Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (Book 1)

I was a bit hesitant when I heard that they were releasing an official illustrated edition of Harry Potter, but my fears were all for naught. The entire unabridged novel was contained between the covers (thankfully complete, as they should never leave out a word of HP!) accompanied by wonderfully wrought illustrations by artist Jim Kay. He channels the films just enough to keep with the established and popularized visual canon, but his style is also very reminiscent of the cover designs from the book’s original publication, which I thought was a nice nod to original fans of the series. The majority of the images are obviously watercolour- or ink-based, and therefore have a wonderfully vibrant tonal quality which treads a careful line show more between the stylings of children’s books and material that will be a viewing pleasure for the original HP-generation (all grown now). Successfully navigating this line (especially considering the depths that the story, and therefore the illustrations, must grow to encompass in the later books) was a definite concern of mine, but it looks like Kay is going to well meet my expectations with his hints of darkness and careful balance as evidenced here. I can’t wait to see what he does with the next installation (and the rest of the series) - they can’t come soon enough! show less

A living legend learns his story.

Vernon Dursley, an aggressively ordinary man, sets out for work. But the world has become a strange place. Wizards walk openly, and owls fly, carrying the most wondrous of news. A great evil has been vanquished, and before the night is through Vernon and his family will be forced to take in the baby who changed it all, Harry Potter. Neither welcomed nor loved, he will wait, unaware, for the day when the magical world comes to reclaim their hero, the Boy Who Lived.

What follows is both familiar and refreshing, as Harry learns his story alongside the audience. His fame only serves to enhance the awkward search for identity, as everyone Harry meets already “knows” his story. Harry is forced to wade show more through assumptions and expectations as he struggles to find his place in a new school. The story once again elevates a common experience with a unique complication, the school is magical. Whimsical adventures establish new characters in artful ways. Much of the story will be familiar to any veterans of fantasy, but this author manages it with a master’s flair.

+Strong Characterization
+Strong Setting
+Strong Narrative Voice, with touches of Humor
*Young Read
*Predictable but enjoyable plot & ideas

4/5 show less

The boy who lived, and the door he opened for me.

I read this book when I was in class 10. I had seen other students carrying it around, the cover worn from multiple readings. I dismissed it as children's fluff. I was fifteen, and I thought I had outgrown fantasy. Then, one afternoon with nothing else to do, I picked up my younger cousin's copy. I opened it to the first line: "Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much." I did not look up again until I had finished the book the next day. Then I read it again.

I did not know, then, that this book would become a door. Not the most sophisticated door, not the most literary door, but a door nonetheless. Behind it show more lay a world where a lonely boy could find friends, where the despised could become powerful, where a game of chess could save a life, and where the worst fear was not a monster but a man without a nose who could not love. I am twenty nine now. I have read thousands of books since. But I have never forgotten the feeling of walking through that door for the first time.

What it is:

Harry Potter is an orphan, raised by his aunt and uncle in a cupboard under the stairs, treated as a servant, told that his parents died in a car crash. On his eleventh birthday, he discovers that he is a wizard, that his parents were murdered by a dark lord named Voldemort, and that he is famous in a world he never knew existed. He is whisked away to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, where he makes his first true friends (Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger), his first true enemies (Draco Malfoy, Professor Snape), and discovers that the magical world is not immune to the same prejudices, cruelties, and injustices as the muggle one. The plot is a mystery: who is trying to steal the Sorcerer's Stone, an alchemical artifact that grants immortality? The answer, when it comes, involves a troll, a chess board, a mirror that shows the heart's desire, and a villain who has been hiding in plain sight the whole time.

Why it stayed with me (from class 10 to now):

1. The worldbuilding is a masterclass in invitation. Rowling does not explain everything at once. She drops hints: owl post, platform nine and three-quarters, Diagon Alley hidden behind a pub wall. You discover the world alongside Harry, and every discovery feels like a gift. The magic is whimsical (chocolate frogs that hop, portraits that talk, staircases that move) but also grounded in rules (you cannot conjure food out of nothing, love is a form of magic that Voldemort cannot understand). This balance of wonder and logic is why the series has endured.

2. The characters are archetypes made flesh. Harry is the orphan hero, but he is also angry, impulsive, and occasionally foolish. Ron is the loyal sidekick, but he is also insecure, jealous, and hungry for recognition. Hermione is the brainy one, but she is also bossy, anxious, and willing to break rules for the right cause. Hagrid is the gentle giant, but he is also reckless and emotionally vulnerable. These are not complex characters by literary standards. But they are real in the way that childhood friends are real. You do not analyze them. You love them.

3. The theme of chosen family hits differently at fifteen. I read this book at an age when I was trying to figure out who I was outside my family. Harry's discovery that he belongs somewhere, that he has a place, a purpose, people who care about him, spoke directly to that longing. The scene at the end, where Harry looks at the mirror of Erised and sees his parents standing behind him, is not just sad. It is also hopeful. Because he walks away from the mirror. He chooses the living over the dead. I did not fully understand that at fifteen. I understand it now.

