype than in reviewing the books. Because there was only one review, it seems as if the hype is more important to write about than the books. Lastly, critics from both newspapers try to answer the question why Harry is so popular. When the first articles were published about Harry, the hype had started to take shape and the newspapers were eager to write about it.
The first review in of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone in De Volkskrant dates back to May 1999. The Dutch translation of the first book was published in the Netherlands in August 1998. The review was published late in the Netherlands. De Volkskrant did not publish a review of the first Harry Potter book. The review discussed here is a review of the first two Harry Potter books together and written by Hanneke Leliveld. The critic raises the question that adults like the books as well. This is in line with what the American critics have written, they were also interested in the adults. Furthermore, the review is mostly interested in the hype around Harry Potter. Leliveld is also interested in the question why Harry is so popular. It is interesting to notice that the first review appeared nine months after the book had been published, which means that Harry Potter was not popular from the start. The review is a review of the first two books: Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. The review first discusses Harry’s life so far and emphasises the fact that Harry is a normal boy who finds out he is a wizard. However, Leliveld also discusses why both adults and children like the books. The American critics also wrote about adults reading the books. It is interesting that Leliveld discusses the popularity amongst adults because this is the first review that appeared about Harry Potter in De Volkskrant. Even though Harry Potter is a children’s book, it was immediately popular among adults in both the United States and the Netherlands. Leliveld writes that Rowling did not have a particular age-group in mind when writing her story on young Harry and she thinks that this might be one of the reasons why Harry is so popular among all ages (par. 5). She does not analyse this any further. She simply states that Harry Potter is on his way to become a hype. Leliveld states but does not analyse. However, she clearly discusses Harry Potter’s popularity, not just in the Netherlands, but all over the world. It is interesting that Harry Potter was already popular when the first review was published.
The second article in De Volkskrant was published February 10th 2000. The third book, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, had just been published in the Dutch translation when Nicoline Baartman wrote the article. The article does not discuss the fact that adults like it, but it mostly discusses the hype around Harry Potter. The hype is the focus of the review. Furthermore, Baartman tries to answer the question why Harry is so popular. This article does not review any of the books. However, the article discusses Harry’s adventures of the first two books. Furthermore, Baartman explains why people are so enthusiastic about this wizard boy. According to Baartman, there has never been any children’s book that was so popular that people had to wait in line to get hold of a book. There was never such a hype as Harry Potter. There had never been a publication party just for the publication of a children’s book (par. 6). Even though there was a hype going on in the Netherlands, Harry Potter underwear or caps could not be found, but Baartman also clearly says “not yet”(par. 2). She starts off by summarising the first Harry Potter book and explains why Harry, according to her, is such a beloved character. Until Harry was 11, he had no idea that he was a wizard and that is one of the reasons the audience loves him. He is a normal boy, but also a wizard and people feel related to him for that reason. Baartman calls Harry the chosen one (par. 17), not realising that in the last books it will become clear that he is actually called the chosen one. Baartman also writes about Rowling’s hard life before she was able to write this story. Maybe, according to Baartman, that is also one of the reasons why her books have become so popular. She was a single mum with no money, who had to write her book in a bar because her apartment was too cold. Baartman is very positive about Harry, who does not act like a hero. All the heroic things he does are the result of his luck or of his anger. He remains a normal boy which is what the readers want, according to Baartman. Baartman also writes about the second Harry Potter book: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. The Dutch translation of the book was published in April 1999. It seems that one of the professors that appears in this book for the first time, Gilderoy Lockhart, has intrigued her. Lockhart teaches Harry how to cope with fame. He teaches him that being famous is not only enjoyable, but also takes hard work. Baartman ends the article praising J.K. Rowling. Rowling, according to Baartman is able to make magical creatures appear out of nowhere and is able to keep suspense in the books. Every book reveals more of the mystery and of Harry Potter. The books are sad but also funny. However, Rowling is very serious about one thing Baartman states at the end: “magic is something you have to learn, you have to try hard” (par. 32). She refers here to why she believes the books are so popular. Her answer is that Harry is an ordinary boy with magical powers, but he continues to be a boy to whom children can relate. Even though Harry has magical powers, he still has to fight hard in life.
The first article that appeared on the third Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, was written by Philip van de Poel. The translation of this third book was published in February 2000 and the article was published in the same month. The article was published immediately. The focus of the article is on the hype around Harry. The title of the article already shows what Van de Poel thinks of the Harry Potter mania: “Harry Potter-addiction is not a bad thing.” Van de Poel, unfortunately, does not really review the book. He writes about the day the Dutch translation came out and about the Harry Potter party specially arranged for the publication of the book. He shows more interest in the Harry Potter mania. He also discusses the fact that the question “who’s afraid of Harry Potter” was a very interesting one in the United States, because people were actually trying to ban Harry Potter from being read in the classrooms (par. 8). Van de Poel does not agree with the idea that Harry Potter should be banned from the classrooms and does not believe that Harry Potter has a bad influence on children.
Another article that can be found in De Volkskrant, but does not necessarily review the books, is by Bert Lanting. The article was published November 1999 when the first two books had already been published in the Dutch translation. Lanting writes that people in the United States seem to think that Harry Potter is the devil himself. It is clear from the article that Lanting does not share this thought. “Sure,” he says, “of course Rowling has introduced symbolism in the books. Lord Voldemort is nothing but evil. The number 666, the number of the devil, can be found in the books and Rowling announced that she would write seven Harry Potter books. According to the people who try to ban Harry Potter from the classrooms, the Harry Potter books have to be the work of the devil because they cannot come up with another explanation how the first three books are number one, two and three on the bestsellers list (par. 7). According to those who want to ban Harry Potter it can only be the work of the devil that one author can write three best-sellers in a row. An article like this shows that De Volkskrant tries to show different angles of the Harry Potter hype. Although Lanting does not believe Harry Potter should be banned, he writes about it.
Only the first article in De Volkskrant is an actual review of two Harry Potter books. The other articles mainly discuss the hype and do not explain the plot of the books. Furthermore, the first article appeared nine months after the book was published in the Netherlands. One can conclude from this that Harry Potter was not popular from the start. The first article reviews all three books in one, but the other articles provide more of an analysis of the books. The question arises whether De Volkskrant was only interested in the Harry Potter hype and not in the books. De Volkskrant does have a children’s section but the Harry Potter books were not reviewed. Similar to the American newspapers, De Volkskrant writes about all age-groups liking Harry, but there is not a clear explanation. This is interesting because the first Harry Potter books were seen as children’s books by for example The New York Times and bookshops in the Netherlands. All reviewers explain why Harry is popular, but not why he is loved by adults as well. Although the critics show analysis in these first articles, it is a pity that the reviewers do not really get into the questions they ask themselves, such as why Harry is so popular and why all age groups tend to like the books. De Volkskrant is very interested in the popularity and chooses to explore that instead of reviewing the books.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone has not been reviewed in Trouw. The first article on J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter was published June 26th, 1999 and written by Nanda Roep. The two Dutch newspapers published their first articles on Harry Potter almost a year after the book had been published in the Dutch translation. Again the question arises, as it did with De Volkskrant, why Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone has not been reviewed. Roep does not address the fact that adults like the book and does not answer the question why she believes Harry is popular. Roep starts off writing about J.K. Rowling’s struggles as a single mum. This can be expected from Trouw because it is a newspaper that focuses on social issues. The second Harry Potter book had already been published when this article was written and it is strange that the first article appeared more than a year later. Roep gives a very short summary of the first Harry Potter book. The only thing she says is that he is invited to attend Hogwart’s school of witchcraft and wizardry and that he turns out to be a wizard. Furthermore, she describes the magical world Rowling creates for her readers (par. 3). Roep clearly does not agree with the comparison between J.K. Rowling and Roald Dahl which was, according to her, made by other critics. According to Roep they are both imaginative but there’s nothing more. She prefers Rowling over Dahl because Rowling manages to create a real world with ordinary people, whereas she cannot say this of Dahl (par. 5). It is interesting that the comparison with Dahl is made, because Dahl is one of history’s most popular writer of children’s books. Roep is extremely positive and claims that Rowling keeps her readers in suspense, which is often said by Dutch critics to explain why Harry Potter is so popular. The reader simply wants to know what happens next. Roep praises Rowling for the way she has thought about every little detail in the book and, furthermore, loves the way Harry reminds her of a knight (par 8).
The second article was published in February 2000. It was published just before the third book was about to be published in Dutch. It does not review the second book but tries to analyse the Harry Potter-hype. It is interesting that the second book as well as the first was not reviewed by Trouw. De Volkskrant immediately published an article after the second book. The hype is the focus of the article by Alfra Brotman. Furthermore, the popularity amongst adults is discussed. Brotman discusses the success Harry Potter has amongst adults and children. She states that it does not come as a surprise that children like the books. The books are funny and scary and for children that is a recipe for success. Adults, however, want to believe that they like the books for other reasons. Brotman writes that it seems as if everybody wonders why Harry Potter is so popular amongst children and adults, boys and girls, and especially why he is so popular in the world. Both De Volkskrant and the American newspapers wonder about the same thing. Brotman also states that Harry had a slow start in the Netherlands. The books became popular after the second book had been published (par. 2). She does not give an explanation why Harry became popular after the second book. Bookshops had trouble selling the books because they are not typical children’s books (par. 8). Brotman also raises the question whether Harry Potter is a directed hype, but she immediately dismisses this idea. She says that Harry Potter really had to fight his way up out of nothing. Harry Potter is not a typical children’s book (par. 4) but it is still seen as a children’s book. It does not have the illustrations that one would normally expect in a children’s book. It became so popular because the story is strong. Originally, the book was declined by eight publishers. A small publisher, Bloomsbury, thought the manuscript was brilliant and decided to publish it. Maybe that is also one of the magical things about the entire Harry Potter story according to Brotman (par. 3). Brotman provides the reader with a history of what happened before Harry Potter and how and when it became a hype.
The third review was again written by Nanda Roep. This is a real review of the third Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. The Dutch translation was published in the Netherlands in February 2000 and the article was published February 12 of the same year; so the book was immediately reviewed. Roep reviews the book and does not go into the question whether adults like it as well. Roep begins by stating that it was likely that the Harry Potter books would get worse because Rowling was extremely successful with her first two books; she had just signed a contract with Warner Brothers for the film rights and she had announced that she would write seven Potter books. According to Roep, it is difficult for an author to stay successful after all the previous success (par. 1). According to Roep, it was a sensational happening that the third book was published in the Netherlands because of the simple reason that it was a Harry Potter book. However, Roep thinks it was even more exciting because this book would prove whether Rowling was really as good an author as everybody thought. Many fail, but Rowling did not. Roep claims that it almost seems impossible for the Harry Potter project to fail (par. 2). She then starts explaining what happened in the previous books, but is very enthusiastic about Rowling’s third book. Roep writes that Rowling has managed to link pieces together in the books. A tree that played a small role in the second book, is very important in The Prisoner of Azkaban. Her opinion becomes very clear when she says that “it is incredible, but in the over 300 pages there is not one dull moment” (par. 10). Even though Roep misses the sensational end of the book, she does not believe the end is boring. Rowling does not end the third book with a climax but she chooses to unravel some unanswered questions by means of a dialogue. Roep is very enthusiastic about this third book and says she cannot wait to read the fourth. She hopes that Harry will mature and that some mysteries will be solved. She loves the suspense Rowling has put in her books (par. 12). This is, according to her, one of the reasons why Harry Potter is as popular as he is.
Trouw has published many articles on Harry Potter but it seems a shame that the first two books have not been reviewed. Furthermore, it is interesting that the reviews appeared very late. The first review was published 10 months after the book was published in Dutch. The second review appeared eight months after the second book had been published. Only the third book gets a real review and this review was published immediately after the book had come out. Moreover, Trouw discusses the popularity amongst adults as well as the hype more than anything else. One thing that can definitely be said about Trouw is that the critics show much interest in the background of the books. Trouw already speaks of a hype after the second book had been published.
The most striking finding when comparing De Volkskrant to Trouw is that both newspapers published the first article related to Harry Potter late. Furthermore, Trouw only reviewed the third Harry Potter book and De Volkskrant only reviewed the first two books in one review. Moreover, the hype is the main focus of most reviews. Already in the first articles the critics are amazed by the popularity of Harry Potter, especially because it took some time. The first reviews appeared late and Harry Potter was not popular from the start. It is therefore interesting that when the critics wrote about Harry, he was immediately popular. Only Trouw states in the review of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban how exciting it was for this book to be published because the first two were so good. It can be seen that the first two books were received with great enthusiasm by Nanda Roep. Another interesting thing that the two newspapers share is the questions they raise and give similar answers to. The question why Harry is as popular as he is, is a question that returns in almost every single review. The answer mainly comes down to the fact that Harry is an ordinary boy who happens to have magical powers. The people feel for him and cannot wait to continue reading what will happen to this young wizard. The critics write about the suspense that Rowling has created and this seems the main reason why the Potter books are as good as the critics believe. The popularity amongst adults is another thing that is discussed by most critics, although the American critics discuss the popularity among adults in greater detail.
This chapter will focus on the differences between the newspapers in their countries and furthermore on the differences and similarities between the countries.
Firstly, the publication of the articles will be discussed. Secondly, the critics’ reaction to adults liking the books will be looked at. Thirdly, whether the newspapers published official reviews or an article on the hype will be looked at. Fourthly, the way critics discussed the hype will be discussed. Furthermore, the articles that discuss the anti Harry Potter movement will be looked at. Furthermore, the different critics will be discussed. Lastly, the critics’ different reasons for liking Harry will be considered.
The first striking difference between the newspapers De Volkskrant, Trouw and The New York Times is that in the Netherlands the first reviews only appeared when the second Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets had been published in the Dutch translation. For both countries it is striking that the very first review dates back to 1999. The New York Times published its first article in February 1999, whereas in De Volkskrant the first review appeared in May 1999 and in Trouw in June 1999. This raises some questions. In the United States Harry Potter and the Scorcerer’s Stone was published in 1997. The Dutch translation was published in 1998. The first reviews were published a year after the book had been published for the three newspapers. One can conclude from this that Harry Potter was not immediately popular, neither in the United States, nor in the Netherlands. It is difficult to answer the question why it took the three newspapers The New York Times, De Volkskrant and Trouw so long before the first review was published. It is odd because in all these newspapers reviews of children’s books can be found. The books were reviewed when J.K. Rowling’s books became popular amongst adults as well as children. October 20th, 1998 USA Today published its first article related to Harry Potter. This was only a month after Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone had been published in the United States. This is the only newspaper that wrote about Harry Potter from the beginning onwards.
Furthermore, all newspapers are amazed by Harry Potter’s popularity amongst adults. Although The New York Times really states that Harry Potter has been written for children, De Volkskrant does not explicitly state this. In the first review of Volkskrant, written by Hanneke Leliveld, it is stated that J.K. Rowling did not have a particular age-group in mind when writing Harry Potter. In The New York Times the review states that Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone was written for children and that it is amazing that adults have take such a liking to the book. Both newspaper discuss the hype around Harry Potter and almost every single review discusses the popularity amongst adults. The Dutch reviewer Hanneke Leliveld thinks that Harry is so popular amongst all ages because Rowling did not have a particular age group in mind when writing about Harry. This is not what Maguire states; he analyses why adults like Harry Potter as much as they do. First, the review of the Harry Potter books can be found in the children’s section of New York Times. This already shows that the newspaper believes they had been written for children. Secondly, Maguire really tries to analyse the popularity amongst adults. He compares Harry Potter to other children’s books and does not necessarily believe that Harry is popular because of who he is or what he does, but because Rowling managed to write in such a way that the Harry Potter books are accessible for adults. This is different from what Leliveld says. Leliveld explains Harry’s popularity in a more ordinary way and does not analyse this any further. The American newspaper USA Today raises the issue of popularity among adults in every single review, but does not analyse why adults like the book. Trouw does not look into the fact that adults like the book. This is interesting because in the Netherlands the Harry Potter books are popular amongst adults as well. Even though the Dutch newspaper Trouw does bring up the fact that adults take an interest in the books as well, the critic does not elaborate on this.
