[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by OtterBooks

*rides up on high horse, wearing top hat and monocle* cloppity cloppity..

What you read is more important than how much.

Not when you are 8. And not when how much=0.

Potter readers moved on to Twilight, then Confessions of a Shopaholic.

cite?

I would replace HP with the likes of Peter S. Beagle, Michael Ende, Shirley Jackson, Philip Pullman, Madeleine L'Engle, and others. There are even many contemporary superiors like Darren Shan, M.T. Anderson, Rick Yancey. I'm not talking about dry classics, here, but a world of delightful, inspired young adult literature that engages the reader with artful prose and substance, in addition to providing entertainment. But that stuff requires parents or teachers who themselves appreciate good fiction, and are capable of offering guidance.

I like those books, too. But I don't really think that reading "A Wrinkle in Time" as a kid had any more real effect on me than reading HP would have.

I don't think Potter is bad. It's just not very good, and there's enough very good, even great fiction out there that there's no excuse for fluff.

Then again, I'm just some random jerk being contrary for the sake of it.

Also top posting is evil.

If the kids aren't interested in reading the better literature, it is just so much paper.