4. The mystery is well-constructed for a first novel. Rowling plants clues (Fluffy the three-headed dog, the trapdoor, the harp, the troll, Snape's leg injury) and pays them off in a way that feels satisfying without being obvious. The final reveal, that Quirinus Quirrell, the stuttering Defense Against the Dark Arts professor, is the villain, with Voldemort's face on the back of his head—is genuinely shocking. The twist works because Rowling hid it in plain sight: the character everyone suspected (Snape) was actually trying to save Harry.

5. The prose is functional but effective. Rowling is not a stylist. Her sentences are clear, her dialogue is natural, and her pacing is excellent. She knows when to speed up (the final obstacle course) and when to slow down (the quiet moments in the common room by the fire). This is not a book you read for beautiful sentences. It is a book you read because you cannot put it down.

Where a class 10 reader might notice flaws (and that's okay):

1. The plot is linear. Harry arrives at Hogwarts, learns about the stone, investigates, and confronts the villain. There are no subplots about house elves, no deep dives into wizarding history, no political commentary. Later books would add complexity. This one is a clean, simple adventure.

2. The villains are cartoonish at times. Draco Malfoy is a sneering bully. Snape is a red herring who exists to be suspicious. Voldemort, in his first appearance, is a face on the back of a head. The moral complexity that makes later books great (Snape's redemption, Malfoy's reluctant humanity) is not present here. That is not a flaw. It is a first book.

3. The prose is aimed at younger readers. The vocabulary is limited. The sentences are short. The emotions are stated directly rather than implied. For a class 10 reader who has already read adult literature, this can feel simplistic. I felt that, even at fifteen. But I also felt that simplicity was exactly what I needed. It was a door, not a labyrinth.

Who should read this:

Anyone who has somehow avoided the Harry Potter phenomenon and wants to see what the fuss is about.
Young readers (9–12) who are ready for a longer chapter book.
Adults who want a comforting, nostalgic read that does not ask too much.
Teachers and parents who want to understand why this series matters to so many.

Who might skip it:

If you require literary prose or moral ambiguity.
If you have already seen the movies and feel no need to revisit (but the book is richer).
If you have objections to the author's later public statements (many readers struggle with this).

Final verdict:

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is not the best book I have ever read. It is not the most sophisticated, the most beautiful, or the most profound. But it is the book that reminded me, at fifteen, that reading could be a door instead of a chore. I had been assigned so many books that felt like medicine. This one felt like a feast.

Five stars. For the cupboard under the stairs. For the sorting hat. For the first time I read the words "Yer a wizard, Harry" and believed them. And for the boy who lived, who taught me that reading is not about escaping life. It is about finding the life you want to live. show less

Not in the mood for a long review so short version. I wanted to hate it but its actually pretty solid. Takes a lot of inspiration from Tolkien, Dahl and Dickens but is its own thing. Can feel a little episodic at times and author isn't able to come up with enough reasons why the kids don't talk to an adult instead of doing things themselves. But overall its a fairly good and easy read. End of review, now on to the interesting part :) .

I was shocked when i realised what this is. The premise is actually an allegory reimagining white, old money privilege as magic. Its kind of amazing in a horrifying sort of way. Essentially the word muggle is this worlds version of the word pleb and the author uses it with gusto to abuse the non-privileged show more class even when there are characters from that class around like Hermione. I don't know if Rowling comes from money but it certainly seems like she wants to.
You'll notice there are never any references to what wizards do for a living or what use a Hogwarts education is, because the people who go to these sorts of schools don't actually need to work for a living.
The only reason given for why magic is covered up is that the commoners will all want handouts from the privileged class if they learn how privileged they are.
“Well, their main job is to keep it from the Muggles that there’s still witches an’ wizards up an’ down the country.”
“Why?”
“Why? Blimey, Harry, everyone’d be wantin’ magic solutions to their problems.
It doesn't help that this book is whiter than the private schools its imitating, and in this case that feels like a feature not a bug. Lets not even get into the goblin bankers, i'm surprised she didn't cut out the pretense entirely and call one of them Fagan.

Anyway i am now more interested in reading 'Atlas Shrugged' as i seriously want to compare the two :) .
show less

It's amazing how much of this first Potter novel is devoted to world-building up front--the principal plot of the book doesn't arrive in explicit form until the back third, or quarter. The courage to do this allows for an immersive and interesting world to unfold, much like it does for Harry, to the reader. All the essential elements are here--Ron and Hermione, Snape and McGonagall, Dumbledore and Hagrid--and of course Quidditch and Hogwarts, and the Dursleys. It is easy to see how this initial offering hooked successive generations of readers from the start and spawned a behemoth still going strong nearly three decades later. The heartrending explanation for Harry's survival in the final moments of this novel is an unexpectedly show more endearing and deep testament to the particular bond mothers have with their children. As an old soul and a relatively new parent myself, I was a bit touched by it. show less

My friend Padric is sophisticated, witty, and urbane, a career bookseller and one of the most well-read people I know. He's equally at home with Oscar Wilde or James Ellroy, Elizabeth George or Jared Diamond. He reads in a wide range of genres and categories, and I defy you to come away from a seller-customer experience with him without an armful of books or, at the very least, a long to-be-read list.

