Americanization of Harry Potter = BAD

[IronParrot]

This goes beyond just the whole "Philosopher's Stone"/"Sorceror's Stone" thing, though that's part of it.

The changes in the American editions are in fact more pervasive and numerous than most people recognize. There are a lot of edits in the text not made by J.K. Rowling that attempt to "Americanize" the books for American readers, and a lot of them are kept under the covers so that people hardly notice.

In terms of the integrity of J.K. Rowling's use of the English language, and her distinct writing style, I think even such minor, subtle changes are a big problem, because culturally they are not representative of the author's intentions for the world she created.

Instead of Americanizing the books to make them appeal to readers, they should be left intact and untouched to draw readers into the quirks of British culture - because that's what literature is fundamentally about: being exposed to new ideas through storytelling.

It's times like this that I'm proud to be in Canada where I can get the real, original British text. I urge the American readers out there to get a hold of the right editions whenever possible, as difficult as it is.

For lists of changes to the text, try this site (http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/help.html).

[Lady of Rohan]

Go Canada, Go Canada, YAY!!! :D

I never knew that they made changes for Americans. :confused:

[BeardofPants]

Man, it drives me nuts that people are too dumb too realise that philosophy was the early branch of science. There's nothing magical about alchemy for crap's sake!!! :mad:

[sun-star]

I can't believe they thought it was necessary to make so many changes. Do they really think Americans are so culturally insular that they won't read a book where it says "biscuits" instead of "cookies"? If I were American, I would feel quite insulted. I'm really glad British publishers don't "translate" American books in the same way (as far as I'm aware) because I find them the best way of finding out about the American way of life and language differences. It's far more interesting to learn stuff like that, IMO :rolleyes:

[Elf Girl]

I am American, and I do feel quite insulted. However I only read the British Harry Potter, so it doesn't bother me. (Thank Eru for Amazon!)

[LuthienTinuviel]

well, a few are obviusly needed ie: football/soccerball, crisps/chips
just because americans have different names for somethings.

all in all the plot doesn't seem affected, so i don't really care, i get enough brit/aussie/NZ/ canadian speak from you people :D ;)

[IronParrot]

"well, a few are obviusly needed ie: football/soccerball, crisps/chips
just because americans have different names for somethings."
I say that's all the more reason it should be left alone. They're not needed. You don't see American editions of Charles Dickens, or British editions of Mark Twain.

(Let's not even go into what an Americanized Lord of the Rings would be like.)

This is done solely out of commercial purposes - and unjustified ones, at that. Rowling made the "Sorceror's Stone" concession to get the contract for the first book, and regretted it ever since - and that just got the ball rolling on a very bad precedent of edited American versions.

[Starr Polish]

Originally posted by IronParrot
(Let's not even go into what an Americanized Lord of the Rings would be like.)

:eek:

JK Rowling does have some problems with her verb form (present perfect, whatnot, bla de bla), and I think I might find that irritating in the British version, but so do other reknowned authors. And what's with adding the black student, or whatnot? That's odd.

[Baby-K]

Originally posted by Starr Polish
:eek:

JK Rowling does have some problems with her verb form (present perfect, whatnot, bla de bla), and I think I might find that irritating in the British version, but so do other reknowned authors. And what's with adding the black student, or whatnot? That's odd.

Do you have any examples? You have to remember that the Americanised way of speaking / writing also includes changes to verbs etc (for example the word "gotten" as used as past perfect tense only exists in the American English (according to the Oxford Dictionary) - in SA & British English it is get got got).

Americanising the works does nothing to enhance them for a new audience, to me it rather detracts from them as they no longer represent the culture of the people who they are about. Harry & the crowd are British, as such the colloquialisms and references used serve to enhance the authenticity.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Americanisation of anything is bad, even if it's Harry Potter. Not to say that America is bad (though I do prefer English spelling :D), but Americanisation destroys the flavour of a work, IMO. Not good at all. :(

[FrodoFriend]

I don't really see the point ... it's not like we don't understand British English. It's just so, I don't know, senseless.

[Laurus Nobilis]

What shocks me more is that it was the American editors who suggested to make the changes. They were underestimating the people from their own country! That's something I really don't understand. For example, I live in Argentina, and books (even children books) that come from, say, Spain, aren't changed to "our" Spanish.

And it really bothers me that they changed the title. Small things like jumper/sweater and such I can accept, but the Philosopher's Stone isn't an invention of Mrs. Rowling- it's a real legend. I read that the editors changed it to "Sorcerer's Stone" so the children could have a better idea of what it was about. So they:

1) Assumed NO children in the US had heard about the Philosopher's Stone

2) Took from them the opportunity to actually learn what it was.

Why, oh, why did they do that?

[Blackboar]

In my school, we talk with American grammer, we some times even get a detention for it! (Been there myself,)
To our English Doctors and Professors it is just plain wrong grammer.

Anyway, back to Harry Potter...I have not read the American version but have heard a lot about it, Somethings obviosusly need changing, sidewalk/path, jam/jelly. All that lot.
I havn't really much more to say on this topic, as I have not read that version.

