I've never gotten into the Harry Potter books personally. I do have some adult friends that are into them. Meh. But, I do think Stewart is pretty funny here. Off the top of my head, the only book series aimed at children or teens that creeps me out is the Twilight books. I don't know if it's because feminist brainwashing or what, but somehow in America we have an army of over-30 women not ashamed to publicly drool over stories about high school kids and very young actors. It's disturbing.
Stewart Lee doesn't really work well in this format. If you know anything about Stewart Lee he's really a long form comedian. Clips like this are ok and funny but are designed and work much better in the full version of what he does
@MrKazzi0 They are not so easily comparable as they are in different mediums of entertainment, have different target demographics and set out to achieve completely different goals.
Stewart Lee is not trying to tell a fantasy adventure story aimed at children, J.K. Rowling is not being angry and satirical for your enjoyment.
@jk28416 We don't agree that she cannot write, even by your own admission the books are highly enjoyable, and whilst not an accurate measure of quality, popularity and critical praise cannot be totally ignored. And again no one is saying that reading should be "mastorbatory" but equally it shouldn't be without enjoyment. For someone who claims to be so well read I find your approach to literature incredibly narrow minded, a claim, ironically, you seem intent to attach to anyone who has read HP.
for me, this guy is either a genius or an idiot. a genius for being able to instantly annoy me, or an idiot for thinking or pretending having an infant-style rant is called comedy. This guy is about a funny as a funeral, or a broken leg, or basically anything that isn't at all funny.
what an elitist cunt stewart lee is. i have read all the harry potter books and love them, because i enjoy letting my imagination have the best of me. however, i have also read nineteen eighty four, animal farm and catcher in the rye. stop comparing literature you old grumpy twat, books have their different qualities.
I find it amusing that fans of Lee seem to feel they MUST hate other comics in order to like him. I think he's sometimes really good. So are those other guys. You don't have to hate one to like the other. Lee badmouthed Boyle. Boyle badmouthed Lee. Who cares? They can both be funny.
@svalchemy I'm not familiar with his work so i can't judge...however i do have the collected works of Oscar Wilde, and I love Harry Potter, so i don't think my literary tastes can be questioned xD
harry potter is for kids, and people should explore literature rather than infantilise themselves by pretending they are children and reading children's books, grow up read an emotive book that explores the human condition and what it is like to be an adult, if you can't do that read a book that is at the very least well written.
@jk28416 I think that your smugness is sickening. Reading is a personal thing...I bet you have to showcase all of your books to make sure people understand that you are reading classics. Grow up, Reading isn't a competition.
@Falsel1ght Who is more smug, the person encouraging others to move away from books which were definitely intended for children and read works which explore what it is to be human, or the person who calls them out on the basis of personal opinion, of which they seem devoid in any meaningful sense?
I think it is far more smug to recline in your couched regard for your own (personal) judgement than to openly question others and yourself of what it is to be an adult human being.
@jk28416 "harry potter is for kids" "read a book that is at the very least well written." - I love these types of comments as you've argued yourself into a corner. If you haven't read the book how can you comment on whether its well written? If you have, then why are you deriding others for reading a kids book that you have read? And have you ever considered the fact that people who have read HP may have read other books too, and that many may be better read then you?
@paulski1966 I've read a few of her best chapters, and she is very bad at setting scenes, her language is basic and tawdry and she peppers the page with useless adverbs and dead metaphors, very similar to Jeffrey Archer in a lot of ways Does not compare with the rape scene in cider with Rosie or the chapter where Raskolnikov remembers the image of the villagers mutilating an old work horse in Crime and Punishment.
@jk28416 I would rather read work of a master that explores the human condition, not populist largely plagiarised tosh designed for children with little to no subtext.
I am glad you enjoy this work, Millions upon millions for people do, irrespective of literary merit, for the same reasons that WWF wrestling is more popular in this world than Ballet.
@jk28416 Which chapters? And the rather lame attempt at trolling with the rape scene and Dostoyevsky comparisons did not go unnoticed. And the "largely plagiarised" comment demonstrates either an overt reliance on the comments of other detractors or a gross misunderstanding of the word plagiarism.