Another difference between the countries is that De Volkskrant and Trouw do not necessarily review the Harry Potter books, whereas The New York Times and USA Today reviewed all books. This makes it hard to compare the articles. The Dutch newspaper gives a simple analysis of the Harry Potter-hype. The American newspapers do this as well, but also review the books separately. De Volkskrant and Trouw immediately discuss the hype that Harry Potter was about to become. Trouw shows much interest in the background of the Harry Potter books. The newspaper does not only raise the issue of popularity among adults, but shows the reader J.K. Rowling’s background. Thus Rowling becomes a real person. The reviews that can be found in USA Today are real reviews and do not go into the background of the books. The main difference between the countries is that in the United States a review of every single book can be found, whereas in the Netherlands this was not done regularly.
Although differences can be found, it is interesting that all these newspapers show one striking similarity. The Harry Potter hype is the most important item in the different articles. Although The New York Times reviews the books, the critics also get into the Harry Potter hype. In the Netherlands, the hype seems to be more important than in the United States, although, the newspapers from both countries discuss Harry’s popularity from the second review onwards. This is striking, knowing that the first reviews appeared almost a year after the book was published.
The critics all give different reasons for liking Harry Potter. There is one thing, though, that all critics have in common. Harry is an ordinary boy who happens to have magical powers. Nevertheless, he experiences what most children undergo, which is one of the reasons why children feel related to him. Furthermore, the suspense that Rowling has created in her books is what makes them so good, according to the critics. They believe the reader wants to read more because of the suspense.
It is also interesting to take a look at the articles that have appeared about the opposition to Harry Potter. In the New York Times an article can be found that discusses conservative ideas against Harry Potter. Although the author of the article does not agree with these ideas, the opinion of this group was publicized . In the Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant, a similar article was published, also discussing the conservative ideas of some groups in the United States. However, the article only discusses the American points of view. It is interesting, though, that both newspapers decided to write an article to inform the readers that not everybody likes Harry.
Another interesting thing is that in The New York Times all reviews were written by different critics. It is, therefore, difficult to see whether the critics changed their mind over the years. In De Volkskrant two articles were written by the same critic. In USA Today, all reviews were written by the same critic, in Trouw, two of the three reviews were written by the same critic. The Dutch critic, Nanda Roep, is very positive about Harry. She wrote both an article that explains the hype as well as a real review. She clearly analyses what Rowling had to go through before her Harry Potter books became popular.
To conclude, the first striking difference between the countries is that in the Netherlands both newspapers published the first Harry Potter articles a year after the Dutch translation of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone had been published. The New York Times also published its first article rather late, but USA Today published its first article only a month after the first book appeared. This is an interesting fact, knowing that nowadays one is not likely to find people who have never heard of J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books. This, of course, raises the question why the three newspapers The New York Times, De Volkskrant and Trouw did not recognise the upcoming popularity of the book when it was published in 1997. The second similarity between the countries is that all newspapers write about the popularity of the books amongst adults. Most newspapers also try to give an explanation for this popularity. This is especially striking because the first three Harry Potter books were seen as children’s books. The main reason the critics give for Harry’s popularity is that he is an ordinary boy who happens to be a wizard. Everybody can relate to him. Harry experiences what any teenage boy experiences. Thirdly, the American newspapers review the three books, whereas the Dutch newspapers wrote many articles about J.K. Rowling’s books, but never really reviewed the books. Trouw published a review of the third book and De Volkskrant reviewed the first and second book in one review. The Dutch newspapers write more about the hype around Harry than the magic of the books itself. Finally, it is interesting to see that in the Dutch newspaper Trouw and the American newspaper USA Today the same critic wrote some of the reviews, whereas in the other newspapers all reviews were written by different critics. It can be said that the newspapers chose to have a Harry Potter specialist. The critics were continuously positive about the Harry Potter books. It will be interesting to see whether the same critics will continue with their reviews for the last four Harry Potter books.
In summary, it can be said that all newspapers discussed were positive about J.K Rowling’s Harry Potter books. The most striking difference between the two countries is that the American newspapers reviewed all Harry Potter books, whereas the Dutch newspapers did not. Furthermore, the Dutch newspapers discuss the popularity more than they discuss the contents of the books. Moreover, all critics wonder why Harry is so popular and most critics believe that suspense is the key word. Everyone wants to read more of Harry.
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
The final four Harry Potter books have a more adult character than the first three. Therefore, these last four books will be compared to find out how different critics have responded to these last four books in comparison with the first three books. First the reviews in the The New York Times will be discussed. Then the reviews in USA Today will be looked at. Finally their differences and similarities will be discussed. The focus will be on the fact that the critics have written actual reviews. Furthermore, these last books have a darker character than the previous three books and the critics have responded to that. Moreover, the question whether the critics discuss the fact that adults like the books will be discussed again. Furthermore, the question why Harry is so popular will be looked at.
The official review in The New York Times was published on July 10th 2000, only two days after the book was published. Janet Maslin has written the review. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was immediately reviewed. Maslin mainly discusses the hype and informs the reader that this book is darker than the previous ones. Furthermore, she writes about the suspense, which is why both adults and children like to read it. The first striking thing that Maslin writes in the article is: “The funny thing about Harry Potter is that he was famous from the start” (par. 1). What Maslin means here is the fact that in the book Harry Potter was famous from the moment he survived the spell Lord Voldemort put on him, when he was just a baby. However, she immediately writes about the “Harrymania” as she calls it. She discusses the fact that Harry Potter is a must-have in the world, which can be seen by the film hype and the Harry Potter Christmas gifts that are sold by the minute. Maslin continues with the contents of the new Harry Potter book. She states that “ [Rowling] has turned this odds-defying new book into everything it promised to be” (par. 3). Furthermore, Maslin gives her reason for the fact that Harry Potter has become so popular all around the world: “what makes the Potter books so popular is the radically simple fact that they're so good” (par. 3). Maslin explains that Rowling has shaped the books and leads the reader into a certain direction. The reader wants to continue reading and is anxious to find out what will happen to Harry and his friends. Rowling has created suspense and that is one of the reasons the book is so good. She then writes about the book itself and gives a clear review of the book. This book is, according to Maslin, as good as she expected from Rowling. However, the only negative aspect Maslin points out is the beginning of the book, which is dark and sinister. Another point that Maslin describes is the popularity among adults. Although she does not expand on this, she writes that “Never has one author done so much to make readers of all ages long to be at school” (par. 7). She clearly shows here that adults, as well as children, like the books. Furthermore, she writes about the previous Harry Potter books:
The series' first book served primarily as an introduction, though its intrigue involved a three-headed monster guarding the Sorcerer's Stone of the title. Then, in the weaker Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Ms. Rowling drifted into a ghastly special effects denouement, replete with giant spiders, that provided the book's most unappetizing scenario. With Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, she arrived at a more trickily convoluted finale, to the point where you might have fried an egg on the forehead of anyone trying to sort out the book's climactic moves (par. 13).
According to Maslin the fourth book has the best plot until now and is twice as difficult in content as the previous books. Both this and the next generation will enjoy reading this book, according to Maslin.
The first review that appeared of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix was published on June 21st 2003, the same day the book was published. Michiko Kakutani wrote the review for The New York Times. At the end of book four, Lord Voldemort had returned, which makes this book darker than its predecessors. Kakutani also realises this. Kakutani does not write about Harry’s popularity but really reviews the book. She summarises what happens and analyses Harry’s behaviour, which is not the behaviour of a good schoolboy. Kakutani says that “because Harry is often in an irritable mood and spends much of the opening chapters brooding about his problems, The Order of the Phoenix gets off to a somewhat ponderous start” (par. 6). The book is darker and has less humour than the previous books. In this book, Rowling also takes much interest in the emotional side of the adolescent main characters. As Harry and his friends mature and reach puberty, they increasingly encounter problems inherent to that age. Kakutani writes that emotional growth does not often show in other children’s books. Again Rowling’s storytelling skills are praised by the critic. Kakutani also explains why she thinks both adults and children like the books: “One of the things that has made the Potter books so appealing to children and many adults is Ms. Rowling's magpie ability to take archetypes and plot points from myriad sources -- myths, fairy tales, children's classics and movies -- and alchemize them into something new” (par. 11). The critic, furthermore, really analyses the book itself and the reader gets a very good idea of what the book is about. Moreover, Kakutani appreciates Rowling’s style of writing for creating suspense.
The review of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince was published July 16th 2005, the same day the book was published, and was written by Michiko Kakutani. Kakutani also wrote the previous review, which makes it easier to compare the two reviews. Kakutani’s focus is on the fact that yet again the book has become darker and she writes that maybe the sixth book contains scenes that are not fit for the younger readers. She believes the Harry Potter books are so popular because Rowling manages to create suspense. Kakutani really reviews the book. It is interesting to see that Kakutani seems to like comparing Harry Potter to Luke Skywalker, something Cathy Hainer from USA Today also did . Luke Skywalker, the hero in the Star Wars series, faces the same battles Harry has to face. It is interesting that she chooses a hero who was also, like Harry, a character from a book that has been put on the big screen. Kakutani, furthermore, believes this sixth book is darker and more violent than the previous books. She states that “two of the novel's final scenes may well be too alarming for the youngest readers” (par. 9). Kakutani begins her review by summarising the book and ends her article explaining Rowling’s genius way of writing, comparing the Harry Potter books to great classics such as Lord of the Rings. The books can be compared because both Tolkien, the author of Lord of the Rings, and Rowling have managed to create a world of fantasy that appeals to everybody. Kakutani does have some criticism: “The Half-Blood Prince suffers, at moments, from an excess of exposition” (par. 14). Kakutani easily overlooks this because of the suspense in the book. She ends her article by writing:
We want to know more about Harry's parents - how they met and married and died -
because that may tell us more about Harry's own yearnings and decisions. We want to know more about Dumbledore's desire to believe the best of everyone because that may shed light on whom he chooses to trust. We want to know more about the circumstances of Tom Riddle's birth because that may shed light on his decision to reinvent himself as Lord Voldemort. (par. 17)
She here explains how Rowling manages to keep the public interested and how Rowling manages to create suspense. Kakutani gives a list of all the things she still wants to find out about Harry. The readers want to know everything and Kakutani cannot wait for the next book to be published, so that she will finally get answers to the many questions that are still waiting to be answered.
Michiko Kakutani also wrote the review of the last Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. The review was published on July 19th 2007, two days before the book was published. This may seem odd but Kakutani writes that she purchased the book before its official release date. The focus of her review is on the suspense in the books and her analysis of adults liking the books as well. In this review she tries to summarise how Rowling manages to keep the tension in her books until the end. She writes: “With each installment, the “Potter” series has grown increasingly dark, and this volume — a copy of which was purchased at a New York City store yesterday, though the book is embargoed for release until 12:01 a.m. on Saturday — is no exception” (par. 2). Kakutani writes this review the way she wrote the previous two reviews. She compares Harry to other heroes such as King Arthur and Henry V, but has chosen to really review the book, meaning that she writes about the book itself and not about the hype around Harry Potter. It is a known fact that Harry is popular and she does not explain much about Harry any more. The last paragraph she writes is a very interesting one:
The world of Harry Potter is a place where the mundane and the marvellous, the
ordinary and the surreal coexist. It’s a place where cars can fly and owls can deliver
the mail, a place where paintings talk and a mirror reflects people’s innermost desires.
It’s also a place utterly recognizable to readers, a place where death and the
catastrophes of daily life are inevitable, and people’s lives are defined by love and loss
and hope — the same way they are in our own mortal world (par. 10).
This quote is in a way an answer to the question why adults like Harry Potter as much as children do. They too find what they want in the Harry Potter books.
Kakutani is enthusiastic about the books, but also shows criticism in her review.
Apart from the first review, the other official reviews were written by Michigo Kakutani. She is very consistent in her way of writing and writes about the book more than she discusses the hype. Furthermore, she likes to compare Harry to other great heroes such as king Arthur and especially Luke Skywalker. She discusses Harry’s popularity in the world. However, she also addresses the fact that these last books are darker than the previous ones, even implying at one point that younger readers will have difficulties with some of the scenes. Unlike the procedure regarding the review of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Kakutani really dives into the book itself and does not merely discuss the Harry Potter-hype. Moreover, Kakutani discusses the popularity among adults and children and gives an extensive reason for that.
For USA Today Deirdre Donahue is the critic who wrote the review of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. The review was published only two days after the book had been published. It is striking that Donahue is not positive about the book. This is different from the review in The New York Times, which had a positive review. This is mostly due to the fact that she reviews the book as a children’s book and writes that some things are too dark for younger readers. She writes that “This installment has the telltale loping pace and paper-chewing verbosity that best-selling authors develop when they try to write a book a year” (par. 2). Nanda Roep, who wrote the review of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban in Trouw, states in that review that, although one would expect Rowling to fail, she believes Rowling has proven the opposite. Donahue states: “The first two books can be read and reread for pleasure, but once is plenty for Goblet of Fire” (par. 2). She then explains the plot of the book but does so without any enthusiasm. The most striking thing is that she thinks this book should not be read by young children. She writes for example that “It's amusing to adults but rather insidey for a children’s book” (par. 13). Donahue means that in this fourth Harry Potter book, Rowling uses jokes that are more difficult for the younger readers to understand. Donahue clearly shows her opinion in this short review of the fourth Harry Potter book and she explicitly states what she thinks of the book, with a negative result.
The fifth Harry Potter book was published June 20th, 2003 in USA Today . This review has again been written by Deirdre Donahue. The focus of her review is that the book is darker and that it will frighten the younger readers. This is in line with what Kakutani wrote for The New York Times. She clearly states her opinion in this review and, in contrast to her opinion of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, is very positive in this review: “Rowling has regained the ability to create an enchanting parallel world where witches and wizards live. And we Muggles (ordinary people) can only dream of joining” (par. 3). What is interesting is that Donahue, as she did in the previous review, looks at the way children will read this fifth book. She states: “Phoenix will not frighten the under-9 crowd, but it will confuse them” (par. 9). Furthermore, she writes that the novel explores young adult issues. What Rowling explores exactly, she does not explains. Donahue does not really try to explain the issues addressed in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, she simply states what happens in the book but does not analyse. Although this book might not be suitable for younger readers in her opinion, she does not explain why exactly. Donahue simply states that the book is too dark and sinister.
Again written by Deirdre Donahue is the review of the sixth Harry Potter book: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. The review was published July 18th 2005, two days after the book was published in the United States. The focus of her review is on the fact that it is not a children’s book because it is darker than ever. Donahue explains why she thinks the Harry Potter books are popular. The first sentence Donahue uses is striking: “There is really only one flaw in the sixth installment of J.K. Rowling's series, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince: It is not a kids' book” (par. 1). Unfortunately, Donahue does not explain why she think the book is not fit for children. Already in her first two reviews, Donahue wrote that the books are not meant to be read by children, but she does not state it as clearly as she does in this review. Rowling lets Harry age in every book and was expecting her readers to grow with Harry. Donahue furthermore states that “It has clearly evolved from a charming tale of a mistreated orphan making his way through the world's coolest boarding school to the serious saga of a knight going forth to battle evil in the fascinating form of Lord Voldemort” (par. 4). It is interesting to compare this remark with Kakutani’s from The New York Times, who compared Harry Potter to Luke Skywalker and King Arthur. However, Donahue does not elaborate on this remark. Donahue ends her review as follows: “OK, this reader thinks these elements are a bit grim for young readers but, hey, I can't wait for Book 7” (par. 10). This quote shows that Donahue also praises the suspense Rowling has managed to create. She does not really try to analyse, but simply states what she thinks of the book.