[Coney]

Originally posted by IronParrot
I say that's all the more reason it should be left alone. They're not needed. You don't see American editions of Charles Dickens, or British editions of Mark Twain.

I agree, there is a whole universe of differing cultures to be learned from books.

One thing that is as sure as mustard, if a kid doesn't know something he/she will ask (good thing)..........I've learned that kids are very good at asking questions (better thing).

[Elf Girl]

Originally posted by Laurus Nobilis
1) Assumed NO children in the US had heard about the Philosopher's Stone
They vastly underestimated us when they did that. I was 8 when I read the first book, and I knew what the Philosopher's Stone is! :eek:

Also, when they did that, they robbed the first HP book of it's connection with mythology, inventing a new name for an incredibly old idea.

[Tanoliel]

Yes. Agreement here.

I really enjoy British words myself--I find them more interesting than mine, whether they are, or whether they're just new. But honestly, adults should know these things, like simple words--football, biscuit, etc. And many kids know them, and if they don't, they ask. Really.
I read a comment--maybe from JK, can't remember--that "jumper" to "sweater" was a must because they didn't want to give the impression that all the boys wore dresses. :D (I think it would be interesting...;))

tano

[sun-star]

Originally posted by Tanoliel
I read a comment--maybe from JK, can't remember--that "jumper" to "sweater" was a must because they didn't want to give the impression that all the boys wore dresses. :D (I think it would be interesting...;))

So is a "jumper" a kind of dress in America?

[Tanoliel]

In America "jumper" refers to, I think, the kind of sleevless dress you put on over a shirt.

[sun-star]

Originally posted by Tanoliel
In America "jumper" refers to, I think, the kind of sleevless dress you put on over a shirt.

Thanks! Looks like I'm the one who needs to learn about the other side of the Atlantic... but I am getting there :D

[Tanoliel]

I just really enjoy British words over American ones, most of the time. Probably because they're new to me.

(Noticed your sig, sun-star: YEAH! Another Bard lover! ;))

tano

[Belle]

Being British myself I think that changing the HP books is very wrong. Living in Britain we have to put up with all the Americanisms in day to day life and in books written by Americans, and we understand perfectly what meaning they are trying to put across. Harry is an English boy going to an English boarding school, and some of the humour is very English. I am sure Americans can understand what JK Rowling means without having things 'translated' for them.

[IronParrot]

And even if they don't understand it, they certainly have the capacity to learn. But to deny them that opportunity is ridiculous.

The sad thing is, most readers don't even know this many changes have been made.

[SamwiseGamgeeOTS]

I certainly didn't.......I'm American....wow, i definatly feel really stupid now...

[Laurus Nobilis]

Don't feel stupid! :( It's the ones who got the idea of changing it who *should* feel stupid. I think at least they should have warned readers that changes had been made, so you could choose what version to buy.

[Fimbrethil]

No I don't think we should feel stupid (I'm American). Just uninformed. I think some things might have confused me in the British version of the books but then again I'm smart (somtimes) and I think I could've figured it out!

[gimli7410]

americans always have to have it there way:p jk:D

[Tanoliel]

Rubbish. :)(Okay, unfortuntely NOT rubbish...but the Americans who Have Their Way are not all of them....)

It was the publishers...and if I had a choice, I wouldn't have changed anything. In fact, I'll probably buy any other HP books on the internet and get the real versions. They're better. :D

[Hasty Ent]

Originally posted by Tanoliel
In fact, I'll probably buy any other HP books on the internet and get the real versions. They're better. :D

If you do, make sure the publisher is Bloomsbury, NOT Scholastic (aka The Fascist Publishing Co). I tried to locate the original British text and found it on Amazon's UK site.

[Tanoliel]

Yeah, no joke. The power of internet is great and good...(and sometimes evil...but still bloody useful!)

tano

[sun-star]

I thought I'd bring this thread back up because:

Talking to some American HP fans, I've heard that there are fewer changes in Order of the Phoenix (from UK TO US editions) than in previous books. Not having the Scholastic versions, I couldn't say, but does anybody know if it's true?

[Cirdan]

Most of the types of edits previously common were not committed this time around. Much of the original style seems to be included. I think things like "pass your exam" versus "get your exam", where it is very ambiguous, were still done. Things like replacing "pudding" with "dessert" were not done this time around.

[Elf Girl]

Yes, I was very impressed with their restraint. (But I still can't wait for my British version to come!)

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by sun-star
I can't believe they thought it was necessary to make so many changes. Do they really think Americans are so culturally insular that they won't read a book where it says "biscuits" instead of "cookies"? If I were American, I would feel quite insulted. I'm really glad British publishers don't "translate" American books in the same way (as far as I'm aware) because I find them the best way of finding out about the American way of life and language differences. It's far more interesting to learn stuff like that, IMO :rolleyes:

I feel insulted , so how about all the whiners stick to english version and stop the crying.