@paulski1966 I'm glad you have found a book that is of your level, but if you wish to expand this, I think you'll find there is much better out there, both in this genre and others, I don't think you can argue with this statement... Unless you are about to compare act 5 scene 5 of MacBeth with chapter 1 of HP and the goblet of brimstone, then I know you really are crazy.
@jk28416 Ah, see now that is the crux of your error, that you assume that anyone who has read HP has read nothing else. Also no one is comparing Rowling to Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky, Dickens or Solzhenitsyn as clearly she isn't. Is she one of the great authors, no, does that mean that her books can't be enjoyable, also no, does reading her books mean that you cannot read Steinbeck or Hemingway - no. Can one persons intellect be judged by only one book they've read - what do you think?
@paulski1966 The great Writers all have something in common, an ability to write, I'm a fraid JK is out on a limb on this front, I'm glad you agree with me on this front. Should reading be purely a masturbatory enjoyment? I'm inclined to say no, it should expand teach and develop. You are welcome to your opinions, I have a list of books to read, and JK's creations come near the bottom, frankly on the basis that I do not believe I could share the same emotive response as a 12 year old.
@paulski1966 I think we can agree that although greatly enjoyable, the books themselves are light-weight. As I've mentioned before this is not a bad thing, but the' what you see is what you get' culture will leave people unfulfilled, it occupies a genre, and a well subscribed one at that, I mean, Tolkien created his own language!
@TheKamanick So you are saying you would rather let you're kids read some Harry Potter Crap than Tolkien? Unbelievable. No wonder young people can't get jobs today...
@rebelyelled "So you are saying you would rather let you're kids read some Harry Potter Crap than Tolkien? Unbelievable. No wonder young people can't get jobs today..." Hang on you just said that HP clearly reminded you of Tolkein - yet now you are saying its crap - how is it possible that its crap and yet reminiscent of a classic at the same time?
@TheKamanick No, I read the Fellowship of the Ring when I was four - it took me all fucking year even though it was a kid's book. I am quite surprised your knee-jerk adult book suggestion was Mein Kampf. Intriguing...
@rebelyelled So you've read one chapter, and on that you write off an entire series. And you call people idiots for having read one book (of which you have also started to read). So are those that read The Hobbit or LOTR idiots? How about His Dark Materials or A Kestrel for a Knave? What about To Kill a Mockingbird, Catcher in the Rye and Of Mice and Men?
I was a vociferous reader as a child, I just don't feel the need to make bullshit claims about reading FOTR at age four.
People realize that the smug superiority is just part of his act, and that that's why it's funny? And that sometimes he simply says things to annoy people? That's obvious to everyone, right?
@jamtlanning Not obvious to a lot of people. He caught me out when I saw him do "41st Best" in The Laughter Lounge, he slagged off Al Murray and his fans and it threw me a bit because I thought he meant it. It's part of his act to try and throw the audience and try and win them around again to keep himself interested. A great stand up comedian is Stewart.
As for Dan Brown it´s a combination of Stewart Lee pitching in to him in that same episode ("The old man died. It was sad" he has a doctor tell a family), and the fact that all the people I know accept that the science of sign theory (semiotics) is called symbology. No one can give me a straight answer about this and it bugs me. If he wrote about meteorologists would he call them 'Cloudologists'? Or mechanics 'Enginologists'? Use the fucking words. Unless you´re Joyce, which he patently isn´t.
paulski1966 - I'm assuming that by stating the Rowling books aren't coherent you've read them? As an adult?
I saw a couple of the films. Whilst I expect you to point out that adapting books for the screen is a process in which the book is bound to lose a lot of its subtleties and interority, the flying sports day, simplistic characterisation and giant spider - all fantastic stuff for kids - were it´s hardly like trying to film Ulysses.