USA Today published the review of the seventh Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows on July 23rd 2007. After many speculations about how Harry would end up, the book was finally published on 21 July. Again, Deirdre Donahue wrote the review. Before the last book had been published, there were many speculations about the death of one of the main characters. Donahue addresses the parents in her review: “Parents, you can relax. Grief counselors will not be required at bedsides and sleep-away camps around the world” (par. 2). In the previous reviews Donahue warned the parents about the grim character of the book. In this review, Donahue believes that the seventh book can be read by children. Furthermore, Donahue explains the plot of the book, but also tries to answer the question why Harry is so popular. She writes: “With the series at the end, the question remains: What explains Rowling's appeal? Perhaps it is that her imaginative creativity infuses her unparalleled range. The pages fly because of the suspense” (par. 9). Again one can see that suspense is one of the main things that make Harry Potter so popular. Donahue clearly shows her opinion of the books and is very positive about the Harry Potter books. The last sentence that Donahue uses shows her positive thoughts on J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series: “The world owes J.K. Rowling a big thank-you. It has been truly magical” (par. 12).
Both The New York Times and USA Today reviewed all the last four Harry Potter books. As might be expected, many more articles were written about Harry, most of them discussing his popularity. Because both newspapers used the same critic to review the last four books, it is easier to compare the two critics from the two different newspapers. The first difference between the critics is that Kakutani analyses the books. The articles published in The New York Times are twice as long as those in USA Today, which gives more space for analysis. Furthermore, Kakutani compares the hero Harry with other great heroes from children’s and adult literature such as Luke Skywalker and King Arthur. Both critics agree that the books become darker and more sinister towards the end. Donahue addresses parents and warns them, whereas Kakutani simply states that the books have become darker. Both critics address the same issues in their reviews. However, they do not, as could be seen in the reviews of the first three Harry Potter books, address the fact why adults like the books. Nevertheless, both critics compare the Harry Potter books to other classics in literature and myths. It seems to be a fact that the Harry Potter books are not children’s books any more. Both Kakutani and Donahue write about the little jokes and references that will not be understood by the younger readers. Although Donahue shows her opinion more often than Kakutani, the latter does not hide what she thinks of the Harry Potter books either. Both critics are positive about J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books. What makes them so enthusiastic is mostly the suspense that Rowling creates in her books. Both critics praise this.
5.
Dutch Reviews of the Last Four Books
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
It is interesting to see whether the Dutch newspapers reviewed the books when they were published in the original language or whether they waited for the Dutch translation to be published. First the reviews in De Volkskrant will be looked at. Then the reviews in Trouw will be discussed. Finally a comparison between the two Dutch newspapers will be made. The focus will be on be on the fact that the critics have written actual reviews. Furthermore, these last books have a darker character than the previous three books and the critics have responded to that. Moreover, the question whether the critics discuss the fact that adults like the books will be discussed. Furthermore, the question why Harry is so popular according to the critics will be looked at.
The first review that appeared in De Volkskrant was published December 15th 2000. This is after the Dutch translation of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire was published. Marieke Henselmans, the critic who wrote the review, mainly discusses the Harry Potter hype and in line with the American critics, the grim character of the book. Many articles were written when the book was published in England and the United States in July 2000, but De Volkskrant did not publish a review after the publication of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. The articles that were published after the original publication of the book discuss the popularity of this fourth book by J.K. Rowling, but do not review the book. The article discussed here reviews the Dutch translation of the fourth Harry Potter book. It is not a review as one would expect. It does not only review the fourth book, but also summarises the previous three books. Furthermore, Henselmans discusses the hype around Harry Potter. Although she discusses the media who try to explain the popularity of the books, she herself does not explain this in detail. Henselmans states various interesting details that this Harry hype has brought about. She writes about 11-year-olds learning English to be able to read the Harry Potter books, philosophers who try to explain Harry’s popularity and she rightfully asks the reader: “What’s going on here?” (par. 5). Furthermore, she states that Harry’s popularity can hardly be called a hype because a hype peaks and goes away, whereas one does not need to be a fortune-teller to see that Harry Potter is on its way to become a classic (par. 6). When she discusses the fourth book, Henselmans wonders whether the death of a certain person is not too much for 11-year-olds. She immediately answers her own question by saying that Harry has matured and so have the readers (par. 11). It is also important to mention that Henselmans praises Wiebe Buddingh’’s translation, who translated all the Harry Potter books, and hopes he will translate the last Harry Potter books as well. She writes that his translations are up to date and that the fantasy words have been chosen with humour. It is interesting that Henselmans does not say whether she has read the fourth book in the original language. Henselmans does not really show her opinion in this review. She writes what children think of the books and does not explicitly write about adults liking the books as well.
The review of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix was published in De Volkskrant on June 23rd, 2003, two days after the book was published in English. Pay-Uun Hiu, the critic, begins her review by stating that the tasks Harry and his friends have to complete have again become harder. It is interesting that De Volkskrant has chosen to review the book after publication in the original language, something that had not been done before in the newspaper. Pay-Uun Hiu mainly discusses the Harry Potter hype and believes that Harry Potter is not a children’s book any more. She, furthermore, writes about more than just the plot of the book. In Amsterdam people could buy the fourth Harry Potter book at midnight and Pay-Uun Hiu writes about the popularity of this sale. Moreover, she writes that Harry has grown beyond the children’s book market, which is not only due to his popularity, but also because Harry is not the 11-year-old boy any more that he was in the first book. She explains why the tasks are harder in this book and states, furthermore, that Harry is maturing. In this book Harry is an adolescent, not a little boy any more. Pay-Uun Hiu is enthusiastic about the book. It does not bother her that the book has 766 pages. Rowling can justify this and the reader will not be disturbed by this. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix was not reviewed by De Volkskrant after the Dutch publication. It is a pity that the Dutch translation does not get extra attention.
Also by Pay-Uun Hiu is the review of the sixth Harry Potter book: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. The review was published only two days after the book was published in the original language. The title of the review already shows what Pay-Uun Hiu thinks of the book: “New Potter is heavy and dark.” Pay-Uun Hiu describes that the world that Rowling has created for Harry has become darker and the evil has become public (par. 3). Both American critics also discuss the grimness of the sixth book. The focus of this review is on the grimness of the book. She does not answer the question why adults like the books, but explains how Harry grows in the books. It is interesting that Pay-Uun Hiu writes that Harry grows along with his trials. In the first book, he is an 11-year-old boy with hardly any powers, but Lord Voldemort also has less power. In the sixth book, Harry is a 16-year-old adolescent and Lord Voldemort has full control of his powers again. They have both grown and this growth can be seen. Furthermore, she writes that the book is not easy any more, the story is more complex than its predecessors and death is not an uncommon phenomenon in this volume. However, although the book is grim, there is still enough humour in the book. The last sentence is striking because Pay-Uun Hiu shows how eager she was for the last book to be published. She is curious for the last book, writing that it will be a hard task for both Harry and J.K. Rowling, who has to weave the various elements of the previous books together in the last book. Pay-Uun Hiu does not think that it will be a story that will be told too fast. She thinks that it will again be a piece of artwork by Rowling (par. 8). So she is very enthusiastic about the Potter books. One of the reasons why Pay-Uun Hiu is so enthusiastic about the Harry Potter books, is the suspense. This is in line with what the American critics thought as well. The book was not reviewed after the Dutch translation was published. Various articles have been written, but they were about the popularity after the Dutch translation was published. The hype was more important to write about than an actual review after the Dutch translation.
The review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was published in De Volkskrant on July 21st, 2007, the same day the book was published in the original language. The review was written by Frits van der Waa. He believes that the seventh book lives up to the expectations of the readers, especially because it keeps the reader in suspense up to the end . Again suspense is what seems to be most important about the Harry Potter books. Along with Pay-Uun Hiu, Van der Waar also discusses the fact the Harry has grown and so have his readers (par. 3). He also writes that Harry was a bit slower because in the ten years it took Rowling to write the books, Harry aged 7 years and his readers 10. Furthermore, the evil has grown as well. Van der Waa explains the plot, writing that beloved characters will be killed and that not only children will shed tears. Van der Waa is very positive about this last Harry Potter book and praises Rowling for the lesson in morality she teaches the reader. The reason why Harry is able to fight and eventually beat Lord Voldemort, is that Harry has the power to love. Lord Voldemort does not have this power and therefore misses out on the most important thing in life, according to the last book. De Volkskrant did not publish a review of Harry Potter and the Deatlhy Hallows after the Dutch translation of the book. The articles that can be found discuss the interest of children in the last books but do not review the book as such, because the young adults and adults have probably already read the books in English according to Henselmans (par. 5).
The most interesting finding in the reviews of De Volkskrant is that all critics agree that the books have become darker and that the readers have to grow with Harry. Except for the review of the fourth book, the other reviews were published after the original publications of the Harry Potter books. This is probably due to the fact that Harry had gained immense popularity in the Netherlands and the books were often read after the English version had been published. The question why adults like the books as well as younger readers is not answered. It is a fact that adults read the Harry Potter books and the critics agree on the fact that the readers have grown, just as Harry has.
Trouw did not publish a review of the fourth Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Trouw did publish a number of articles, but they discuss issues around the Harry Potter hype. One article discusses the fact that a nine-year-old discovered a mistake in the fourth book, another article is about the Dutch Harry Potter audio books, but no real review has been written. The question arises why the book has not been reviewed. Harry is popular enough in the Netherlands. It is interesting, though, that the hype seems to be so important for Trouw. This may be due to the fact that Trouw is a newspaper that focuses on social issues. In earlier reviews it became clear that Trouw focuses on social issues.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix was reviewed by Trouw and published June 28th, 2003, five days after the publication of the English original. The critic, Peter de Boer, mainly discusses the suspense that is so important in the books. Furthermore, he questions the hype because he believes Harry Potter has grown beyond the hype. He does not believe that Harry Potter can be called a hype because of his popularity over the years. A hype peaks and goes away, whereas Harry Potter’s popularity seems to be endless. Moreover, he shares the idea with other critics, that the book has a darker character. The review starts off with a personal anecdote that immediately grasps the reader’s attention. He writes that on the day of publication, he was standing in line to buy two copies of the fifth Harry Potter book, one for himself and one for his daughter, who found it impossible to wait until her father had finished the book (par. 2). His daughter was anxious to read the next Harry Potter book. J.K Rowling’s ability to create suspense is apparently very important for the reader. He then states that J.K. Rowling did not need the media for Harry’s popularity. According to De Boer she did it all by herself. Harry was not popular from the start, but because the books are so good and full of suspense, they have become popular. De Boer, furthermore, writes that there is only one thing that he would like to say about the entire Harry Potter hype, because too much has been written about it already. He thinks it is a pity that one should call Harry Potter a hype because the books were written brilliantly (par. 4). De Volkskrant also states that Harry Potter is more than a hype. It is striking that De Boer then writes about what other Dutch critics have written about the books, mostly positive comments. He explains the plot and then starts analysing. He writes that darkness dominates this book, although Rowling does make it a bit lighter by her witty remarks. This is another thing that both Henselmans and Pay-Uun Hiu from De Volkskrant agree on as well. De Boer furthermore writes that everything is different in this book, because the good characters are not necessarily always good. De Boer writes that this book uses more psychology than the previous books and believes that this is exactly what makes this book the best book of the series (par. 10). One example is that Harry sometimes feels Lord Voldemort’s thoughts, even thinking bad things. The reader is in Harry’s mind and so also in Lord Voldemort’s. De Boer gives an analysis of the book and explains why he thinks this book is so good.
The first article on Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince in Trouw dates back to November 19, 2005. Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince was originally published in July 2005 but Trouw did not publish a review after the book had been published in its original language. The article is an analysis of the book. Agnes Andeweg wonders about questions such as whether Harry Potter is good or bad for children. This is what Deirdre Donahue, the critic for USA Today, wonders about as well. The focus of her article is on the grim character of the book. All critics, including Andeweg, seem to agree that the sixth Harry Potter book is scarier than ever. Andeweg begins her analysis by comparing this book with older novels such as Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and novels by Stephen King. She believes that these novels create the surroundings of the Harry Potter books (par. 2). Voldemort is compared to Dracula. It is interesting that these novels are for adults and not children and that Andeweg compares the Harry Potter books to adult literature. According to Andeweg the Potter books get more gruesome, because the evil closes in but stays recognisable (par. 5). Andeweg shows analysis, but unfortunately does not review the book as such. Her focus is on all Harry Potter books and she does not merely discuss the sixth book. She dives into the characters and compares them to other characters in literature. However, she also writes that Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince is not as funny as its predecessors. It is interesting, though, that she does not necessarily see Harry Potter as a children’s book, although she does not answer the question why adults like the books.
The article of the last Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, is not a review in Trouw. The article discusses the popularity of the last book and the rapidity of the sale of the last book. Different fans get a chance to say something about the seventh book. It seems strange that the last book has not been reviewed properly, because the previous Harry Potter books were very popular and were almost always reviewed by Trouw. It is interesting that this last book, the grand finale, has not been reviewed.
It is striking that Trouw only published two reviews of the last four Harry Potter books. However, the reviews that were published show real analysis and do not just explain the plots of the books. The reviews have been written by different critics. Harry’s popularity was discussed in the reviews, and both reviews state that the brilliance of the book is the reason for Harry’s popularity, without any need of the media. Although it is stated that the books have become darker, the critics do not say that they are unfit for children.
To conclude, all critics discuss the fact that the books have become more sinister. Moreover, they question whether the books are still fit for children, but all critics have come to the conclusion that the books are still suited for the younger readers. Furthermore, the critics believe that the readers have matured, just as Harry has. The critics agree that although the Harry Potter books have become darker, Rowling has managed to use humour in the books, which makes the books not too grim to read. It is interesting that both De Volkskrant and Trouw reviewed the books after the English version of the Harry Potter books had been published. This is in contrast with the first three books, where the reviews were written only after the Dutch translation had come out. Nevertheless, there are some differences. De Volkskrant reviewed all Harry Potter books, whereas Trouw only published two reviews of the last four books. Furthermore, De Volkskrant has the same critic several times, whereas Trouw has different critics for each review. This does not mean that the reviews show more differences. The newspapers do not show too many differences overall.
In the previous chapters, two Dutch and two American newspapers have been compared. Various reviews from the newspapers have been discussed. It is interesting to see where the differences and similarities between the countries can be found and how Harry Potter has been received by the different newspapers. In chapter three it became clear that The New York Times and De Volkskrant both review the books and analyse them. The reviews of the last four books were actual reviews, discussing the separate books and not only focusing on the Harry Potter hype. The critics mostly agreed. They all think that the books have become more sinister over the years.
It is striking that the Dutch newspaper Trouw did not publish many reviews, or articles, on Harry Potter. Reviews can be found, and articles as well, but overall the number is not as high as in the other newspapers. It should be added though that the articles that were published actually discuss interesting details of the Harry Potter mania. It is a pity, though, that many of those articles were not really reviews of the books. The articles mainly dealt with Harry Potter and not the separate books. This is probably due to the fact that for Trouw social stories are very important.
The American newspapers pay attention to the question why adults are interested in Harry Potter. The Dutch newspapers did not write about the question why adults like the books. According to the Dutch critics it is a fact that adults like them.. However, in the American newspapers, differences can easily be detected. Where The New York Times tries to answer the question why adults like the Harry Potter books, USA Today keeps on seeing the Harry Potter books as children’s books and warns parents about the intensity of the books. Furthermore, it is interesting that the Dutch newspapers both agree on the fact that the last four Harry Potter books are still fit for children. The American newspaper USA Today, on the other hand believes that the books have become too sinister for children and are not fit for them to read unsupervised.
