gusamo

??

Mutley Hyde

Interesting you mention this now - I just last week hunted down the American mass market paperback Scholastic edition of Sorcerer's Stone, and will be picking up Chamber of Secrets, in the same edition, soon. I don't care for American the oversized paperbacks, nor the hardbacks due to the awful, IMHO, artwork. There is a nice set of British paperbacks for adults, but I just like the art on the Scholastic mass market paperbacks better.

This one I got (above).

This one I gotta order.

This British set of paperbacks above is cool, and really sleek lookin' but I just like the American ones better for some reason.

I like the fronts of the British hardbacks, but the spines are just too "loud", like a dang harlequin... am I too picky?


All pics link to Amazon - for your Potter shopping/browsing convenience.

Holly E. Ordway

I'd go for the British editions... not for the covers (though I like them a lot better anyway) but for the original text. For the U.S. editions, the editors at Scholastic changed many small things to make them more "American" -- things like boot vs. trunk of a car, the names of foods, etc. Bleah. Guess they figured kids weren't smart enough to figure out that people might use a few different words in another country. Anyway, one of the reasons I enjoy the books is for the British flavor, so for me the original is the only way to go.

Mutley Hyde

Hmm, good point, but are those actual examples that you're citing? I can understand if they had made spelling translation changes such as "judgement" to "judgment", but changing "lift" to "elevator" or "torch" to "flashlight" would be kinda lame - however, I can understand it for kids; I do feel a kid might have a hard time understanding that a torch is a flashlight, and wouldn't have a clue of what a lift was. I know, as I had to ask my dad about these very examples when I was a kid. So anyway, maybe I'll go with the British adult set if that's actually the case with these, if they made terminology changes, and not just spelling changes.

Holly E. Ordway

I sold my U.S. Scholastic editions when I got the British ones, so I can't give a direct reference at the moment. But I recall specificially that "jumper" was changed to "sweater"; in the opening of the first book, "baker's" is changed to "bakery," and "bun" is changed to "doughnut". In my opinion those sorts of changes alter the flavor of the story - I don't want to have a generic U.S. flavor. I also have a sneaking suspicion that they toned down Hagrid's accent, but I can't confirm it.

I remember being confused about torch/flashlight from reading The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe as a kid... but you know, I figured it out eventually. And in the process I experienced a tiny bit of another culture... I think it's shortchanging kids to change things like that just because they "might" have a hard time with it. IMO (and I teach, btw) I think it's beneficial for kids to *think* more as they read, so I'd support it in that regard anyway.

Personally, I'm a hardcore "don't edit" kind of reader - I like editions where the spelling is left British as well. Somehow "colour" and "honour" seem to capture the British accent in writing better than "color" and "honor". But I can see making those changes a lot sooner than changing actual *words* for different words.

Incidentally, I read somewhere that the Goblet of Fire was substantially less edited for the U.S. market than the earlier books; guess Scholastic is realizing kids are savvier than they thought! I don't have a copy of the U.S. version to back up that report, though.

Mutley Hyde

Doughnut for bun??? That's it man, down with Scholastic! Just kidding, kinda. I agree with you for the most part Ordway, and you've certainly given me something to think about. I do think kids are much smarter than adults typically consider them, but if they were to leave the books fully unedited, I would prefer them add a glossary, both spelling and terminology, in the back of the books. I just have a hard time leaving it solely up to the kid to figure out without any reference to go on. I think an unedited edition with a glossary would be the perfect way to go for American editions, just my opinion.

Now I gotta go do Christmas! Merry Christmas Ordway, and all you other DVDTalk readers!

Holly E. Ordway

Merry Christmas to you too, Mutley!

I agree that putting a glossary in the back is the best idea if a publisher thinks that there are some words that might confuse a reader. An "extra" like that doesn't do any violence to the original text, a reader can completely ignore it if he doesn't need it, and it's there to lend a hand if needed. Perfect!

Of course, that makes too much sense for Scholastic to have done it that way! Then again, it's not surprising - apparently they originally were hesitant to publish Goblet of Fire during the summer (even after the success of the earlier books) because they thought it was too long and kids wouldn't want to read it on their vacation, or something along those lines (Googling didn't bring up the details, alas). Hmmm... guess they were wrong again....

gusamo

Does the British set have dustcovers? I don't care for dustcovers much. They seem to tear pretty easy. Plus how much does £33.60 equal in US currency?

Mutley Hyde

Gusamo, dustcovers do tear easy - that's why I use Bro-dart protective/archival covers. They're clear archival plastic on one side, acid free paper on the other, and you sandwich the book cover between the two. Go to www.brodart.com to check 'em out and buy some if you think they're right for you. I wouldn't do without them.

Now, back to Potter books; there are two British hardback series that I know of so far - the ones with dustcovers, pictured above, and the Bloomsbury special editions where an illustrated plate is glued to the cover.