@NormanArches - So you are basing how coherent a 7 volume 3300+ page piece of work is on "a couple of the films"?What did you find incoherent?You simply state that they were not trying to film Ulysses - obviously. But its this type of thing that bugs me, you're comparing apples and oranges. The Potter series makes no claim to being Ulysses (i' afraid I'm with Woolf and Lawrence when it comes to Ulysses), it simply claims to be an entertaining story - In the vein of Lewis, Dahl, Le Guin et al
Nobody mentioned the C. S. Lewis quote yet? “A children's story that can only be enjoyed by children is not a good children's story in the slightest.” A good story is a good story no matter what your age is.
I love reading light-hearted works, and some of them include kid's books. I think it's fine to have a bit of variety. Loved the way Lee said, "I'm a 40 year old man!"
@zorroazulapex Lee isn't actually criticising adults who read or have read children's books per se. He's just reacting to the sheep-like way in which people got obsessed with Harry Potter and tried to make everyone else read them as well.
The ambiguous start of my last post might look like I´m criticising Stewart Lee. Not my intention. I was agreeing with him 100%. Is it better for adults to read HP books than The Sun or sit on front of QVC? Probably.Is it better for them to read HP than a proper book, for adults?
No fucking way. Like the 'symbologist' in Dan Brown. Google it for me, I can´t be fucked.There´s no such thing, is there? I´m sure the discipline of sign theory is called semiology.There´s another written for retards.
@NormanArches I'm curious as to what you define as a "proper book for adults". Dan Browns are targeted at adults only, so are they better to read these then, or is it limited to just classics, and if that is the case, what about classic children's literature such as Kipling , Dahl, Wind in the Willows and Alice in Wonderland, would you prefer adults read a Jilly Cooper or an Danielle Steel to these? I'm assuming that by stating the Rowling books aren't coherent you've read them? As an adult?
Comparing people who read HP books with Blake writing his Songs for a local church group competition misses much - these people read children´s lit and Blake was writing it at full mental stretch. There´s also the fact that the Songs are, quantitatively, a small part of Blake´s work - so he´s also talking about the 'epics' like Milton and Jerusalem, where the real meat is; it also glosses over the fact that the songs, unlike Rowling´s boy´s own stories, are intellectually coherent.
@chalkus What a stupid cunt you are. I write an intelligent comment, you respond with insults and nothing else. Don't bother replying - go and read a book. 'Effective methods of suicide' preferably.
So Lee has read all of Blake's work, including Songs of Innocence, which Blake based on the meters of nursery rhymes and children's songs. Its a good job that the romantic visionary and poet wasn't reading nursery rhymes at 32 years of age eh? That would be embarrassing.
You do realise what you just did? You compared William Blake to JK Rowling. Time to retire to a monastery and ponder on your misdeeds for the next 30 years.
@textthing - er no i didn't, i compared Blake to the millions of adults that have also at some point read childrens literature whilst in adulthood, who Lee seems to feel are an embarrassment. Or perhaps you'd prefer that I pointed out that Blake read children's literature as research for his body of work to ensure its accuracy, something that Lee - by his own admission - didn't. So perhaps you could retire to a monastery and pull your literary head out of your snobbish arse?
My comment was facetious - but oh what a tirade of rage! I should do it again!
Blake drew on cultural material to produce his body of work. Adults read Harry Potter because advertising tells them it's the thing to do. Harry Potter is cultural junk - airport fiction for kids. What is your point?
@textthing Your comment wasn't facetious, it was inaccurate, there's quite a considerable difference. And hardly a "tirade" of rage is it. I'd also be curious to see all of this advertising for the books, especially that targeted specifically towards the adult audience, and especially for the earlier books. And my point was explained in my last post - the irony that Lee uses an author to demonstrate "adult" reading who has been guilty of the very thing he is lambasting others for.
@textthing Did you miss this "Lee uses an author to demonstrate "adult" reading who has been guilty of the very thing he is lambasting others for." Yet again how simple do i have to explain this? Still yet to see all of this advertising telling adults to read the potter books, or are you just choosing to ignore this point?