All newspapers agree that the Harry Potter books are good. The main reason the critics give for the popularity of the Harry Potter books is the way Rowling manages to create suspense in her books. Rowling manages to write in such a way that all readers, young and old, want to know what will happen next to Harry.
All newspapers are interested in the Harry Potter hype. Trouw and USA Today write more about the hype than the other two newspapers. A difference with the earlier reviews, though, is that now the critics are not sure whether it is a hype, as a hype has a peak and fades away. This cannot be said about Harry Potter. Especially The New York Times and De Volkskrant seem to agree on this. They believe that Harry Potter will be a classic.
It is not more than logical that the American newspapers reviewed the books after they had been published in the United States. It is interesting, however, to see that the Dutch newspapers started reviewing the books after they had been published in English. The Dutch newspapers waited with reviewing the books until the Dutch translation had been published, where the first three books are concerned. The last four books were reviewed after the book had been published in English. The Harry Potter-hype had started when the fourth book, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, was published. Young adults and adults had started reading the books in English in the Netherlands. Again, it should be taken into account that the books are immensely popular among adults and they did not want to wait until the Dutch translation came out.
Most critics like to compare Harry to other great heroes from English literature. Kakutani from The New York Times compares Harry to king Arthur and Star Wars’ Luke Skywalker. Harry has become as popular as other great heroes. Furthermore, the critics like to compare Rowling to other writers, such as Tolkien. The comparison between Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings and J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books is often made. This is due to the fact that both writers have created a fantasy world, but also because the Harry Potter films are as popular as The Lord of the Rings.
It can be concluded that the three newspapers The New York Times, De Volkskrant and Trouw took the Harry Potter-hype very seriously and wrote reviews that analyse the books. Only USA Today did not write in depth reviews. The critic for USA Today tells us what she thinks of the Harry Potter books, but does not analyse the books. She states that the books are too sinister for children, but does not explain why she believes the books are too intense. It can, furthermore, be seen that Trouw did not publish as many articles as the other newspapers did. However, the articles that were published showed some real analysis. It is interesting that the Dutch newspapers do not try to answer the question why adults like the books. The two American newspapers are very interested in this issue. Furthermore, all critics agree that the books have become darker over the years. The readers had to grow with Harry. The American critics are in doubt as to whether the books are still fit for children, whereas the Dutch critics believe children can still read the books.
In the past six chapters, American reviews from The New York Times and USA Today have been discussed, as well as Dutch reviews from De Volkskrant and Trouw. To answer the questions whether Dutch and American critics respond in the same way and how their criticism developed over the years, the reviews of the newspapers mentioned above have been analysed. Because the Harry Potter books have become more sinister and difficult over the years, the first three Harry Potter books were first discussed. Similarities and differences have been found between the four newspapers. The most striking differences have been detected between the reviews discussed after the first three Harry Potter books and the last four. However, one thing all newspapers have in common; Harry Potter has been received with great enthusiasm. It took some time, though, before J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books became popular, but once people got to know the young wizard, they could not get enough of him.
It is striking that Harry Potter was not popular in the beginning. The first reviews only appeared months after the books had been published. The only newspaper that did publish a review just a month after the book had been published was USA Today. In the Netherlands the reviews only appeared after the Dutch translation had been published. This is an interesting fact when compared to the reviews of the last four books, of which the reviews were published faster. Furthermore, the newspapers published more articles that were related to Harry Potter. Moreover, the Dutch newspapers published their reviews after the English publication, something they had not done for reviews of the first three books. It is also interesting to see that the Dutch newspapers did not always publish a review, but often discussed the Harry Potter-hype. The American newspapers always reviewed the books.
The hype is something that every critic thought was worth writing about. The American critics did not only discuss the book itself, but also wrote about the hype. After the second book had been published, the first critics wrote about a hype, which is quite remarkable, considering that the first review appeared so late. The numbers of articles that were published on Harry Potter show how popular Harry was. The New York Times published over 2000 articles related to Harry Potter, USA Today published little over a thousand. De Volkskrant published about 600 Potter articles and Trouw around 500. The American newspapers wrote more about the Harry Potter hype than the Dutch newspapers. However, this does not say anything about the reception of the books. Both countries received the books with great enthusiasm.
Furthermore, it was remarkable that the critics respond to adults who like the books in their first reviews. It can be said that this is one of the reasons why the reviews of the last four books appeared after the English publication in the Netherlands. All newspapers discuss the fact that adults like to read Harry Potter as much as younger readers do. The critics discuss this fact and especially try to answer the question why they like it in reviews of the first three books. The main answer is that Harry Potter is accessible and that everybody can relate to the young wizard who is just an ordinary boy who happens to have magical powers. In the reviews of the last four books, the question is not asked any more by the Dutch critics. The American critics still discuss adults reading the books, but the Dutch critics see it as a simple fact that Harry Potter is read by all ages.
The question why Harry is popular has been answered with different arguments by different critics. In the first reviews the critics believed Harry Potter was popular because the books were accessible for everybody and everybody could relate to him. In the later reviews, all critics discuss the suspense that Rowling has created. They believe this is the main reason for liking Harry Potter.
Furthermore, the way the reviews were written also changed. This has to do with the popularity Harry Potter gained later on. Although the first reviews discuss Harry’s popularity in both the Netherlands and the United States, the critics did not know how popular he was going to be. In the later reviews, the critics were unanimous that Harry Potter was on his way to become a classic. However, the reviews that were published of the first three books wrote of a hype after the second book. The critics continued writing about the hype in the reviews of the last four books, although the word hype was questioned. Most critics like to refer to Harry Potter as a classic to be. The critics believe that a hype was not the right word to use because a hype peaks and fades away. In discussing the change of the reviews, it is also interesting to look at the different critics responsible for the reviews. The newspapers have chosen to employ different critics for the first three and last four books. However, this varies between the newspapers. USA Today and Trouw employed the same critic for the first three books. With respect to the last four books Trouw only published two official reviews that were written by different critics. USA Today employed the same critic for the reviews of the last four books. However, this critic was not the critic that wrote the reviews of the first three books. The New York Times and De Volkskrant employed different critics for their reviews of the first three Potter books. For the last four books The New York Times employed the same critic. De Volkskrant also employed the same critic to review the last four books. The same critic was assigned to review the Harry Potter books.
The most striking finding, however, is that the American and Dutch newspapers did not differ as much as might have been expected. The question that needs answering is whether American and Dutch critics have responded in the same way and whether their criticism changed over the years. Overall the newspapers agree that Harry Potter is a lovable character. They also agree that the books have become darker over the years. USA Today is the only newspaper that shows many differences with the other three. This newspaper consistently had shorter reviews, which did not analyse the books. However, it did publish many articles. The opinion of the critics that wrote the reviews for USA Today was very clear. Furthermore, the newspaper is the only one of the four that did not only state that the last four books had become creepier, but also warned parents not to let their children read them by themselves. The critic wrote about Harry Potter as a children’s book, something the other newspapers did not do, as Harry Potter was tremendously popular among adults as well as youngsters.
Even though J.K. Rowling has written her last Harry Potter book, the media cannot get enough of Harry. The last articles written about Harry were published in April 2008. In these articles the critics refer back to Harry Potter as if J.K. Rowlings books are classics. Deirdre Donahue who wrote the reviews of the last four Harry Potter books for USA Today, expresses what all critics agree on: “The world owes J.K. Rowling a big thank-you. It has been truly magical” (par. 12).
Andeweg, Agnes. “Niet de magie wint, maar de liefde; HP6 is een humanistisch griezelboek.” Trouw 19 Nov. 2005.
Baartman, Nicoline. “Graag per omgaande per uil reageren.” De Volkskrant 10 Feb. 2000.
Blume, Judy. “ Is Harry Potter Evil?” New York Times 22 Oct. 1999.
De Boer, Peter. “Harry voelt het kwaad in zichzelf ; J.K. Rowling werkt toe naar een gruwelijke finale.” Trouw 28 June 2003.
Brotman, Alfra. “Betoverd door Zweinstein.” Trouw 4 Feb. 2000.
Carvajal, Doreen. “Children’s Book Casts a Spell over Adults: Young Wizard is a Best Seller and Copyright Challenge.” New York Times 1 Apr. 1999.
Donahue, Deirdre. “ ‘Goblet of Fire’ Burns out Lengthy Fourth Book Lacks Spark of Imagination.” USA Today 10 July 2000.
---, “Harry Does Some Serious Growing Up.” USA Today 18 July 2005.
---, “ ‘Potter’ Creator Closes the Book on a Note of Magic.” USA Today 23 July 2007.
---, “Rich Character, Magical Prose Elevate ‘Phoenix’.” USA Today 20 June 2003.
Hainer, Cathy. “Second Time’s Still a Charm For Spellbinding Saga.” USA Today 27 May 1999.
---, “A Tale of Sorcery to Charm All Ages.” USA Today 20 Oct. 1998.
---, “Third Time’s Another Charmer For Harry Potter.” USA Today 8 Sep. 1999.
Henselmans, Marieke. “Echte Potter-fan kende deel vier al.” De Volkskrant 15 Dec. 2000.
Hiu, Pay Uun. “Eerste zoen van puberende Harry is nat.” De Volkskrant 23 June 2003.
---. “Nieuwe Potter is zwaar en duister.” De Volkskrant 18 July 2005.
Kakutani, Michiko. “An Epic Showdown as Harry Potter Is Initiated Into Adulthood.” New York Times 19 July 2007.
---. “For Famous Young Wizard, a Darker Turn.” New York Times 21 June 2003.
---. “Harry Potter Works his Magic Again in a Far Darker Tale.” New York Times 16 July 2005.
Lanting, Bert. “Amerikaanse kinderziel bedreigd” De Volkskrant 3 Nov. 1999.
Leliveld, Hanneke. “ Recensie Harry Potter.” De Volkskrant 28 May 1999.
Maguire, Gregory. “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.” New York Times 5 Sep. 1999.
Maslin, Janet. “At Last, the Wizard Gets Back to School.” New York Times 10 July 2000.
Van de Poel, Philip. “Harry Potter-verslaving is niet erg.” De Volkskrant 7 Feb. 2000.
Roep, Nanda. “Harry Potter neemt het op tegen de zwarte macht.” Trouw 26 June 1999.
---, “Sirius Zwarts wil karwei afmaken: Harry doden.” Trouw 12 Feb 2000.
Van der Waa, Frits. “Laatste Potter is triomf voor Rowling: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows maakt de hoogespannen verwachtingen meer dan waar.” De Volkskrant 21 July 2007.
“De Laatste Potter verkoopt goed: 15 boeken per seconde.” Trouw 23 July 2007.
Table of Publication
Publication of Harry Potter books:
|
English |
Dutch Translation |
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone |
June 26, 1997 |
August, 1998 |
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets |
July 2, 1998, |
May, 1999 |
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban |
September 8, 1999 |
February, 2000 |
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire |
July 8, 2000 |
December, 2000 |
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix |
June 21, 2003 |
November, 2003 |
Harry Potter and the Half blood Prince |
July 16, 2005 |
November 19, 2005 |
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows |
July 21, 2007 |
November 17, 2007 |
List of Publication reviews:
Books |
New York Times |
USA Today |
|||
|
Date of publication |
Author and Title |
Date of Publication |
Author and Title |
|
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone |
Feb. 19, 1999
Apr. 1, 1999 |
Review |
Oct. 20, 1998 |
Review |
|
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets |
|
|
May 27, 1999 |
Review |
|
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban |
Sep. 5, 1999
Oct.22, 1999 |
Review |
Sep. 8, 1999 |
Review |
|
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire |
July 10, 2000 |
Review |
July 10, 2000 |
Review |
|
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix |
June 21, 2003 |
Review |
June 20, 2003 |
Review |
|
Harry Potter and the Half blood Prince |
July 16, 2005 |
Review |
July 18, 2005 |
Review |
|
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows |
July 19, 2007 |
Review |
July 23, 2007 |
Review |
|
Books |
De Volkskrant |
Trouw |
|||
|
Date of publication |
Author and Title |
Date of Publication |
Author and Title |
|
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone |
May 28, 1999 |
Review |
June 26, 1999 |
Nanda Roep: “Harry Potter neemt het op tegen de Zwarte Macht” 755 words |
|
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets |
Nov. 3, 1999 |
Bert Lanting: “Amerikaanse Kinderziel Bedreigd” |
Feb. 4, 2000 |
Alfra Brotman: “Betoverd door Zweinstein” |
|
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban |
Feb. 10, 2000
Feb. 7, 2000 |
Nicoline Baartman: “Graag per Omgaande Per Uil Reageren” |
Feb. 12, 2000 |
Review |
|
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire |
Dec . 15, 2000 |
Review |
|
|
|
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix |
June 23, 2003 |
Review |
June 28, 2003 |
Review |
|
Harry Potter and the Half blood Prince |
July 18, 2005 |
Review |
Nov. 19, 2005 |
Agnes Andeweg: “Niet de Magie Wint, maar de Liefde; HP6 is een humanistisch griezelboek” |
|
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows |
July 21, 2007 |
Review |
July 23, 2007 |
“De Laatste Potter verkoopt goed: 15 boeken per seconde” |
|
Lexis Nexis online database for newspapers.
Although the first Harry Potter books do not include much angst, the later Harry Potter books do include angst. Especially books six and seven.
The hero from the Star Wars trilogy. As Harry, he is the only one who can fight evil.
Harry Potter en de Steen der Wijzen
Harry Potter en de Geheime Kamer
Harry Potter en de Gevangene van Azkaban
“Toveren moet je leren, je moet er je best voor doen”
“Harry Potterverslaving is niet erg”
Lexis Nexis
“Het is ongelooflijk, maar in de ruim driehonderd pagina's is het werkelijk geen moment saai.”
Harry Potter en de Vuurbeker
Harry Potter en de Orde van de Feniks
Harry Potter en de Halfbloed Prins
Harry Potter en de Relieken van de Dood
“Wat is hier aan de hand?”
“Nieuwe Potter is Zwaar en Duister”
Source: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/32344/Thesis-Final-Heiltje-Winterink.doc
Web site to visit: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/
Author of the text: indicated on the source document of the above text
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban:
Presentation:
Harry Potter is a series of seven fantasy novels written by British author J. K. Rowling. The books chronicle the adventures of the adolescent wizard Harry Potter, together with Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger, his friends from the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft . The central story concerns Harry's struggle against the evil wizard Lord Voldemort, who killed Harry's parents in his quest to conquer the wizarding world and subjugate non-magical (Muggle) people to his rule.
The Digest of « Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban »:
Harry Potter is with Dursleys for the summer, learning to do more spells, and awaits an imminent visit from Uncle Vernon's sister Marge. Harry loses his temper when Marge insults his family, and unintentionally causes her to inflate and float away. Harry flees, as he expects to be punished for performing magic outside of school. The Knight Bus appears and takes Harry to the Leaky Cauldron where Minister for Magic Cornelius Fudge tells Harry he will not be expelled. Harry learns that Sirius Black, who is said to be a supporter of Lord Voldemort, has escaped from Azkaban and that Black will likely come after him.
