XPost: alt.comp.freeware   
   From: DONTvictordix@imapmail.orgSPAMME   
      
   On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:54:23 -0500, DasFox wrote:   
      
   > On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 01:43:18 -0600, AlleyCat wrote:   
   >   
   >> In article , dasfox@hushmail.com says...   
   >>> LOL...backing out like a Weaselely...   
   >>>   
   >>> Potter is for ALL ages...too bad you SHAME yourself...   
   >>>   
   >>> THANKS   
   >>>   
   >> OK... you're right... Potter IS for all ages... but the books? Since I've   
   never   
   >> even looked at one, can you tell me what kind of read they are? Were the   
   first   
   >> two written as if writing for 11 and 12 year olds? Did the books get   
   >> progressively more challenging to read? I can't imagine the first two being   
   >> written any other way, other than making them readable to that age group.   
   >   
   > Good read with Tech...Yes...Yes, more Tech...   
   >   
   > THANKS   
      
   It is difficult to imagine a more distinct and intelligible review   
   than DasFox' but I will try ;)   
      
   The first two books, The Philosopher's (Sorcerer's Stone) and Chamber   
   of Secrets were written in simpler fashion. By simpler, I mean that   
   they were more descriptive, stage setting, character introductions and   
   backgrounds. Yes, they were more readable to younger Potterites.   
      
   Keep in mind, Ms. Rowling by the time SS/PS went film, she was writing   
   both for book and movie and for a much broader audience   
   chronologically.   
      
   Mr. or Mrs. Cat, may I suggest that you do as I have counseled my   
   cohort Draco Malfoy? Listen to the audiobooks (Stephen Fry); at least   
   SS/PS and COS and read the others?   
      
   I would be happy to send the audiobooks the entire collection to you   
   in mp3 format if you wish. Let me know what email I should utilize.   
      
   They are Trojan/Malfoyware free, btw ;0)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)