@FractalZero - "Nursery rhymes are somewhat more enduring and well crafted than a Harry Potter book" - clearly you've read the Harry potter books then in order to make that comment. I also fail to see how you can comment on how enduring something is when you are referring to work that is as little 4 years old. There's also the small issue of stating opinion as fact as well.
@bowen192 - No, I meant Songs of Innocence, it was published 5 years before Songs of Innocence and of Experience (which I appreciate contains all of the poems from Songs of Innocence) which was published when Blake was 37. I also believe Blake used the archaic spelling of tiger, hence - Tyger, Tyger, burning bright, in the forest of the night; - this was also not in Songs of Innocence, but in Songs of Experience.
@paulski1966 But Blake wasn't reading nursery rhymes purely for his enjoyment -- he was researching for a serious work. That's nowhere near the same thing.
@llsrx so its acceptable for adults to read children's literature for research purposes then. So, say if you were writing a comedy sketch where you were berating the quality of said book then it would be perfectly acceptable, infact pretty much necessary, to read the piece of work you were discussing, even if it was for children. But its nowhere near the same thing is it!
@mmscott9 - Notice that you also removed this comment (however i still have it). If you had any basic knowledge of reading then you'd note that at no point did i say Songs of Innocence were nursery rhymes. Also whilst SoE is meant to contrast SoI, they were not initially published together (it was 5 years before they were) so to say SoI is only intended to be read as a counterpoint to SoE is incorrect. To put it bluntly - you're the moron.
@paulski1966 NB the comment was deleted because I knew it was incorrect. The amount of pettiness oh here is astounding, that people are fuming that their intellects have been challenged by an act that is purposively self righteous and condescending.
SoI has a deeper meaning than to be contrasted with SoE. There are far more to the works than that.I agree with the underlying rant against this sheepish mentality though which Lee actually argued rather than a dislike of the subject matter itself.
@mmscott9 "The amount of pettiness oh here is astounding" - you referred to people on here who agreed with a statement you claimed was incorrect (but which was only down to you misreading it) as morons - how would you expect people to respond to that? If you knew your comment was incorrect, why type it in the first place? And where is anyone "fuming that there intellects have been challenged" exactly?
"SoI has a deeper meaning......" Eh, i know - which is why i pointed this out to YOU.
@paulski1966 Real life experiences and his feelings towards the social and economic climate of C17 and 18th shaped Blake's works, and so gives Songs of Innocence far more weight in substance than commercialised, over hyped meaningless nonsense like the Harry Potter books, which was the basis of Lee's entire rant.
@mmscott9 Obviously you've read the HP series in order to refer to them as meaningless nonsense? "commercialised, over hyped" - its always hilarious to read this phrase associated with the HP series. You do realise that the first book had an initial print run of 500 - the entire promotional campaign consisted of sending some copies to critics. Hardly commercialised or over hyped. The hype around HP started because of the quality of the books and the awards they won, simple as that.
"began due to a juggernaut of a marketing machine" - feel free to back this statement up with some evidence, such as the TV campaign for any of the first three books. Or an ad campaign in the national press, or an internet campaign maybe, or anything that points to a "Juggernaut of a marketing machine".
I like the HP series and I don't think there's anything wrong with getting in touch with your inner child (in a metaphysical sense you reprobates). But I still had a good chuckle at Stewart Lee's bookish snobbery.
Does it not feel that Stewart Lee is getting rather lazy - Jeremy Clarkson, Dan Brown, Harry Potter, Chris Moyles etc. it all seems like choosing easy targets whilst pandering to the target audiences need to feel intellectually superior - I look forward to his searing routines on Cold Play and Simon Cowell.
what scares me about J k Rowling is how the fuck can someone become so rich by doing something so unimportant.....Its as if someone has brainwashed millions of people into running out and buying the books and seeing the movies ,,about what ?? about fuck all...i agree with everything lee says here i thought i was alone
yes when its about hob goblins and wizards..I wouldnt care if i ever set eyes on or heard of harry twater or the hobbits ever again,,,my point was the writer has basicaly by
I've never gotten into the Harry Potter books personally. I do have some adult friends that are into them. Meh. But, I do think Stewart is pretty funny here. Off the top of my head, the only book series aimed at children or teens that creeps me out is the Twilight books. I don't know if it's because feminist brainwashing or what, but somehow in America we have an army of over-30 women not ashamed to publicly drool over stories about high school kids and very young actors. It's disturbing.
