I liked The Goblet of Fire. But I like movies with competition (and dragons!). Also, I was greatly amused by the DBZ fight at the end (dueling kamehameha’s).

Mind you, I don’t like Harry Potter. While I think it is great that it inspired more kids to start reading as a hobby rather than out of necessity, I feel it never gets out of the kid mode. The characters grow up but still she has these silly items. Plus, harkening back to ‘witches and broomsticks and such’ should not be immediately kid-friendly, in my mind. It almost hurts any future books over the next 15-20 years that want to do a classic witch tale.

Anyways…the in-depth of magic is actually rather interesting. I like it when an author is really devoted to their work enough to put some effort into it beyond simple outlining of the story. What is frustrating about the book is the attitude of the main character and the fact that the main plot never really occurs until you are near the end (I think, at least).

Of course, you are welcome to borrow it. It’s really quite well-written and several of the ideas are well-done…it’s just frustrating.

If this were done in the Potter-style (sadly that’s the best example I can come up with) of one book per year but in the Brakebills college-type setting, I think it would have been better because it feels like there is a lot more Grossman could have done, he’s a magnificent writer (he writes for Time). Of course, then it would be called a Harry Potter ripoff for adults

So right off the bat, any book relating to HP is almost immediately dismissed in my mind. As for the great lengths you say he goes into describing magic and the rules, I see pluses and minuses to that. Firstly, that sounds incredibly boring to read about. But having rules is a good thing. I hate how almost all books degenerates into either “He’s the greatest ever, and just gets more powerful” or “he could be the greatest ever, he just needs to unlock his potential”, but never stating why this is so. There is danger in explaining that why too. Just think of the Force from Star Wars in the original Trilogy, and the explanation they give in the newer prequel trilogy. Completely ruined it. Major credit to the original trilogy though. Luke didn’t just become the “greatest master of the Force” and defeat the emperor. Infact, he lost. But he didn’t give in and THAT is where he had his victory, which drove his dad to save him (who also didn’t use the force to defeat the emperor, he just picked him up and threw him off the platform). Getting back to the rules, I think believable mysticism is a fine line between absurd/unexplained and tedious explanation. I personally like a quick outline of the rules (like in some universes where a wizard needs to memorize a spell each day, and can only use it once, and forgets the spell after 24 hours), but without having everything explained down to the minute details.

I’ll write more later.