American editor underestimates the intelligence of Harry Potter readers

When I got my first Harry Potter book (the Scholastic edition) I noticed that it used American spellings (things like "color" instead of "colour"). And the name of the book didn't match the movie (Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone).

Later at another bookstore I found the Canadian edition (from Raincoast books), and it had much prettier cover art so I bought the rest of my Potter books from there. And I was so unhappy about my American book that I ended up buying Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone from Raincoast too.

It's not just the spelling that's Americanized in the Scholastic edition. A quaffle is compared to a soccer ball (not a football), a Beater's bat is like "a short baseball bat" (not a rounder's bat, whatever that is), and Hermione has a crying jag in "the "bathroom" (not the toilets). All that in about 4 pages.

Is this interference called for? There's no question for me personally - half the charm of the Potter stories is their Britishness (I'm pretty nerdy about my love of things English) and I can't help but feel that the American books are butchered. But they're more approachable for American kids. Does this dumb them down too much?

EDIT: I've changed the title to reflect what I see as the real issue. But this discussion has brought home the fact that many Americans see everything un-American as, at best, not the sort of thing impressionable kids should be exposed to.

One of the things I love most about the British is their inimitable ability to assume they are superior, in all ways, to any other human on the planet...

It is quite awe-inspiring...

lol you crack me up, kathygator.


Wasn't Harry Potter not conceived, written etc. for children & only marketed that way after the fact?  I was under the impression this was the case.

no no no - it was always a children's book.  It just gradually got turned into and adult book as well.

all right, some people seem to think that i was trying to be offensive or something and say that spaniards and brits have better language than us western hemispherers. that's not what i'm saying. i'm saying that there are different dialects at work, and as people have said... it can be confusing to meet someone who "speaks the same language" as you but doesn't really.

{{{Heather}}} :)

flamel,

In your first post, you ask:

"Is this interference called for?"

The "interference" in this case being the substitution of American terms and spellings for British ones.

You incidentally answered your own question even before you posed it when you typed (emphasis mine):

"a Beater's bat is like "a short baseball bat" (not a rounder's bat, whatever that is), "

You, a self-described lover "of things English," apparently don't know what a rounders bat is, which means the description of a beater's bat as a "rounders bat" did not provide the explanation to the reader (in this case you, an adult who loves things English) intended by the author. So the author lost you there.

So yes, "this interference" is, indeed, called for, as you so succinctly proved in your initial post.

BTW, have you looked up "rounders bat" yet? Probably not, so here's a picture of one. Hmmm... it looks like a short baseball bat, doesn't it? :-)

Good point, Athena...

Something I'd like to bring up is that they kept the setting in the UK. It's not like they changed the locations or anything. And it still has a British feel to it. Just because they switched out a few words to keep us "poor Americans" in the loop as to what is going on, I don't think they Americanized it. They still eat puddings at the school feasts -- and not double Whoppers with cheese.

*grumble*

Ah, ok.  I was referring to something I'd heard years ago, perhaps just a rumor (rumour in case no one knew what I meant :P)  that when she wrote the books she didn't intend for them to be for children.  That wasn't her vision or however you want to say it.  But publisher & marketing wise no one thought that would wash so they insisted it be children's books.  I thought she said this in an interview, but as I said, it could have just been a rumor going around way back.

When you think about it though, the concepts, aside from the age of the young characters are far from the usual children's material.  The size of the books as well, particularly as the series progressed.  Quite a difference from Beezus & Ramona & Mouse & the motorcycle.  I don't recall reading any books at that age (that were actually meant for children) in which beloved characters died, terrible things happened to children, frightening creatures with an ability, if not desire to suck your soul out of you, leaving you in a state worse than death & twists that involved such things as long time family pets commiting unspeakable acts of betrayal.

Americanization does not neccessarily mean 'dumbing down'...just sayin'...

Exactly, kathygator.

The thread title, and the notion, are IMHO unnecessarily inflammatory.

I'd really like flamel to edit his original post so that he doesn't insult a whole country.

EDITED to change the sex of my pronouns. Thanks Athena!

Stereotypes are funny...I suppose in Japanese translations he assumes they 'math' it up...or in French translations they 'romance' it up...

edited: ditto...:)

flamel's a he. :-)

Edited to add: and a nice guy, too; I'm sure he didn't intend for the title and notion to be inflammatory.

sorry...we southerners aren't that good at readin'....:)

And yet, so many of America's good writers have come from the south... :-)

hee hee...

See, now if only more people would be willing to beat they kids us people might all be better at the book learnin'.  :P   (crossover from other thread)

hehe sorry, couldn't resist.

I think the most shocking part of this thread is that I've NEVER saw people fight becuase of Harry Potter before. Sure people debate what will happen in the next book, but I've never seen such a venemous post about Harry Potter.

Harry is a uniter not a divider.

I guess we're all entitled to our own opinion about the need (or lack thereof) to 'americanize' the HP books.

But I'm remembering something I read on this site recently... wise words from someone... maybe Clairelaine? that said something like

Rule #1 - Don't annoy people.

Rule #2 - Don't be easily annoyed.

If you feel certain that a comment doesn't apply to you (or to your country) it might not bother you as much as if you worry to yourself that there's a grain of truth to it.... knowwhatahmean?

I don't know... I think I get annoyed when there ISN'T truth to something more than I get annoyed by something that IS true.

The changes here are IMHO completely mischaracterized by the phrase "dumbing down."

The "poor Americans" bit makes me laugh, however, since this country is consistently the destination of choice of soooo many people; it appears there are many in the world who hope to become "poor Americans."