ActaNonVerba71 21 hours ago
"No, I haven't read Harry Potter, but I have read the complete works of the romantic poet and visionary William Blake, so fuck off!"
- Best Line Ever.
Kaos77Kisame 2 days ago 2
this is funny?
Dylan20121 3 days ago
So this guy is trying to be funny be complaining about books he hasn't read?
Sn0wLeppard 4 days ago 2
harry potter and the tree of nothing hahahah
tobiojo10 4 days ago
There are 132 adults who read Harry Potter books, books for children...
somename99 5 days ago
@somename99 LOL.
ActaNonVerba71 21 hours ago
Stewart Lee doesn't really work well in this format. If you know anything about Stewart Lee he's really a long form comedian. Clips like this are ok and funny but are designed and work much better in the full version of what he does
WHWonka 6 days ago 2
HARRY POTTER > STEWART LEE
MrKazzi0 1 week ago
@MrKazzi0 They are not so easily comparable as they are in different mediums of entertainment, have different target demographics and set out to achieve completely different goals.
Stewart Lee is not trying to tell a fantasy adventure story aimed at children, J.K. Rowling is not being angry and satirical for your enjoyment.
Kaos77Kisame 2 days ago
@jk28416 We don't agree that she cannot write, even by your own admission the books are highly enjoyable, and whilst not an accurate measure of quality, popularity and critical praise cannot be totally ignored. And again no one is saying that reading should be "mastorbatory" but equally it shouldn't be without enjoyment. For someone who claims to be so well read I find your approach to literature incredibly narrow minded, a claim, ironically, you seem intent to attach to anyone who has read HP.
paulski1966 1 week ago 3
for me, this guy is either a genius or an idiot. a genius for being able to instantly annoy me, or an idiot for thinking or pretending having an infant-style rant is called comedy. This guy is about a funny as a funeral, or a broken leg, or basically anything that isn't at all funny.
InhabitantOfOddworld 1 week ago
what an elitist cunt stewart lee is. i have read all the harry potter books and love them, because i enjoy letting my imagination have the best of me. however, i have also read nineteen eighty four, animal farm and catcher in the rye. stop comparing literature you old grumpy twat, books have their different qualities.
OkJohnnyLetsGo 1 week ago
This shows just how some people will laugh at absolutely anything!
napchier 1 week ago
TESCO NOT TESCOS YOU SILLY MAN
xanderableme 2 weeks ago
Brilliant - I love the nasty comments from obvious HP fans, probably having an unpleasant moment of self-insight...
escargot606 2 weeks ago
@escargot606 he just came off as arrogant. his punchline at the end was funny though I'll give him that.
Choo69 2 weeks ago
I find it amusing that fans of Lee seem to feel they MUST hate other comics in order to like him. I think he's sometimes really good. So are those other guys. You don't have to hate one to like the other. Lee badmouthed Boyle. Boyle badmouthed Lee. Who cares? They can both be funny.
WalterLiddy 2 weeks ago
@WalterLiddy im not a fan of lee (although this now may change), but i can safely say frankie boyle is a piece of shit
louiecostello 2 weeks ago
I don't know why but 'harry potter and the forest of embarrassment' just sets me off everytime
ijuhat19 2 weeks ago 6
absolute garbage.
Thecolourjim 2 weeks ago
Hahahaha I love Harry potter but I think I may love him more :)
nomesbirdy 2 weeks ago
109 people have read Harry Potter and the tree of nothing.
rocketjunkie88 2 weeks ago
This is wank.
CommissarXIV 2 weeks ago
Never really found him funny, this is the sort of shit people ramble on bout in pubs to their mates, usually with a polite chuckle.
"Tryhard" springs to mind.