Harry journeys to Hogwarts with his best friends Ron and Hermione. On the Hogwarts Express train, they share a compartment with the new Defense against the Dark Arts teacher, Remus Lupin, who is sleeping when they enter the compartment. Abruptly, the train is stopped and a Dementor boards, searching for Black. Harry faints when the Dementor enters their compartment, but Lupin awakens and repels the Dementor after hearing a woman-like scream. At school, Albus Dumbledore informs the Hogwarts students that the Dementors have been set as a guard around the school grounds as a protection against Black. In addition to Lupin, Hagrid is announced as the new Care of Magical Creatures teacher. Lupin's lessons prove enjoyable; he teaches useful spells and helps less confident students like Neville. However Hagrid's class does not go to plan; on the first day, Draco Malfoy deliberately provokes the Hippogriff Buckbeak into attacking him. His father Lucius Malfoy successfully has Buckbeak sentenced to death.
During a Quidditch match, several Dementors approach Harry, causing him to fall off his broomstick. Because of this Lupin teaches Harry to defend himself against Dementors with a Patronus charm. A Patronus is the opposite of a Dementor: as Dementors feed on depression and darkness, so a Patronus must be created with a happy memory. As Harry was unable to get permission to visit Hogsmeade from a Parent or Guardian, Fred and George give Harry the Marauder's Map so that he can sneak out of the castle. At Hogsmeade, Harry overhears that Black was his godfather and his parents' best friend. Black is said to have divulged the Potters' secret whereabouts to Voldemort and murdered their mutual friend Peter Pettigrew. Harry vows to kill Black, but is later astonished when he sees Pettigrew's name on the map.
Buck ( Buckbeak)
In Divination class, Professor Trelawney enters a trance and predicts that the Dark Lord's servant will return to Harry that night. Harry, Ron and Hermione visit Hagrid to console him over Buckbeak's impending execution and discover Scabbers, who had been missing earlier that year. Just then Fudge, Dumbledore and an executioner visit Hagrid's to carry out Buckbeak's execution (which the trio watch sadly), when Scabbers suddenly bites Ron and escapes. While the trio is chasing Scabbers, a large dog drags both Ron and his rat, Scabbers, into a hole at the base of the Whomping Willow before Harry could get to them. The Whomping Willow attacks Harry and Hermione but Hermione uses the swinging willow branches to their advantage. Harry and Hermione follow, to the Shrieking Shack. It turns out the dog is the Animagus form of Sirius Black. Harry attacks Sirius and takes him to the ground, but before he can do anything, Lupin arrives, disarms Harry, and embraces Sirius as an old friend. After being confronted by Hermione, Lupin admits to being a werewolf. And at this moment Snape appears, planning to catch Black and Lupin and hand them over to the Dementors, but is knocked out by Harry. Lupin and Black explain that Scabbers is Peter Pettigrew, who is also an Animagus, and that he is the one who did for what Black served time in Azkaban. Lupin and Sirius force Pettigrew back to his human form and then prepare to kill him, but are stopped by Harry, who tells them that it was not what James Potter would have done. Instead, he wants to turn over Pettigrew to the Dementors. As the group head back to the castle, the full moon rises; Lupin transforms into a werewolf, which allows Pettigrew to escape. Lupin and Sirius fight in their animal forms, until Lupin is distracted by the sound of another werewolf and Dementors attack Sirius and Harry. As Sirius is about to have his soul removed, Harry sees a figure in the distance cast a powerful stag-shaped Patronus, scattering the Dementors and saving their lives. Harry believes the mysterious figure to be that of his father James.
Hermione reveals that she possesses a time-turner, which is how she has been taking multiple classes at once. She and Harry travel back in time three hours, watching themselves go through the night's events. They set Buckbeak free and return to the Whomping Willow. As the Dementors are about to attack the "other" Harry and Sirius, Harry realizes that he is the person who cast the Patronus, which gives him the confidence to do so now. Harry and Hermione rescue Sirius, who escapes on Buckbeak. At the end of the year, Lupin resigns, knowing that people will not allow a werewolf to teach their children. Later, Sirius sends Harry a Firebolt, an extremely fast racing broom.
The Description of the Picture:
The picture is a still from “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban». Harry Potter, Ron Wesley and Hermione Granger on the lookout from behind huge pumpkins to release Buckbeak unfairly sentenced to death thanks to Hermione time turner. The scene takes place in Hagrid garden.
Our Judgment of the Harry Potter movie’s and the novels:
We prefer the novels because in the movies, many scenes from the novels aren’t present and the actors from the movie bear no resemblance to the characters in the novel. Daniel Raddclife plays Harry Potter fairly badly. In the Harry Potter novels, I like J.K Rowling’s style and I love the novels which speak about fantasy and magic. The Harry Potter novels are a good story and I observe the wizard’s world is well described, it is a realistic description.
The Harry Potter’s Actors
Source: http://lycee-brassens.ac-reunion.fr/spip/IMG/doc/Lafrechoux_Magalie_Delamothe_Evelyne_207.doc
Web site to visit: http://lycee-brassens.ac-reunion.fr/
Author of the text: indicated on the source document of the above text
General notes on the series
The Harry Potter books were written by British writer Joanne Kathleen Rowling. They are an immensely popular series of fantasy novels depicting a world of witches and wizards. Unlike other well-known fantasy worlds (Lewis’s Narnia, Tolkien’s Middle-earth, Pratchett’s Discworld, or Le Guin’s Earthsea), Rowling’s world is “both utterly separate from and yet ultimately connected to our own world. (…) [It] exists alongside [our world] and many of its institutions and locations are in towns, such as London, that are recognisable to anyone” (Wikipedia). Initially, the publishers targeted the books at children from nine to eleven years of age, but as the time goes the story has gradually won the hearts of adults as well and gained a worldwide fame during the decade of its existence.
The series consists of seven books. However, only six have been published yet: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (June 26, 1997), Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (July 2, 1998), Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (September 8, 1999), Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (July 8, 2000), Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (June 21, 2003), and Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (July 16, 2005). The title of the seventh book, which is to finish and complete the story of the young bespectacled wizard, is still a secret and so is its publication date.
J.K. Rowling wrote two more books that are related to the series, though, strictly speaking, not really part of it: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2001), and Quidditch Through the Ages (2001). Both of them were mentioned in the series as fictional books. The first purports to be written by Newt Scamander and it is a copy of one of the textbooks used at Hogwarts school, the latter is presented as a work of Kennilworthy Whisp tracing the history of the famous wizards’ game. These two books were written to benefit the British charity Comic Relief (Wikipedia).
So far, the first four books were made into successful film adaptations produced by Warner Bros. According to the Internet Movie Database (www.imdb.com), they rank number four (Philosopher’s Stone), eight (Goblet of Fire), ten (Chamber of Secrets), and seventeen (Prisoner of Azkaban) in the list of all time highest-grossing films. Over 400 additional products were licensed under the Harry Potter brand, including five video games, a trading card game, and a board game. “Some elements of the story have even become part of the real world, for example the Bertie Bott’s Beans, under which name the Jelly Belly company sells real sweets.” . What is interesting from the linguistic point of view is the introduction of the word “Muggle” into English. It “has been accepted into the Oxford English Dictionary as ‘a person who lacks a particular skill or skills, or who is regarded as inferior in some way.’” (Wikipedia)
2.2 Criticism, praise and awards
The Harry Potter series has become one of the most beloved – but at the same time most criticised – works of children’s literature. At first the novels were incredibly positively reviewed, with only a few critical voices being heard. However, following the publication of the fifth book (Goblet of Fire) strong criticism aroused. “The complaints often aim at the fact that the books support occultism, Satanism, are violent and contain motives that criticise family life.” Some religious groups for example criticise the books for pagan imagery, feminist circles for its supposedly patriarchal and chauvinistic content, and A. S. Byatt virtually accused Rowling of plagiarism by calling her universe “secondary world, made up of intelligently patchworked derivative motifs from all sorts of children’s literature” (Wikipedia).
Nevertheless, J. K. Rowling and her books received a lot of various prestigious awards. They include:
four Whitaker Platinum Book Awards (all of which were awarded in 2001), three Nestlé Smarties Book Prizes (1997-1999), two Scottish Arts Council Book Awards (1999 and 2001), and the WHSmith book of the year (2006), among others. In 2000 Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban was nominated for Best Novel in the Hugo Awards while in 2001 Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire won said award. (Wikipedia)
2.3 Translations and translators
The series is also popular in its many translations. According to the article “Harry Potter in Translation” available on the Wikipedia website, the books have been translated into 66 languages, including Latin and Ancient Greek, which were done as academic exercises. “[I]n some countries, such as Spain and India, the book has been translated into several local languages (…), sometimes the book has been translated into two different dialects of the same language in two different countries (for example, separate Portuguese versions for Brazil and Portugal).”
The official translation of Harry Potter books – as well as films – into Czech is done by Vladimír and Pavel Medek. Vladimír translated the first, second and fourth book as Harry Potter a Kámen mudrců (2000), Harry Potter a Tajemná komnata (2000), and Harry Potter a Ohnivý pohár (2001) respectively. Pavel translated the third, fifth and sixth book as Harry Potter a Vězeň z Azkabanu (2001), Harry Potter a Fénixův řád (February 29, 2004), and Harry Potter a Princ dvojí krve (December 19, 2005). He translated also the two additional fictional books that were published under the titles of Famfrpál v průběhu věků (2001), and Fantastická zvířata a kde je najít (2002).
Into the Slovak language the books were, coincidentally, translated by two women: Jana Petrikovičová did the first two books: Harry Potter a Kameň mudrcov (2000), and Harry Potter a Tajomná komnata (2001). Oľga Kralovičová translated the rest of the books: Harry Potter a Väzeň z Azkabanu (2001), Harry Potter a Ohnivá čaša (2001), Harry Potter a Fénixov rád (2003), and Harry Potter a Polovičný princ (2005) plus one of the fictional books (Fantastické zvery a ich výskyt – published in 2001). However, the second fictional book – Metlobal v priebehu vekov (2001) – was translated by another translator: Martin Kasadra.
In an enquiry, which took place in Czech libraries and on the Internet during the year 2004, Czech readers voted Harry Potter the most popular book. (Seznam Encyklopedie). A list of various prizes and awards is available on the website of the International Board on Books for Young People (IBBY) in the Czech Republic. The Harry Potter books (in Czech translation) were awarded several prizes in the readers’ research called “SUK – All of us read ” (SUK - Čteme všichni). The table below with its listing speaks volumes about the popularity of the story and, implicitly, about the quality of the translation.
Book “Children’s award“ (Cena dětí) Other
Harry Potter a Kámen mudrců 1st in 2000 "Award of the librarians of the Club of children's libraries SKIP" (Cena knihovníků Klubu dětských knihoven SKIP) – 1st in 2000
8th in 2002 "Award of the Night with Andersen (Cena Noci s Andersenem) in 2002
Harry Potter a Tajemná komnata 4th in 2000 Award of the Night with Andersen (Cena Noci s Andersenem) in 2002
5th in 2002
4th in 2003
Harry Potter a Vězeň z Azkabanu 2nd in 2001 Award of the Night with Andersen (Cena Noci s Andersenem) in 2002
6th in 2002
8th in 2003
16th in 2004
Harry Potter a Ohnivý pohár 1st in 2001 Award of the Night with Andersen (Cena Noci s Andersenem) in 2002
2nd in 2002
1st in 2003
Harry Potter a Fénixův řád 1st in 2004
Harry Potter a Princ dvojí krve 1st in 2005
Table 1: Awards for the books in Czech
In 2000, of the twenty award-winning books only four were translations: two Harry Potter books, Astrid Lindgren’s The Six Bullerby Children (13th-14th), and a book by Christiane Gohl (18th). The top ranking Czech originals were Zdeněk Miler’s Krtek a raketa (2 nd) and Miloš Macourek’s Mach a Šebestová na cestách (3 rd). In 2001, it was ten original works to ten translations (the top two being Rowling’s/Medeks’ works, followed closely by another work by Gohl and Lindgren’s Pippi Longstocking and Bullerby Children). In 2002, with two Harry Potter movies and two Lord of the Rings movies having been released, the awards were presented to four Harry Potter books and three Tolkien’s works (Hobbit – 7th, Fellowship of the Ring – 3rd, and Two Towers – 16th). Total number of the translations on the list was eleven in that year. In 2003, only six of the books were Czech originals – the top one was Zdeněk Svěrák’s work (Jaké je to asi v Čudu) that ranked number two. The 2004 list included thirteen translations comprising again books about Harry Potter, and Enid Blyton and Astrid Lindgren’s works (these two authors were awarded a prize almost every year). In 2005, only three books were awarded: Harry Potter a princ dvojí krve, Jiří Kahoun’s Včelí medvídci od jara do zimy, and C. S. Lewis’s Letopisy Narnie: Lev, čarodějnice a skříň (Lion, the witch and the wardrobe). I believe that these awards illustrate the trends in children literature and it might be, therefore, interesting to have a look at this in a few years time to see, whether the popularity of the books was caused by their quality or by the media propagation and marketing strategy only.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Collection of the relevant terms within the series
For the purpose of research and analysis a collection of relevant data was needed. These I gathered from the six books on Harry Potter by J. K. Rowling (for the list see chapter 2) and their respective translations into Czech. For the purpose of comparison I also explored the Slovak translations made by Jana Petrikovičová and Oľga Kralovičová. I wanted to include data from the two fictional books as well, because the Fantastic Beasts “[describe] 75 magical species found around the world“ (Wikipedia), and that means a lot of new words from one field with which the translator had to deal. The Quidditch book would have been a great asset too, I believe, because it delves into the history of the sport and, if I am not mistaken, that would bring a lot of previously unknown terms into the light: for example the origins of the word “quidditch” are explained. Unfortunately, these two books seem to be impossible to get in the Czech Republic; the English originals are available only via foreign internet shops and, as far as I know, the Czech translations are out of stock and another publication is not planned any more.
In the process of collecting the data I did not use any special research method; I simply read through the books and when I spotted a word meeting my requirements I noted it down. The requirements were as follows: it was a name of a person (and I also included pet names) or a place; or – given by the fact that I was looking for neologisms – it denoted a creature, plant, magical object, potion or spell. I also excerpted a group of book and magazine titles, because their number in the books is large and they are worth noting. When looking for the equivalents in translations, I compared the context of the original with that of the translation; therefore, I am confident that each threesome of terms in the table is 100 percent correct.
3.1 Notes on and explanation of the table
All the data I collected for and used in the work is to be found in the extensive table appended at the end of my thesis. The table consists of several columns for the original term, Czech translation, and Slovak translation. Next to these, I also provided the page numbers for easy reference. Generally speaking, I tried to write down the first occurrence of the term in the series. I suppose I managed to find majority of the terms in the books that were relevant to me. However, I admit that a few terms could have passed unnoticed.
To facilitate orientation, comparison, and analysis I divided the data into several categories: names of people, names of places, titles of books, magical items, and miscellaneous. These I labelled with general words for the purpose of further specification and division (see Table 1 below). The boundary between groups (and subgroups in particular) was not always clear and some of the terms were hard to pigeon-hole; take Eldred Worple (Half-Blood Prince), for example, who is introduced to the reader as professor Slughorn’s former student and the famous author of a book about vampires.