By the way folks (outside of England), don't be afraid of buying from Amazon.UK - the shipping is incredibly fast. I ordered a book for my dad just a week ago, and it was here for Christmas. Extremely awesome in my book.

Jackskeleton

One question here. Looking into getting the UK versions aswell, though enjoyed the Schoolastic versions for what they are.

Now Mutley, those look nice, are those in this box set? or is this a different box set altogether?



Pretty nice, if you want to spend 99 bucks on it.


if you are looking for a currancy converter here you go

http://www.convertit.com/Go/ConvertI...rter_Input.ASP



remember it's Pounds

Mutley Hyde

Ohhhh yeah...

I saw that too Jack, but just kept rambling past it for some reason. It turns out that that set is for the Special Edition hardbacks that I just posted in my last post.

Click this next pic to go to the page that shows all the covers together. It's an impressive set. Too bad I have a thing for dustcovers, and I don't trust glued plates on covers. They do look pretty dang nice though.

My final peeve about the potter books, er, for now , is that two of the books have pretty cool covers, and the other two just suck. Yes, I mean the ones with the dragon and griffin are cool, but the one with the car and train are suckekeke! I mean seriously, look at them all together in the linked page, and tell me those books look like they're from the same set. Grr.

Mutley Hyde

Wow, and a note on prices. At lease two of the special editions are listed on Amazon US, but they're $42 a piece. Both at Amazon.UK and Amazon.CA, AFTER currency conversion, they run $20 a pop (Goblet goes for a little more). Amazon.CA doesn't have the set, but the set from Amazon.UK is $95 after conversion. Looks like you actually would save $15 just ordering the individual books, but then you'd miss out on the snappy slipcase.

Mantecore

hmm, tough choice, but i think im going to order them, its a hella of alot of money though, wish i could find them cheaper, but 95 seems like the best, any coupons for amazon.uk?

Mutley Hyde

Nothing for the UK, but I think there are some for Canada in the Amazon Coupons thread in DVD Bargains forum.

Actually, I've never seen a coup for the UK, which is sucky, because I've ordered a few time from them now.

Ah well.

Mutley Hyde

MAke that one Canada coup; CANADASKY535 for $5 0ff $35

gusamo

Don't forget about Ebay!

fiver

I have the British hardcover editions and I like them very much although I agree the train and the car aren't as good as the other two.

I wouldn't own the American editions as I prefer original text as any changes may alter subtle meanings as well. And I think we are short changing our youth by not encouraging them to learn new words whether or not they're from their own culture or not. When I was in school, they taught us a little something about determining meanings through the context of what you're reading. Do they just not do that anymore in school?

Michael

Mutley Hyde

Michael, they hardly teach anything in school here anymore. It's politically incorrect. About the only "safe" area is math, and, well, America just isn't really known for being a country of math wizzes. Lower (meaning grade school and high school, although that phrase certainly can have a dual meaning) education has become daycare for the masses.

Okay, rant over - I yield the soapbox.

mllefoo

I saw a set of Leather bound Harry Potter books at a children's book store recently. I'd love to get a set.

I'm waiting for the third movie to come out so I can get another plush griffin.

gusamo

I think the leather bound books only include the first two books. The last two aren't in leather yet, I think.

adamblast

I wouldn't go too far overboard with buying any box set of the current four books... Remember that it'll be obsolete the moment the fifth book comes out...

If you're wanting a beautiful, definitive hardbound set to last for the ages, you're better off buying cheap "reading copies" for now, and making your home library purchase when the series is completed. As it stands now, you've probably got a 50-50 chance of ending up with a mis-matched set, as publishers change the "look" of their big-money franchises fairly regularly.

silentbob007

Aren't the leatherbound copies like $75 a piece?? I don't know if I like this series that much ....

Mutley Hyde

Yup. My eyes about popped out of my skull when I saw the price at Borders. Plus, they're the poo-poo American versions.

resinrats

I have no problem with a word or two being changed between the US and UK versions. As long as whatever the word or phrase was changed to holds the same meaning. I don't think kids will get some higher understanding on England because of alternate words.

Another thing to consider. Having an unknown UK word or phrase in the US edition would disrupt the reading flow for the kid. Example: 'Boot' instead of 'trunk. A kid would stop and wonder what the heck a boot was (besides footware). Even I wouldn't know what the boot meant.

There is still UK terms in the books. Soccer is still referred to as football in one of the books.

Mutley Hyde

Bloomsbury has finally published a series of, IMO, really sharp looking adult covers for the Potter series.



but wait...




PAPERBACK?!?!?!

Yes, paperback. Well, I was quite stunned they would do this in paperback first, which would normally be a sign that a publisher isn't planning on a hardback release, however, I have good news for those of you who prefer hardbacks.

I emailed Bloomsbury the moment I saw this news, and follows is the outcome of that correspondance (which to Bloomsbury's great credit, took mere hours to complete. Talk about customer service!)

Needless to say...