Why is it not possible for a child to enjoy both Harry Potter AND Wind in the Willows?

Helen, I agree with some of the things you say. But I cannot see any argument in your piece to support your contention that it is better for a child to read nothing than read about Harry Potter. The question is not whether Harry Potter books are inferior to classics, possibly they are in some respects. But for them to be worse than nothing is an assertion that needs to be supported. I am very thankful that I was able to read Wizard and Beano comics as a kid. They were certainly better than nothing for me, but if only I could have got my hands on a Harry Potter or two.
Fencepost.

Helen Pringle needs to take a chill pill.

Just because some of us may enjoy an excursion to Macca's doesn't mean we limit our taste buds and do not enjoy high cuisine. Though some will never venture beyond a burger, many do.

It's the same with books. In my household of three children, one enjoyed reading Harry Potter, one could never get into it, but devoured Lord of the Rings (twice) and one reads them, but tells me there are so many fantastic books which are better 'why does this one get so much hype?'. All three read all kinds of books.

As for reading out loud. That's wonderful, but also not all stories are interesting to everybody. The first book I read out loud was 'The Hobbit' some 12 years ago. Even my husband sat in and enjoyed it

As it seems that the interest in Harry Potterisms is a good way of getting our minds off what we are facing in our world today it might be a good idea to get Harry's philosophical favourites more interested in the following:

It has been said to be true that the more peaceful changes in history were brought on by philosophers such as Socrates, St Thomas Aquinas, and John Locke of Britain.

Just as Aquinas lifted Christianity out of the Dark Ages, with his acceptance of Socratic Reasoning to balance Christian faith, so John Locke carried on the task in 1688 to lift Britain from the clutches of autocratic religous royalty, his doctrine later patterning the democratic section or the bulk of the American Constitution apart from the so-called symbolic prerogative that allows both Regent and President to only play Garden-Gnome leadership in a true democracy.

Harry Potter's bearded thinkers if taken as real might agree that today's world has truly lost its philosophical reasoning through allowing for example the wornout religous philosophy of the Promised Land to interfere with the balance of power in today's Middle East.

The PL undemocratic formula also not only defies the Sermon on the Mount, but also has brought on most of the wars in Western history.

Come on, Harry, world problems are too serious to escape into romantics, so put on your truly democratic thnking cap, matey, our world needs it so much?

Tall poppy syndrome.

I wonder how many students have been put off reading by the Ms Pringles of the world?

"The first duty to children is to make them happy, If you have not made them so, you have wronged them, No other good they may get can make up for that.” Charles Buxton, English writer 1823 - 1871

Back in 1973 my high school history teacher told my 5th form class of the experiences of a friend of her's who taught in a 'housing development' / Housing Commission area Sydney's west. This teacher had asked her class of 38 students how many had books, except school books, at home. Out of a class of 38 there was only three.

Perhaps in the light of this history the HarryPotter phenomenon is not a bad thing, but then I look back on my reading school list from my early teens: 1984, Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies, Return of the Native. For relaxation I read anything by Arthur.C.Clark.

These books challenged both my reading ability and my mind.

Should any child be encouraged to read a book that they can speed read? It is like junk food, as someone else has previously alluded to: but do we want to feed children's minds the equivalent of low fibre, high sugar and high salt food as an exclusive diet?

In some ways I agree with Helen: if we don't feed our kids the HarryPotter junk food and instead satisfy their hunger for reading with something that they cannot read that fast, but requires thought and contemplation, they will be better nourished, intellectually, spiritually and emotionally for it.

I think that is what she means about having children read nothing rather than reading Harrypotter. Leave them hungry for something, instead of gratified and satisfied that they have raced through a series of books, that are the equivalent of comic books, without the pictures.