Group Subgroup Group Subgroup
Names of People Student Titles of Books Periodical
Staff Law
Writer (other)
Fictional Figure Magical Items Plant
Ghost Creature
Nickname Potion
Pet Spell
(other) Formula
Names of Places Address Miscellaneous Food, Broom…
Facility
Educational Institution
(other)
Table 2: Division of the terms into groups and subgroups
I think it is necessary to explain what the particular subgroups contain and why. Let me start with the proper names, where I included names of people and places. The “Student” subgroup is rather self-explanatory; it contains names of students of magic: Harry’s contemporaries as well as ex-students. By the term “Staff” I labelled people working in the Hogwarts school, people working for the Ministry of magic and/or for the Order of the Phoenix (i.e. secret organization working against the dark side alongside the ministry), deatheaters (i.e. supporters of the dark side), and people who own or work in a magical facility such as a shop or a pub. The third category – “Fictional Figure” – includes names of various figures appearing in books, pictures or as statues; they are supposed to be part of the history of the magical community and they help to create the atmosphere of the world of wizards and witches. I decided not to include the names of authors of books into this subgroup, but rather establish a separate group for them (“Writer”), because their names have special connotations usually referring to the subject of the book – they name as well as mean. The remaining subgroups under the “Names of People” heading are rather narrow and I would say it is obvious what they contain: “Ghost”, “Pet“, and “Nickname”. These three subgroups were created mainly because the names did not fit into any other category, but still I thought they should be distinguished from the rest of names of people that appear only once or twice in the story and do not play any significant role (for example muggle – i.e. nonmagic – TV broadcaster, or professor Gilderoy Lockhart’s fans). Under the heading “Names of Places”, there are the following categories: “Address” (villages, streets and other places that can appear in the address), “Facility” (anything providing some sort of service: pubs, shops, candy store, bank…), and “Educational Institution” (in other words names of schools, magical as well as nonmagical).
The second large group is that of neologisms. The “Magical Item” group consists of five subgroups: “Plant”, “Creature”, “Potion”, “Spell”, and “Formula”. I believe that these terms do not need any particular explanation as it is evident what they are used to label. However, it should probably be noted that the word “Spell” labels the names of spells (e.g. Killing Curse), whereas “Formula” is the actual wording of the spell (in this case Avada Kedavra). The rest of the terms that come under the neologisms can be found in the “Miscellaneous” group (mainly labelled as magical objects). However, apart from the terms that definitely classify as neologisms (horcrux, pensieve), this group includes also various words that did not fit into the other groups and subgroups and, strictly speaking, are not new in the language, such as trade names of Fred and George Weasleys’ products. Unlike in other groups, the subdivision of this category – where available – does not serve the purpose of further specification (there are not enough similar terms to justify establishment of separate subgroups), but exists rather to give the reader at least a slight notion of what the term means.
4. THEORETICAL BASIS
4.1 Newmark’s theory
I will base the analysis of the collected data on Peter Newmark’s theory of translation, because – though he might be looked down on by some people for trying to introduce a pragmatic theory into a field of study, which seems to be based to a large degree on intuition and a natural taste in language – as far as I know, he is the only one who provides in his work a list of various translation methods and procedures; and that is what I was looking for, because I needed a base for my research and such a complex scale seemed to be a very good start.
In the introductory chapter of A Textbook of Translation Newmark stresses that:
[a] translator has to have a flair and a feel for his own language. There is nothing mystical about this “sixth sense”, but it is compounded of intelligence, sensitivity and intuition, as well as of knowledge. This sixth sense, which often comes into play during a final revision, tells you when to translate literally, and also, instinctively, perhaps once in a hundred or three hundred words, when to break all the “rules” of translation (…). (4)
With this I cannot but agree; especially in the field of translation of fictional literature, where (unlike in technical translation) the exactitude is not the most important criterion but where the readability and authenticity in the target language come to play important roles. It is here where the difference between a translator with excellent knowledge of the foreign language but rather poor sense of his or her mother tongue and a translator with a natural feeling for words would be probably most obvious – with the latter’s work being definitely more enjoyable for the reader.
Considering this, it seems that fictional works cannot be analysed using a set of procedures. However, I believe that every translator, when translating, has a concept or scheme in his or her mind of how he/she would deal with various issues that may occur in the process, such as new words or characters’ names; even though this might be only subconscious and not planned beforehand. “[The translator] is intuitively or consciously following a theory of translation, just as any teacher of grammar teaches a theory of linguistics” (Newmark, 8).
In his Textbook Peter Newmark deals with both translation methods and translation procedures. He says in the book that “while translation methods relate to whole texts, translation procedures are used for sentences and the smaller units of language” (81). Therefore, I will not discuss the translation methods at all and focus on the procedures only, because my thesis deals with the translation of individual words (neologisms and proper nouns) not with the analysis of whole sentences or the general quality of translation. Below, I will provide a few pieces of information on each of the procedures.
4.2 Introduction to the individual procedures
In chapters 7 and 8 (68-93), Newmark discusses the following procedures: literal translation, transference, naturalisation, cultural equivalent, functional equivalent, descriptive equivalent, synonymy, through-translation, shifts or transpositions, modulation, recognized translation, translation label, compensation, componential analysis, reduction and expansion, paraphrase, other procedures (equivalence and adaptation), couplets, and notes, additions, glosses. Let us, then, move to the individual procedures and make projections about whether they are of any use in translation of fiction and whether the translators of Harry Potter books used them. All the facts in the following sections (notes on the individual procedures) are based on Newmark’s A Textbook of Translation even though it may not be explicitly stated in the relevant paragraphs.
4.2.1 Literal translation
As Newmark says, literal translation is the basic translation procedure, both in communicative and semantic translation, in that translation starts from there. However, above the word level, literal translation becomes increasingly difficult. When any kind of translation problem arises, literal translation is usually out of the question. On the other hand, “literal translation above the word level is the only correct procedure, if the [source language (hereafter SL)] and [target language (hereafter TL)] meaning correspond, or correspond more closely than any alternative; that means (…) that the words not only refer to the same ‘thing’ but have similar associations and appear to be equally frequent in this type of text”. Literal translation ranges from one word to one word to sentence to sentence, includes single-word metaphors, extended plural-word metaphors as well as proverbs (‘all that glitters is not gold’, není všechno zlato, co se třpytí). Newmark extends literal translation also to correspondence such as un bilan sanguine, ‘a blood check’, since it can be flexible with grammar whilst it keeps the same ‘extra-contextual lexis’.
4.2.2 Transference
First of the procedures alternative to literal translation is transference, in other words transcription. It is the process of transferring a word from a SL to a TL. In this way the word then becomes a “loan word”. Newmark claims that “in principle, the names of SL objects, inventions, devices, processes to be imported into the TL community should be creatively (…) translated, if they are neologisms, although brand names have to be transferred (81).” Among other things that are normally transferred are names of living people and most dead people, and geographical and topographical names.
This procedure is often used in the Harry Potter translation and examples are “Jim McGuffin”, “Rubeus Hagrid”, or “Adalbert Waffling”, where no change in the spelling occurs. It should be noted that the pronunciation of some of the names in Czech differs from that in English (which is caused mainly by the Czech readers’ unawareness of the “correct” pronunciation). Owing to this, such names could qualify as members of the naturalisation group (see definition below). However, I believe that translators are not responsible for the way foreign-looking names are pronounced in the target languages by the readers, because – speaking about written documents – they do not have many (if any) means of influencing it. Therefore, I will not deal with such border cases in this work and will treat the names without any change in the spelling as transferred names.
4.2.3 Naturalisation
Naturalisation succeeds transference. It is the adaptation of the SL word to the normal pronunciation of the target language and then to its normal morphology.
Again, this procedure is used abundantly in the series. All female names (surnames) would fit in here due to the “–ová” suffix traditionally used in the Czech language (e.g. “Molly Weasley” translated as “Molly Weasleyová”, or “Susan Bones” as “Susan Bonesová”). Where a combination of letters unnatural for the target language – Czech in this case – occurs (th, ph, etc.), naturalisation usually takes places, resulting in pairs such as “Bathilda”–“Batylda” and “Nymphadora” – “Nymfadora”.
4.2.4 Cultural equivalent
Cultural equivalent is “an approximate translation where a SL cultural word is translated by a TL cultural word” (82-3). The use of such equivalents is limited, since the translations are not accurate, but only approximate. The examples are following: “baccalauréat” translated as “(the French) A level”, or “Palais Bourbon” as “(the French) Westminster”.
4.2.5 Functional equivalent
This is a common procedure applied to cultural words. It “requires the use of a culture-free word, sometimes with a new specific term” (83). This is according to Newmark the most accurate way of translating a cultural word. “A similar procedure is used when a SL technical word has no TL equivalent. (…) For cultural terms, it is often combined with transference” (83) – to such combination Newmark refers as a “couplet”.
4.2.6 Descriptive equivalent
This procedure is not explained in much detail by Newmark. He only notes that “description sometimes has to be weighed against function” (83) and that “description and function are essential elements in explanation and therefore in translation (84).”
4.2.7 Synonymy
Newmark uses the word synonym in the sense of “a near TL equivalent to an SL word in a context, where a precise equivalent may or may not exist. This procedure is used for a SL word where there is no clear one-to-one equivalent, and the word is not important in the text” (84). Synonymy is used mainly for adjectives and adverbs of quality, which are beyond the scope of my work.
4.2.8 Through-translation
Through-translation is Newmark’s term for calque or loan translation, which is “the literal translation of common collocations, names of organisations, the components of compounds (…) and perhaps phrases”.
An example from the Harry Potter story is the translation of the name of the French school of magic “Beauxbatons” as “Krásnohůlky”, where the French components of the word are translated literally: “beaux” meaning “beautiful”(”krásné” in Czech), and “batons” meaning “sticks”, or ”wands” in this case (“hůlky” in Czech).
4.2.9 Shifts or transpositions
A shift or transposition is a translation procedure involving a change in the grammar from SL to TL. Newmark lists four types of transpositions. One type, which does not offer the translator any choice, is the automatic change from singular to plural, or in the position of adjective. The second type is required when an SL grammatical structure does not exist in the TL. The third type of shift is the one where literal translation is grammatically possible but may not accord with natural usage in the TL. The fourth type is the replacement of a virtual lexical gap by a grammatical structure. Newmark claims that “[t]ransposition is the only translation procedure concerned with grammar, and most translators make transpositions intuitively.” (88) This procedure is not used in the process of translating neologisms and proper nouns.
4.2.10 Modulation
The term “modulation” was coined by Vinay and Darbelnet to define “a variation through a change of viewpoint, of perspective and very often of category of thought” (88). This procedure comprises several categories, but Newmark speaks about only a few of them. It seems to deal with larger units of translation than individual words and I, therefore, think it is not relevant for this work.
4.2.11 Recognised translation
Newmark emphasizes that it is important to “use the official or the generally accepted translation of any institutional term” (89), because change of the term may cause confusion, especially in official or serious informative texts. This procedure seems to be rather problematic. I thought about placing some of the English names into this group, because they have sort of equivalents in Czech (“Petunia” – “Petúnie”, “Celestina” – “Celestýna”, or “Alicia” – “Alice”). However, there are more possible frames of reference; these names could be regarded as naturalised versions of the foreign words, or cultural equivalents. It is not always obvious where the borderline between the procedures is. Therefore, as it is probably rather an issue of consistency within the translation, I will postpone the conclusion about the use of this procedure for the time being.
4.2.12 Translation label
Translation label is a provisional translation, usually of a new institutional term, which should be put, according to Newmark, in inverted commas that can later be discreetly withdrawn. I believe that this way of translating a previously untranslated word is not used in fiction very often, even if the word in question is an institutional term.
4.2.13 Compensation
This is said to occur when loss of meaning, sound-effect, metaphor or pragmatic effect in one part of a sentence is compensated in another part, or in a contiguous sentence. Presence of this procedure in the translation of Rowling’s work would have to be discussed in the larger context of the whole series (or book at least), with the stress on the use of alliteration and puns. As I directed the focus of my thesis from the beginning on individual words, I cannot explore this issue in satisfactory detail.
4.2.14 Componential analysis
Componential analysis in translation is not the same as componential analysis in linguistics, where it means analysing or splitting up the various senses of a word into sense-components, which may or may not be universals. In translation, “the basic process is to compare a SL word with a TL word, which has a similar meaning but is not an obvious one-to-one equivalent, by demonstrating first their common and then their differing sense components”. (114) Componential analysis is useful in translating neologisms, whether these are new words naming newly invented or imported objects or processes, or new expressions that suddenly fill one of the innumerable gaps in a language.
4.2.15 Reduction and Expansion
These are, as Newmark says, “rather imprecise translation procedures” (90), which are practised intuitively or ad hoc. In simple terms, reduction implies omission of a word from an expression, that word not being essential for understanding; whereas expansion is a rather descriptive way of translating an expression and involves the use of a greater number of words in TL than in SL.
4.2.16 Paraphrase
Paraphrase is “an amplification or explanation of the meaning of a segment of the text. It is used in an ‘anonymous’ text when it is poorly written, or has important implications and omissions.” (90)
4.2.17 Other procedures
Under the heading Other procedures Newmark lists Equivalence and Adaptation. Both of these terms were established by Vinay and Darbelnet. Equivalence seems to refer to “notices, familiar alternatives, phrases and idioms – in other words, different ways of rendering the clichés and standard aspects of language” (91). Adaptation is the use of a recognised equivalent between two situations. Newmark notes that though these two procedures might be illuminating to some extent they are not usable.
4.2.18 Couplets
Couplets, triplets, and quadruplets simply combine two, three or four of the above-mentioned procedures respectively for dealing with a single problem. The most common use is for cultural words, the combination being transference with a functional or a cultural equivalent.
4.2.19 Notes, additions, glosses
Lastly, Newmark makes some suggestions about notes and supplying additional information in translation: “The additional information a translator may have to add to his version is normally cultural (…), technical (…) or linguistic (…) and is dependent on the requirements of his, as opposed to the original, readership.” (91) I believe this is rather clear and uncomplicated; therefore, I will not delve into it any longer. I would like to add that the Czech translators of Harry Potter are not in favour of notes, because, as one of them says, it shows that the translator could not cope with the problem and it disturbs the smoothness of the text.
5. ANALYSIS
Czech translations of Harry Potter are thought very highly of not only by the readers, who might be, to be honest, a bit partial, but also by people from literary circles. Prof. Svatava Urbanová sums up why the Medeks’ works are so popular:
It is an excellent work, especially in the characters and places naming. The Czech translation is extraordinary due to the limited use of foreign words, the number of allusions, word plays and anagrams it contains, (…) the fact that the translators skilfully invented name not only for the sport game Quidditch etc., that they keep the key words – Latin for example – used in charms, jinxes and curses, so that a change of the meaning would not occur (…).
J. K. Rowling uses irony, satire, wordplay, and folklore very often in her books and thus the Harry Potter series presents special challenges to translators. According to the article “Harry Potter in translation”, these challenges are culture, language, invented words, and proper nouns. “The cultural environment of the book is decidedly English (…) and many of the cultural nuances will be unfamiliar to readers in translation.” However, I do not think it is so dramatic; the story is not supposed to be changed to fit completely the culture of the reader (Czech in this case), i.e. to look as if the story took place in the reader’s country, and the translators, therefore, make only minor amendments concerning the culture (some special types of English food are changed so that they are more familiar to the reader – Yorkshire pudding, for example). As far as I know, there is only one translator’s note in the series: in the first book, Vladimír Medek made a note explaining the term “prefect”, because such a function is connected to boarding schools and really is not known to Czech children.
The second problematic area is that of language, because language generally “reveals much about the various characters” (Wikipedia). In my opinion, the biggest problem is probably Hagrid’s manner of speaking – he has to have a non-standard pronunciation and lexicon, and, at the same time, one special dialect should not be decipherable in his speech, so that it is not possible to connect him incorrectly with any area in the Czech Republic for example. The two remaining instances, that is to say proper nouns and invented words, will be discussed further in subchapters 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 respectively.
Finally, I would like to add one thing that influences the process of translation and makes it more problematic: the time pressure exerted on the translators by publishers and readers. As Pavel Medek says, this pressure is also the reason why there are two Czech translators for one series, in fact:
when the fourth book was being published in English, mass hysteria broke out and Albatros wanted to make up for the lag quickly. At that moment, we were [translating] the second book; hence, it was necessary to translate the two remaining books in a hurry.