Tilaron 3 weeks ago 2
@Tilaron Or maybe you just love Potter and a tear trickled down your face.
310sucks 6 days ago
@310sucks Not really, I just like comedians that tell jokes rather than re-telling dumb banter.
Tilaron 6 days ago
@Tilaron When did "try hard" become an insult?
BeestOfSpood 5 days ago
i heard reading makes you bent, is this true??
abels121 3 weeks ago
Thumbs up for William Blake.
Jcolinsol 3 weeks ago
ha ha fucking ha
MadOldPete 3 weeks ago
I will laugh at a loud fart, but this just wasn't funny :P
Jeffo193 3 weeks ago
@Jeffo193
Not a fan of William Blake, then?
svalchemy 3 weeks ago
@svalchemy I'm not familiar with his work so i can't judge...however i do have the collected works of Oscar Wilde, and I love Harry Potter, so i don't think my literary tastes can be questioned xD
Jeffo193 3 weeks ago
lmao this guy's removing any negative comments about Stewart Lee.
theEarlofChip 1 month ago
Comment removed
ZephyrMusicOfficial 1 month ago
I thought he was a comedian....
MrMatican 1 month ago
GAY
robotpanda77 1 month ago
Thank god for youtube commentators who can psychically tell what Lee REALLY means.
Treblaine 1 month ago
Gasp! Lee shops at Tescos, he's as bad as the rest of us o_O
slimjimpui 1 month ago
Harry Potter and the Mitten of Wool spoiler: Snape hugs Dumbledore .
larry123738 1 month ago
harry potter is for kids, and people should explore literature rather than infantilise themselves by pretending they are children and reading children's books, grow up read an emotive book that explores the human condition and what it is like to be an adult, if you can't do that read a book that is at the very least well written.
jk28416 1 month ago
@jk28416 I think that your smugness is sickening. Reading is a personal thing...I bet you have to showcase all of your books to make sure people understand that you are reading classics. Grow up, Reading isn't a competition.
Falsel1ght 1 month ago
@Falsel1ght Who is more smug, the person encouraging others to move away from books which were definitely intended for children and read works which explore what it is to be human, or the person who calls them out on the basis of personal opinion, of which they seem devoid in any meaningful sense?
I think it is far more smug to recline in your couched regard for your own (personal) judgement than to openly question others and yourself of what it is to be an adult human being.
i7omahawki 1 month ago
@jk28416 "harry potter is for kids" "read a book that is at the very least well written." - I love these types of comments as you've argued yourself into a corner. If you haven't read the book how can you comment on whether its well written? If you have, then why are you deriding others for reading a kids book that you have read? And have you ever considered the fact that people who have read HP may have read other books too, and that many may be better read then you?
paulski1966 1 week ago
@paulski1966 I've read a few of her best chapters, and she is very bad at setting scenes, her language is basic and tawdry and she peppers the page with useless adverbs and dead metaphors, very similar to Jeffrey Archer in a lot of ways Does not compare with the rape scene in cider with Rosie or the chapter where Raskolnikov remembers the image of the villagers mutilating an old work horse in Crime and Punishment.
jk28416 1 week ago
@jk28416 I would rather read work of a master that explores the human condition, not populist largely plagiarised tosh designed for children with little to no subtext.
I am glad you enjoy this work, Millions upon millions for people do, irrespective of literary merit, for the same reasons that WWF wrestling is more popular in this world than Ballet.
jk28416 1 week ago
@jk28416 Which chapters? And the rather lame attempt at trolling with the rape scene and Dostoyevsky comparisons did not go unnoticed. And the "largely plagiarised" comment demonstrates either an overt reliance on the comments of other detractors or a gross misunderstanding of the word plagiarism.
paulski1966 1 week ago
@paulski1966 I'm glad you have found a book that is of your level, but if you wish to expand this, I think you'll find there is much better out there, both in this genre and others, I don't think you can argue with this statement... Unless you are about to compare act 5 scene 5 of MacBeth with chapter 1 of HP and the goblet of brimstone, then I know you really are crazy.