And yet, twice a year, right around February and then again in July, one of us will contact the other, by email or by phone, and the message will be: it's time for Harry. What brings us, readers and booksellers both, back to this children's series, twice a year, every year?

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone is the first of the seven show more Harry Potter books. In it, Harry Potter--an orphan, known in one world as "The Boy Who Lived," known in another as "you" or "boy"--is taken out of his classically awful existence and transported to a magical world. Pretty standard stuff, the basic plot, give or take, of story upon story, year after year, of kid lit. But, something sets these books apart, even in this first installment which--let's face it--is not particularly well-written or even that original. And yet...

We enter the world of Harry Potter with a little prologue, in which we learn that there has been a cataclysmic event: someone terrible and evil is gone and the world is celebrating. But a boy has been left orphaned, and the prologue ends with him being left to grow up in what will almost certainly be unpleasant circumstances.

Ten years later we meet the boy, Harry Potter, skinny and undernourished but still plucky and resilient. He's been made to sleep in the (now iconic) cupboard under the stairs, his birthday is never remembered, and Christmas presents usually consist of a pair of his uncle's used socks. But he remembers things sometimes, and even if he doesn't know if they're dreams or real, he knows there's something more.

His hero's journey (and make no mistake about it, over the seven volumes it becomes a classic Campbellian journey) begins when he is plucked from the constrained, antiseptic world of suburbia and taken to be trained up as a wizard at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. There, he will face tasks and trials, sometimes alone and sometimes with his friends Ron and Hermione beside him.

J.K. Rowling draws from classic British novels of life in public school, such as Tom Brown's Schooldays, and from classic fairy tales (Cinderella, Jack & the Beanstalk spring immediately to mind), and her own reading or instinctive understanding of Joseph Campbell's monomyth of the hero's journey. What makes the Harry Potter series special is not the world that Rowling creates, although that world is certainly wondrous, but rather, her treatment of her characters. What matters to J.K. Rowling is knowledge, bravery, loyalty, friendship, and--most of all--love.

Oscar Wilde once quipped (and I apologize for my awkward paraphrasing) that one would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at the death of Little Nell. I love Dickens and I love that thought, because there must be something absurd and over the top about any scene capable of such tear-jerking pathos. And this is how I feel about Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. It's funny and sweet and deeply heartfelt, and if some of the sentiments might seem like well-worn platitudes when taken on their surface, dig a little deeper and the truth is there.

And if you can get past Neville's being awarded 10 points for Gryffindor because, "It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends" without both crying and laughing, then you do have a heart of stone. show less

A first time read for me. (Technically not a read but a listen: the audiobook narrated by Stephen Fry). No, I haven't been living under a rock. It's just that after years of telling my Harry Potter fan son, thanks all the same, I really don't want to read any Harry Potter books, I finally succumbed thanks to a GR group. Is it possible that I am the last person in the world to read this book who was over the age of ten when it was first published? Maybe.

My resistance to reading Harry Potter wasn't particularly to do with the hype surrounding it at the beginning or with each successive instalment. It's just that I persuaded myself when I was about ten that I don't like fantasy. That's how old I was when [b:The Lion, the Witch, and the show more Wardrobe|100915|The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (Chronicles of Narnia, #2)|C.S. Lewis|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1308957077s/100915.jpg|4790821] scared me silly. I never fully recovered. Although I sort of did, really, because I went on to read the Narnia Chronicles as an adult and found them perfectly delightful. And it's hard to dislike [b:Alice in Wonderland|13023|Alice in Wonderland|Lewis Carroll|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1166512952s/13023.jpg|2933712]. However, I still haven't read Tolkien.

Anyway, I'm glad that I finally decided to go along for the ride. I enjoyed this book immensely. I particularly liked the humour. (A giant three-headed dog named Fluffy!!) I liked the satire. I got hooked into the story. I loved Stephen Fry's voices. Now I understand why this book appealed so much to my son.

It is certainly derivative. There's Cinderella, old fashioned boarding school stories, a dose of Star Wars (itself extremely derivative), a touch of Alice in Wonderland - and lots of other influences besides. But the influences work well together. I found the ending slightly unsatisfactory - there appeared to be quite a lot of exposition all done in a bit of a rush - but I wasn't unduly troubled.

All in all, a good read. And my son is saying "I told you so". show less