5.1. Notes relating to the translation of proper nouns and neologisms
5.1.1 Proper nouns
Generally the translation of names is easier than that of neologisms. It is because the name is only a label for a person, a sticker that helps us stay in the picture and follow the storyline. Even when the name has a special meaning, it refers to the bearer’s character only and, translated or not, does not influence the plot significantly; it simply enhances the story and attracts the readers by supplying them with stuff to think about, creating opportunities for possible associations and assumptions about the person’s qualities, shortcomings, temperament and character.
To translate proper nouns in the Harry Potter books seems to be risky, because “Rowling creates names that usually contain several meanings. All the books are stuffed with these names and they provide some of the series’ greatest pleasures for adult readers.” Various sources, including Rowling’s own website, state that she has a semi-detailed plan of the storyline written since 1990, when the idea first occurred to her. This plan includes “the plots for each of the seven envisioned books, in addition to an enormous amount of biographical and historical information on her characters and universe” (Wikipedia). This might prove to pose problems for translators, because while the author knows why she devised such and such name for such and such character, or whether a seemingly unimportant thing will become of major importance further in the story, the translator is usually kept in the dark.
One problem of such nature concerning the real name of Voldemort might possibly arise in the seventh book, if Rowling plans to play with the significant word “riddle”. In the second book, the translators had to deal with the fact that the sentence “I am Lord Voldemort” is an anagram of the said wizard’s full name “Tom Marvolo Riddle”. In Czech, the name was changed to “Tom Rojvol Raddle” (Já Lord Voldemort) resulting in the loss of meaning of the surname. Nevertheless, this happens in many languages, for example in French the name is “Tom Elvis Jedusor”. The Slovak translator changed it to “Tom Marvoloso Riddle” (A som i Lord Voldemort), thus retaining the possibility for future play on words open. (For examples of solutions in other languages see the article “Lord Voldemort” on the Wikipedia site.)
This required change of name presents additional problems; for example Tom Riddle should share his first name with Tom the bartender (Half-Blood Prince), but this is not the case in all languages (his first name is “Mark” in Slovenian, “Marten” in Dutch, and “Romeo” in Danish, for example). Moreover, in the case of Tom the bartender, the name cannot be changed to be the same as Riddle’s, because he has already appeared in the previous books.
5.1.2 Neologisms
Neologisms can be defined as newly coined lexical units or existing lexical units that acquire a new sense. They usually attract everyone and most people like them (140). Newmark stresses that in non-literary texts, translators should not normally create neologisms. However, he also states when the translator has the right to do so:
Firstly, in a literary text, it is his duty to re-create any neologism he meets on the basis of the SL neologism (…). Secondly, when translating a popular advertisement, he can create a neologism, usually with a strong phonaesthetic effect, if it appears to follow the sense of its SL ‘counterpart’ and is pragmatically effective. Thirdly, he can transfer an SL cultural word, if for one reason or another he thinks it important. (149)
As was already hinted, invented words are extremely difficult to translate. A lot of words and phrases including spell and incantation formulations, magical items, creatures and plants are the work of Rowling’s imagination. Many of the spells, for example, “are drawn from or inspired by Latin, and have a certain resonance with English speakers. For example, priori incantatem, (a spell which causes the last spells performed by a wand to be reproduced in reverse order), would be familiar to many English-speaking readers as the words prior (‘previous’) and incant (‘recite, utter’)” (Wikipedia). The Czech translators have created several new words themselves (“Repellentus” for “Impervius”, “Pulírexo” for “Scourgify”, or “Ševelissimo” for “Muffliato”), but usually they have resorted to transference.
5.2 Analysis of proper nouns and neologisms
When I was planning this thesis, I thought (rather naively, I must admit) that if I take Newmark’s theory as a base, it would be a smooth ride. I imagined dividing the terms into groups by procedures used, counting the number of occurrences and drawing conclusions from these results. However, as I started to delve into the theory more deeply, I realised that it is not at all as systematic as it seemed at the first sight. Several procedures overlap, and it is almost always possible to look at the terms in question from various angles. I was, thus, forced to refrain from the envisioned method and had to find an alternative. Finally, I decided to stick to the idea of creating a table, but change the actual division into groups.
I tried to divide the terms by their appearance, i.e. whether and how they were changed in the process of translation, if we compare the original and the Czech term, rather then the procedures used, because, as I already said, the procedures were sometimes overlapping and sometimes even impossible to recognise. I established several categories to create a scale ranging from no change of the word at all to the translation, which is not based on the original word, but on the meaning of the term learned from the context. The scale is as follows: No change > Minor change > Existing word – translated literally > Existing word – not translated literally > Component meaning – translated literally > Meaning equivalent. I was not sure about where to place several terms, therefore, I included them in a separate group called Not identified. When assorting the terms into these groups I usually checked the word in Internet dictionaries (I used the OneLook Dictionary Search that works as a search engine) to find whether they exist or not. In case they did not exist I always looked for a possible component meaning. However, the borderline was not, again, always clear and it is possible that some of the terms could be included in a different group than that I included it in.
As for the distribution of procedures, it is difficult to say which procedures specifically are used in the groups – I would have to comment on each and every term individually to explain and clarify what makes me think the translator used such and such procedure; and that is virtually impracticable as I collected nearly a thousand of various terms, not including about 100 of book titles. I can thus make only several notes concerning what is quite clear. Obviously, almost all of the terms in “no change” group will be transferred. “Minor change” will consist mainly of naturalised terms and possibly recognized translations. “Existing word – translated literally” would be accounted for by literal translation. But in the remaining groups I am not sure, because the procedures overlap and could probably be used in more of them. From what I have experienced in the process of analysing the terms, I would say that descriptive equivalent may be one of the procedures used when translating terms from the “existing word – not translated literally” group, while “through-translation” tends to dominate “component meaning – translated literally” group; expansion is, I believe, used mainly for spell and potion names translation (e.g. “Unforgivable Curses” – “kletby, které se nepromíjejí”). Nevertheless, I think that even if I managed to assign more of the procedures to the groups, the list would never be exclusive.
5.2.1 Proper nouns
In the process of translation into Czech, approximately 47 % of the names of people in the Harry Potter series are not changed at all, i.e. they are transferred. 30 % of the names are only slightly changed, mainly as a result of the Czech -ová ending of the female surnames; i.e. they are naturalised. However, the transference and naturalisation procedures may not be the only procedures used here; for example, some of the names of famous witches and wizards that appear on the Chocolate Frogs collectible cards could be regarded as recognized translations, in fact. This would be the case of Merlin and Morgana, both of whom are well-known figures from the Arthurian legends, or of the astronomer Ptolemy.
The student subgroup is one of the largest subgroups of the names-of-people group. 56.5 % of the names are transferred, and about 40 % are naturalised. All of the sixty-one transferred names are names of boys. Thirty-six of the forty-three naturalised names are girls’ names; of the remaining seven names one is actually a typo (“Sebbins” instead of “Stebbins”; curiously enough, the Slovaks made a mistake too, resulting in “Stebbind”), one is a result of transcription of a Bulgarian name (Poljakoff – Poljakov) and the rest can be accounted for by the fact that either an uncommon letter at the end of the word or a combination of letters not common in the Czech language was present (Barnabas – Barnabáš, Theodore – Teodor).
Only four names are not members of the no-change and minor-change groups. The first is “Lavender Brown” (Levandule Brownová), which I decided to include in the “existing word – translated literally” group due to the translation of her first name. The Second is “Luna Lovegood”, a term from the “component meaning – translated literally” group. The surname is a two-component compound and as such it was translated into Czech. However, there is one reason why “Luna” is translated as “Lenka”. As this character is thought to be a weirdo by Hogwarts students, she has been given a nickname: Loony Lovegood. Because similar change is probably not realizable in Czech, her first name was translated as Lenka to rhyme with “Střelenka”, thus creating a nice and very likely nickname. In Slovak, this wordplay was completely ignored and the name and nickname, for want of a better word, is the same (Luna Lovegoodová).
The two remaining students’ names were included in the not-identified group, but it is, actually, known why they were translated in such a way. One of the names is “Tom Marvolo Riddle”, which I commented on at the beginning of this chapter and whose translation was motivated by the anagram important for the plot. The second name is “Eileen Prince”. In the sixth book, Harry finds a schoolbook with the following inscription: “This Book is the Property of the Half-Blood Prince” (183), in Czech: “Tato kniha je majetkem Prince dvojí krve” (161). The characters then speculate whose book it might be, and, as gender is not distinguishable in English, it is suggested that the owner could possibly be a girl. The translators needed to find a solution to preserve this obscurity; the result in Czech is the creation of an alternative name “Eileen Prince-Lloydová”. Though I appreciate how Messrs Medeks dealt with this issue, I cannot help thinking that “Princ-Lloydová” would be even slightly better.
I believe that the reason for such distribution of procedures among the names of students is that the story has an undoubtedly British setting and, as a result, also British students. Thus, it would not be appropriate if the characters had Czech-like names, especially as we know that they travel to school each year by a train that goes from the existing King’s Cross Station in London.
The second large subgroup is that of the names of staff. The ratio is almost the same as in the case of students: 42 % of names were transferred and 33 % naturalised – if we allow ourselves to ignore possible disputable instances and use these terms. The only difference is the number of terms that are translated in the truest sense of the word (twenty-eight of one hundred and fourteen terms). Three names are translated literally: “Albus Dumbledore” (Albus Brumbál), his brother “Aberforth Dumbledore” and “Elphias Doge” (Elfias Dóže). The last seems to be rather easy – actually, it is a dictionary equivalent. What was the subject of many questions concerning the translation of names in Harry Potter was why “Dumbledore” is translated as “Brumbál”. I checked up on the once-heard information and can confirm that they are both archaic expressions for bumblebee.
In the group “existing word – not translated literally” I included seven names consisting of words that exist in English, but which are translated loosely. An example is “Cornelius Fudge” that translates as “Kornelius Popletal”. Here, the translator decided to change the surname, so that it described the character. However, I believe that “Popletal” is not the best choice. As is obvious in the later books, especially after Voldemort returns, Fudge is very career-conscious and unwilling to endanger his position as prime minister. Instead of dealing with problems, he dodges them; because he is afraid of what would happen if Voldemort returned, he prefers to pretend that nothing has happened. He is not a scatterbrain or a muddle-headed person as the Czech surname suggests; he fudges the unpleasant situations and issues deliberately.
Next group (“component meaning – translated literally”) includes compounds whose component or components are translated literally. Good examples are a ministry employee “Proudfoot” (Hrdonožka) and werewolf “Fenrir Greyback” (Fenrir Šedohřbet), where the through-translation procedure is actually used.
The last group on the scale is the meaning-equivalent group. Here are either names whose English component is not translated literally, or names whose translation is not based on the original word, but on the context. “Cuthbert Mockridge” (Cuthbert Jakopec) and “Madam Puddifoot” (madame Pacinková) would probably qualify as examples of the first eventuality, while “Mad-Eye Moody” (Pošuk Moody) and “Rufus Scrimgeour” (Rufus Brousek) translations are definitely based on the context only. As for “Rufus Scrimgeour”, Pavel Medek said that “[it is] a name of some Scottish family and, strictly speaking, it does not mean anything”. Therefore, there is no reason to translate it. But he adds: “[s]till, as this minister succeeds Popletal [i.e. Fudge], it would be very strange if it was all of a sudden someone called Scrimgeour” . Unfortunately, the character called Scrimgeour appeared in the fifth book already, and was left untranslated. I do not know whether Mr Medek simply overlooked Scrimgeour’s first appearance in the story, or whether he deliberately decided to ignore it and translate his name in the sixth book, where the character plays a more important role; nevertheless, I think that when the translator decides for some kind of solution, they should be consistent with it as much as possible during the rest of the work.
Now, I will move to the much smaller groups of names I established: writers, fictional figures, nicknames, pets and ghosts. None of these includes more than thirty items and it is, therefore, impossible to draw conclusions concerning the use of procedures. As a result, I will make only a few comments on things I found interesting or important. The reason for excluding writers from the fictional-figures group and establishing a separate group for them seems rather unfounded now. Initially, I thought that the group of writers would be more prominent due to the fact that about a hundred of various books are mentioned in the series; I also expected the majority of the names to be translated. However, the group finally comprises only thirteen names and only seven of them are translated. The only terms that support my hypothesis that names of writers name as well as mean, because they refer to the subject of their books, are “Emeric Switch” (Emeric Cvak), who wrote a transfiguration schoolbook; “Phyllida Spore” (Phyllida Výtrusová), author of a book about herbology; and “Newt Scamander” (Mlok Scamander), author of Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them.
Half of the names from the “fictional figure” group are translated. These names are of no real importance for the plot, but they are successful in creating the atmosphere of an alternative world with its own history. Rowling very often uses alliteration when creating a name, examples from other groups would be “Parvati Patil”, “Filius Flitwick”, or three of the founders of the school: “Rowena Ravenclaw”, “Helga Hufflepuff”, and “Salazar Slytherin”. In Czech translation, alliteration is not generally preserved, because it is not commonly used in routine texts (unlike in English). However, in the case of the names of fictional figures the translators had a rather free hand as to what to do with these names and they often tried not only to translate the comical meaning of the name, but they also kept the alliterative form. Thus, “Urg the Unclean” becomes “Šour Špinavec”, “Lachlan the Lanky” is “Valerián Vyzáblý”, and “Wilfred the Wistful” is translated as “Zachariáš Zadumaný”. As I got on the theme of alliteration here, it is also worth noting the name of the permanently bewailing ghost of a girl called “Moaning Myrtle” that became “Ufňukaná Uršula” in Czech.
Nicknames are usually translated using information from the context, as is quite predictable. The best-known nicknames from Harry Potter books are: Moony, Padfoot, Prongs, and Wormtail. As their bearers were able to change into animals at will, these nicknames indicate what kind of animals they were. “Moony” (Náměsíčník) is the nickname of the werewolf Remus J. Lupin – moon being the element that rules his life; also note that the surname is actually a form of Latin word for “wolf” and “Remus” refers to one of the founders of Rome that were nursed by a she-wolf. “Padfoot” (Tichošlápek) is a compound of “pad” and “foot” suggesting that the animal (dog actually), whose shape Sirius Black can take at will, can walk very quietly. Moreover, the name Sirius is the name of a star, also called “Dog Star”, found in the constellation Canis Major. “Prongs” (Dvanácterák) is the nickname of Harry’s father James and is translated rather freely into Czech; the term is also more specifying than the original. “Wormtail” (Červíček), a nickname for Peter Pettigrew, who changes into a rat, refers to the actual similarity of a rat’s tail to a worm (earthworm comes to my mind). And unless I am much mistaken, the surname could be regarded as a compound of a French word “petit” meaning “small” and the English verb “grow”, thus telling us something about the character’s appearance and possibly also his mental character.
Pet and ghost names do not seem to contain anything particularly important to note. The groups are too small to make any conclusion concerning the use of procedures possible. What remains is the “Other” subgroup. These are mainly people that do not recur in the story or serve only as a crowd, such as muggles, Quidditch players, and distant relatives. Almost 54 % of these names are left untouched, transferred; about 35 % are naturalised (or otherwise, slightly changed). The only term I would like to point out here is the name of a house-elf called “Kreacher” (Krátura). I cannot but like this name and its translation. “Kreacher” is homophonous with “creature” and similarly the Czech equivalent “Krátura” is semi-homophonous with the word “kreatura”. Apart from containing the pun the name is also descriptive, revealing what this creature is like.