jk28416 1 week ago
@jk28416 Ah, see now that is the crux of your error, that you assume that anyone who has read HP has read nothing else. Also no one is comparing Rowling to Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky, Dickens or Solzhenitsyn as clearly she isn't. Is she one of the great authors, no, does that mean that her books can't be enjoyable, also no, does reading her books mean that you cannot read Steinbeck or Hemingway - no. Can one persons intellect be judged by only one book they've read - what do you think?
paulski1966 1 week ago
@paulski1966 The great Writers all have something in common, an ability to write, I'm a fraid JK is out on a limb on this front, I'm glad you agree with me on this front. Should reading be purely a masturbatory enjoyment? I'm inclined to say no, it should expand teach and develop. You are welcome to your opinions, I have a list of books to read, and JK's creations come near the bottom, frankly on the basis that I do not believe I could share the same emotive response as a 12 year old.
jk28416 1 week ago
@paulski1966 I think we can agree that although greatly enjoyable, the books themselves are light-weight. As I've mentioned before this is not a bad thing, but the' what you see is what you get' culture will leave people unfulfilled, it occupies a genre, and a well subscribed one at that, I mean, Tolkien created his own language!
jk28416 1 week ago
Actually the first and the last harry potter are interesting. 2 trough 6 are a copy paste expand of the first one.
dddrrmm 1 month ago
I don't find this man funny at all.
HeatVisionPaolo 1 month ago
@paulski1966 Like you I was a kid once, and after reading just one chapter
of an HP book as an adult it brought back memories of the Hobbitt and Lord
of the Rings and kid's stuff like that. Perhaps you did not read as a
child or were a slow learner?
rebelyelled 1 month ago
@rebelyelled Lord of the Rings aren't really kids' books. You're the first I've ever heard say that.
JOCieDC 1 month ago
@rebelyelled Lord of the Rings is NOT for children. Are you fucking crazy? Did you read Mein Kampf when you were 4?
TheKamanick 1 month ago
@TheKamanick So you are saying you would rather let you're kids read some Harry Potter Crap than Tolkien? Unbelievable. No wonder young people can't get jobs today...
rebelyelled 1 month ago
@rebelyelled And when exactly did I say that? Please tell me - I'm intrigued.
TheKamanick 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rebelyelled "So you are saying you would rather let you're kids read some Harry Potter Crap than Tolkien? Unbelievable. No wonder young people can't get jobs today..." Hang on you just said that HP clearly reminded you of Tolkein - yet now you are saying its crap - how is it possible that its crap and yet reminiscent of a classic at the same time?
paulski1966 1 week ago
@TheKamanick No, I read the Fellowship of the Ring when I was four - it took me all fucking year even though it was a kid's book. I am quite surprised your knee-jerk adult book suggestion was Mein Kampf. Intriguing...
rebelyelled 1 month ago
@rebelyelled So you've read one chapter, and on that you write off an entire series. And you call people idiots for having read one book (of which you have also started to read). So are those that read The Hobbit or LOTR idiots? How about His Dark Materials or A Kestrel for a Knave? What about To Kill a Mockingbird, Catcher in the Rye and Of Mice and Men?
I was a vociferous reader as a child, I just don't feel the need to make bullshit claims about reading FOTR at age four.
paulski1966 1 week ago
@paulski1966 Calm down mate. Stewart Lee is a comedian. He is taking the piss in this video. It is meant as a wind up. I was taking the piss too.
rebelyelled 1 week ago
@rebelyelled "I was taking the piss too." I believe the phrase you are hunting for is "trolling".
paulski1966 1 week ago
@paulski1966 Indeedski
rebelyelled 1 week ago
He's not on any Harry Potter books, he's on a stage.
ThisVideoGetsMeMoist 1 month ago 6
Only kids and idiots read HP books
rebelyelled 1 month ago
@rebelyelled And how would you be qualified to make a statement about the quality of a book unless you had read it? So are you a kid or an idiot?
paulski1966 1 month ago
I've read all of the Harry Potter series not because I'm a child but because I enjoy reading all sorts and I'm not a snob.
drplbiftin 1 month ago
'The tree of nothing' is fucking genius.
navroful 1 month ago
harry potter is better than watching this dude!
