![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
borislvinСписок книжных магазинов, которые будут работать в ночь с пятницы на субботу - http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/funstuff/partysearch
borislvinborislvin
Profile
borislvin
Page Summary
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by timeasmymeasure
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 05:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 06:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 12:03 pm (UTC)Whatever Harry was, he wasn't just a book anymore. By the time the fourth volume hit the stores in July 2000, the initial print run had soared to 3.8 million and the embargo and simultaneous release date were being strictly enforced.
Rowling has said that was her doing. "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" was "the culmination of 10 years' work," she told an interviewer after its release, and it has a huge plot development at the end: "Had that got out, there's no way the book would have been as enjoyable to read."
Fair enough. But the embargo also made a wonderful marketing device.
Call it talent, marketing, luck -- by this time, Harry Potter had emerged as a prime example of what economists Robert Frank and Philip Cook have called the "winner-take-all society." Small differences in performance or talent, Frank and Cook argue, get magnified by our media culture to the point where the top-ranked performers receive wildly exaggerated economic rewards.
Is this not a bad thing? Are there not -- as booksellers passionately proclaim -- many other wonderful children's books that deserve our attention? Rowling herself, who is deeply proud of her creation, nonetheless seems embarrassed by the scale of her success.
No, it's a good thing, says economist Frank. And here's where Harry the Savior comes in again.
It is precisely his winner-take-all clout, Frank says, that makes it possible for Harry to compete for kids' attention. Without it, television and video games would sweep the field.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302251_pf.html
no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 12:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 07:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 07:54 am (UTC)С точки зрения неожиданности было бы очень красиво, если бы умер Волдеморт :)
no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 11:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 12:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 03:14 pm (UTC)Во-вторых, это следует и из логики книги. Дамблодор, видимо, погибнет в конце, после чего Гарри останется один на один с Вольдемортом, потому что именно он, согласно пророчеству, и может победить Вольдеморта. И сделать это он должен, по той же логике, уже сам, без помощи и поддержки Дамблдора (но, вероятно, с помощью друзей). Этим завершится процесс его взросления.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 03:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 03:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-14 04:00 pm (UTC)