When speaking about proper nouns I must not forget the names of places. There is only about sixty of them in Harry Potter series. Most of them are either in the “address” or “facility” subgroup. The first group does not seem to be interesting from the translation point of view, as it includes either names of places that actually exist (Charing Cross Road, Vauxhall Road, Norfolk) or places that can be freely translated or not, because they are simply parts of an address and do not refer to anything particular (Grimmauld Place, Magnolia Crescent, Wisteria Walk). The only two terms particularly worth noting are the names of two streets situated in the magical part of London: “Diagon Alley” and “Knockturn Alley”. In Knockturn Alley, magic market devoted to dark arts flourishes. The name “suggests something beaten up or twisted, and is also semi-homophonous with ‘nocturnally’, suggesting darkness and, by extension, evil” (Wikipedia). Similarly “Diagon Alley” is a homophone of “diagonally”. This toponym translates into Czech as “Příčná ulice”, which is simply based on the meaning of the homophone, as there seems to be no possible way of maintaining the pun present English.
What I personally find interesting are the names of various magical shops. The shops are translated so that they look like possibly existing shops that want to attract customers and the names suggest what kind of articles is sold in these shops. I believe, this is where the translator can show what he/she is capable of and can let his or her fancy roam, especially when the book is full of names such as “Weasleys’ Wizard Wheezes” (Kratochvilné kouzelnické kejkle), and “Flourish and Blotts” (Krucánky a Kaňoury).
5.2.2 Neologisms
The group of neologisms includes several subgroups; almost all of the terms are translated somehow, except for those in the “formula” subgroup. The terms in this subgroup are wordings of various spells and they originate mainly from Latin, or at least imitate the look of Latin words (via -us ending, for example). Fifty-eight of the sixty-seven formulas are transferred. Here, I am afraid, I cannot make objective comments on how successful these words are in communicating the meaning to the Czech reader, in particular the Czech child reader, because as I have an already good knowledge of foreign languages (especially French), I can find the meaning in these words easily. However, even if the words were absolutely unfamiliar to Czech readers, I would not go for translating them, because their foreign look makes the text much more interesting and their meaning is, in fact, usually clarified by the context. It is also possible to translate and then foreignize these words as the translators did in the case of “Impervius” (Repellentus) or “Muffliatto” (Ševelissimo), but this method does not seem practicable in such a large text with so many terms. Three formulas are evidently English: “Obliviate”, “Stupefy”, and “Orchideous”, and are therefore normally translated into Czech as “Zapomeňte”, “Mdloby na vás”, and “Orchidejovou” respectively. As for the last term, I prefer the Slovak idea of changing the word to “Orchideus”, because it fits more in the text and it definitely sounds more like an incantation.
The second large and interesting group is that of creatures. One third of the terms were translated literally. These are real animals that have Czech equivalents (e.g. tubeworm, and lacewing fly); mythical creatures known in both cultures, such as werewolf, cockatrice, and sphinx; or animals that do not exist, but the words of their names are normally used and can, thus, be easily translated (Fire Crab, or Common Welsh Green). In the “existing word – not translated literally” group can be found names of creatures common in some cultures, but not in Czech (Red Cap is a type of malevolent murderous creature found in British folklore; Kappa is Japanese folkloric water imp; Grindylows are mythological creatures that originated from Yorkshire); or names that are actually “old words with new meanings” – i.e. the words refer to something else possibly with no connection to the creature, such as “porlock” or “doxy” (Porlock is a coastal village in Somerset; doxy is an archaic slang expression for prostitute). Creatures that are completely products of Rowling’s imagination are translated via the meaning of the word’s components; examples are “Flobberworm” (“Tlustočerv” - based on the part “worm”), or Nogtail (“Drsnochvost” – based on “tail”). The translation of about twenty percent of the terms is based completely on the information given in context: “Crup” is said to look like Jack Russel Terrier with forked tail and is then translated as “hafoň”, a term that contains the Czech sound of barking; “Murtlap” (Hrboun) is a rat with some sort of anemone on its back that resembles a hunch.
The plant-names group is rather small. It includes thirty-five terms; fifteen are translated literally. These are either existing plants, such as monkshood, lovage, and sneezewort, or names compound of existing words that can be translated literally to create an acceptable name for a plant (e.g. Devil’s Snare, Bouncing Bulbs, and Fanged Geranium). The “existing word – not translated literally” group contains terms of two types: newly created phrases made of existing words that are translated loosely (the word “chomping” in “Chinese Chomping Cabbage”, for example, does not mean “zubatý”), or names that are translated “incorrectly”, though in translation there is not generally one correct solution. What I mean by saying “incorrectly” is that the translator chose an existing Czech word, which is not an equivalent of the original term. For example, Mr Medek translated “wolfsbane”, or aconitum lycoctonum, as “mordovník”, which is, however, a common name for a different type of aconite (Aconitum Stoerkianum Reichb., or Aconitum napellus L.). The “correct” translation would be “vlčí mor”. Also the term “kýchavice” seems to be the Czech equivalent of “veratrum” rather then “hellebore”, which I found out to be called “čemeřice”. Nevertheless, I am not a botanist and it is possible that these plants are connected somehow, though I did not find any such connection. As these terms are in no way crucial to the plot, their translations, though imprecise, may be accepted without reservation.
Several translations are based, again, on the meaning of a component; for example “gillyweed” enables people to survive under water due to the gills they grow, thus the Czech equivalent is “žaberník”, reminding the reader of the word “žábry” (gill). I would like to comment on one term I included in the “meaning equivalent” group. The term is “earwiggy flower”. Mr Medek translated it as “uchotřaska”, while Mrs Kraľovičová created “ucholakový kvet”. Both these versions seem to be plausible due to the different frame of reference the translators had. The Czech translator seems to have divided the word into two components: “ear” and “wiggly”, while the Slovak translator recognized the word “earwig”, which is a type of insect, and based the translation of this term on it (“ucholak” is Slovak word for earwig). What remains are the potion and spell names subgroups. As for these two, I do not think they include anything specially challenging. The terms are usually descriptive and they reflect the actual use, purpose, or effect of the potion or spell in question.
When I was collecting the terms and assorting them into groups according to what they refer to, I established a group called “Miscellaneous” where I included all the terms that did not fit in the other groups. As a result, it was not possible to analyse these terms in the same way as the terms from other groups and I will, therefore, make only several individual comments on those issues I found interesting. I will start with the names of special types of products invented by the Weasley twins. These items (food mainly) are always meant to be funny, though a bit dangerous. The names generally follow the alliteration pattern common in Rowling’s work and the Czech translators (unlike the Slovaks) keep pace with it too. Examples are “Ton-Tongue Toffee” (“Jazyk jako jelito” in Czech; “Jazykoplazá karamelka” in Slovak) that makes your tongue grow enormously; “Extendable Ears” (“ultradlouhé uši”; “predlžovacie uši”), which allow the user to hear far-away conversations; or “Skiving Snacxboxes” (“záškolácké zákusky”; “ulievacie maškrty”) that hold variety of sweets to make the consumer sick and enable him to bunk off classes – these include “Puking Pastilles” (dávivý dortíček), “Fainting Fancies” (omdlévací oplatky), and “Nosebleed Nougat” (krvácivá kokoska). There are eight Quidditch teams in the story (thirteen if the works outside the Harry Potter series are included); all but one are in the alliterative form, which is again maintained in Czech, see for example “Holyhead Harpies” (Holyheadské harpyje), or “Pride of Portree” (Pýcha Portree).
Rowling created also a lot of new terms for newly invented objects, which are particularly challenging in the process of translation and I must say that the Czech translators dealt with them quite successfully. At random I can give the following. “Animagus” is a wizard or witch capable of turning into a particular animal and back at will. The word is a compound of “ani-” referring to “animal” and “magus”, Latin word for mage. It is translated as “zvěromág”. Another interesting term is “Omniocculars”, a special type of binoculars that work as a recorder and enable the owner to forward and rewind the image. It consists of the Latin word “omnia” meaning “all” and the word “ocular”. The Czech equivalent is “všechnohled” that resembles the word “dalekohled”. “Pensieve” is a magical object in the shape of a bowl into which memories and thoughts can be placed and then looked at from distance. “The name is a portmanteau of two words “pensive, meaning “musingly or dreamily thoughtful”, and sieve, a type of bowl with perforations through which fine particles of a substance (such as flour) may be passed to separate them from coarser ones.” (Wikipedia). The Czech translators created a term based on a different word but used the same word-formation procedure as Rowling: they joined the words “mysl” (mind) and “slánka” (salt cellar), thus creating a new term “myslánka”. In the Order of the Phoenix, Harry has to attend special lessons of “Occlumency”, that is “the magical defence of the mind against external penetration” (Order of the Phoenix, 572). This term comes probably from the Latin words “occludere” (to shut) and “mens” (mind). These words have certain resonance with English readers, because their language knows words of these origins: “to occlude”, and “mind” or “mentor”. As there are not such words in Czech, the word was translated to sound more familiar and the result is “Nitrobrana”, defence of the mind, spirit. The relating subject of “Legilimency” (legere – to read) is translated as “Nitrozpyt”, a compound of “nitro” (inside or mind), and “zpytovat” (an archaic Czech expression for searching one’s conscience).
There are many more terms that could be discussed in this way, but their number is too large to do so in a bachelor thesis. I will therefore leave the discussion here. I hope I managed to introduce at least a few interesting issues and to show the complexity of the translation of Harry Potter books. As you might have noticed, I left out completely the group of book titles. That is because though they are interesting from the reader’s point of view, they are not actually specifically challenging concerning the means of translation.
6. CONCLUSION
The aim of this work was to find out whether there exists some sort of system or pattern in the translation of names and new words in the Harry Potter series. The theoretical basis was provided by Peter Newmark; J. K. Rowling’s work translated by Messrs Medeks served as the case study. After the collection of specifically chosen terms, whose number amounts to nearly one thousand, was completed, I divided the terms into groups and tried to analyse them.
What I found out does not match what I had expected though, concerning both the theory and the actual translation. As for the theory, I had the impression that it is pragmatic and useful and that the terms I collected will be easily accounted for by the translation procedures. However, as I focused on the analysis and delved into the procedures I realized that the theory is not a strictly followed rule. It may look good on paper and may possibly be helpful in the process of translating some types of text, but cannot serve as a tool for analysis of an already translated fiction work.
As for the translation, I thought I would discover some special patterns in the way of translating names and neologisms that appear in the Harry Potter series. I imagined that there would be some system in the way the names are translated or transferred, depending on the position of the bearer in the story; for example, that students and staffs would be left as they are, because they are meant to be seen as characters really dwelling in Britain, while writers and fictional figures would be translated, because they are rather comical characters and their names are created with the intention of amusing the readers.
Thus, I was a bit disappointed when I learned by reading an interview with Pavel Medek that their “system” actually consists in translating those names that are significant in some way: “Technically speaking, (…) when the name has a meaning, we tried to translate it adequately.” The translators seem to translate the names on the basis of whether or not the name includes any existing English word. To be honest, I expected something more sophisticated and complicated than this.
Nevertheless, it does not seem to be important for ordinary readers whether certain words are translated literally or not. I believe that as long as the work is readable and the translators do not make any major changes that would affect the plot significantly or change the story noticeably, there is no need to be critical. I must say that from the point of view of a reader the translation is very successful and entertaining.
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY
7.1 Primary sources
Kralovičová, Oľga, trans. Harry Potter a Fénixov rád. By J. K. Rowling. Bratislava: Ikar, 2003. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003.
---, trans. Harry Potter a Ohnivá čaša. By J. K. Rowling. Bratislava: Ikar, 2001. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000.
---, trans. Harry Potter a Polovičný princ. By J. K. Rowling. Bratislava: Ikar, 2001. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005.
---, trans. Harry Potter a Väzeň z Azkabanu. By J. K. Rowling. Bratislava: Ikar, 2001. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. London: Bloomsbury, 1999.
Medek, Pavel, trans. Harry Potter a Fénixův řád. By J. K. Rowling. Praha: Albatros, 2004. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2003.
---, trans. Harry Potter a Princ dvojí krve. By J. K. Rowling. Praha: Albatros, 2005. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005.
---, trans. Harry Potter a Vězeň z Azkabanu. By J. K. Rowling. Praha: Albatros, 2002. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. London: Bloomsbury, 1999.
Medek, Vladimír, trans. Harry Potter a Kámen mudrců. By J. K. Rowling. Praha: Albatros, 2002. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997.
---, trans. Harry Potter a Ohnivý pohár. By J. K. Rowling. Praha: Albatros, 2002. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2000.
---, trans. Harry Potter a Tajemná komnata. By J. K. Rowling. Praha: Albatros, 2002. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 1998.
Petrikovičová, Jana, trans. Harry Potter a Kameň mudrcov. By J. K. Rowling. Bratislava: Ikar, 2000. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 1997.
---, trans. Harry Potter a Tajomná komnata. By J. K. Rowling. Bratislava: Ikar, 2001. Trans. of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 1998.
Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. London: Bloomsbury, 2000.
---. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. London: Bloomsbury, 2001.
---. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. London: Bloomsbury, 2005.
---. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. London: Bloomsbury, 2004.
---. Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. London: Bloomsbury, 2000.
---. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. London: Bloomsbury, N/A.
7.2 Secondary sources
Newmark, Peter. A Textbook of Translation. London: Prentice-Hall, 1988.
“All-Time Worldwide Boxoffice”. IMDb. 30 October 2006. 5 November 2006 <http://imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world-wide>
“Fanstastic Beasts and Where to Find Them”. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 25 September 2006. 19 October 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Fantastic_Beasts_and_Where_to_Find_Them>
“Harry Potter in translation”. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 5 October 2006. 19 October 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_in_translation>
“Harry Potter, Medek a české překladatelství”. CITARNY.CZ. 5 November 2006 <http://www.citarny.cz/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=415>
“Harry Potter”. Seznam Encyklopedie. 16 May 2006. 19 October 2006 <http://encyklopedie.seznam.cz/heslo/130418-harry-potter>
“Harry Potter”. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 17 October 2006. 19 October 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_potter>
“Lord Voldemort”. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 16 November 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Voldemort#Name_and_anagram>
“Potter ‘is fastest-selling book ever’.” BBC NEWS. 22 June 2003. 5 November 2006 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/3005862.stm>
“Quidditch Through the Ages”. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 14 October 2006. 19 October 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quidditch_Through_the_Ages>
“Worksheet: Half-Blood Prince sets UK record“. CBBC Newsround. July 20 2005. 5 November 2006 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4700000/ newsid_4701400/4701409.stm>
Cilková, K. “Rozhovor s Pavlem Medkem”. Pevnost speciál 2/2005: 54-5.
International Board of Books for young people. 5 November 2006 <http://www.ibby.cz/modules/multi/>
OneLook Dictionary Search. 16 November 2006 < http://www.onelook.com/>
APPENDICES
In the appendices, two tables are presented. In appendix A, there is the table of terms that qualified as relevant according to the requirements stated in chapter 3. In appendix B it is the table of terms divided into several groups on the basis of which procedure was probably used.
Source: https://is.muni.cz/th/109069/ff_b/thesis.doc
Web site to visit: https://is.muni.cz/
Author of the text: indicated on the source document of the above text
If you are the author of the text above and you not agree to share your knowledge for teaching, research, scholarship (for fair use as indicated in the United States copyrigh low) please send us an e-mail and we will remove your text quickly. Fair use is a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work. In United States copyright law, fair use is a doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, search engines, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, unlicensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use)
The information of medicine and health contained in the site are of a general nature and purpose which is purely informative and for this reason may not replace in any case, the council of a doctor or a qualified entity legally to the profession.
The texts are the property of their respective authors and we thank them for giving us the opportunity to share for free to students, teachers and users of the Web their texts will used only for illustrative educational and scientific purposes only.
All the information in our site are given for nonprofit educational purposes