TheLornahanlon 1 month ago
My favorite book of the series was "Harry Potter and the Chamber Pot of Secrets"!
txvoltaire 1 month ago
@sibeliandrift - he actually read Classics at Oxford, sorry to be a dick....
tomhills1 2 months ago
I see Frankie Boyle called Stew 'flabby and irrelevant', what a stupid statement! Boyle isn't fit to lick Stew's boots.
TheDensley7 2 months ago 17
@TheDensley7 I'm a Scotch man, so Ihave authority to declare that Frankie is not 'cult', he is just shyte.
majorkeybaree 3 weeks ago
I quite like Boyle, but ad hominem attacks are worthless
Stewart Lee is fantastic
cajjer 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
.Does he hate everything successful? Harry potter, Top Gear, Michael Mcintyre..
ComedicTheory 1 week ago
No he just hates stuff that is shit like the above examples.
joehughes9 2 months ago
This guy is an absolute moron.
chrispatrickjones 2 months ago
@chrispatrickjones Well, he's read English at Oxford so that probably isn't true.
sibeliandrift 2 months ago
Does he hate everything successful? Harry potter, Top Gear, Michael Mcintyre..
ComedicTheory 3 months ago
@ComedicTheory fuck all those things!
weaselidiotu 2 months ago
@ComedicTheory Only if it's mediocre.
meu02136 1 month ago
FUCK TESCO! FUCK HARRY POTTER! read something that actually has some creativity to it...NOT Blake. try Alice's Adventures in Wonderland.
tazmon122 3 months ago
I'm more annoyed by the people laughing in the audience. Annoyed because they. all. read. harry. potter.
cardinalvincent 4 months ago
@cardinalvincent Annoyed? Lighten up.
bulmeruk 3 months ago
@cardinalvincent You might find life less annoying if you can learn, like the people in the audience, to laugh at yourself.
hatfinch 2 months ago
possibly the best 'fuck off' to a certain group of people ever!
2k7johnnyboy 4 months ago
cheep up u mardy cnnnntttt
mikeyholding 4 months ago
People realize that the smug superiority is just part of his act, and that that's why it's funny? And that sometimes he simply says things to annoy people? That's obvious to everyone, right?
jamtlanning 4 months ago 61
@jamtlanning
no it isn't, this is youtube. surprisingly though the dislike bar is not that bad.
hendrixexperiencedig 4 months ago
@jamtlanning - Some people just don't 'get' deep satire.
meldme 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jamtlanning Nope, most don't have a clue.
bulmeruk 3 months ago
@jamtlanning Not obvious to a lot of people. He caught me out when I saw him do "41st Best" in The Laughter Lounge, he slagged off Al Murray and his fans and it threw me a bit because I thought he meant it. It's part of his act to try and throw the audience and try and win them around again to keep himself interested. A great stand up comedian is Stewart.
checkoutgirl 2 months ago
@jamtlanning Sadly not haha
samandyjohn 2 months ago
@jamtlanning Two of your three 'questions' aren't questions.
boydegg 1 month ago
@jamtlanning yout think his act boils down to trying to offend people? i don't think thats fair.
S1elmx 1 month ago
@S1elmx Not offend, annoy. Create tension. Big difference.
jamtlanning 1 month ago
@jamtlanning They're still kiddie books, though.
Menegoth 1 month ago
@jamtlanning To be honest I hope he just genuinly hates Harry Potter and reads William Blake
ZephyrMusicOfficial 1 month ago
As for Dan Brown it´s a combination of Stewart Lee pitching in to him in that same episode ("The old man died. It was sad" he has a doctor tell a family), and the fact that all the people I know accept that the science of sign theory (semiotics) is called symbology. No one can give me a straight answer about this and it bugs me. If he wrote about meteorologists would he call them 'Cloudologists'? Or mechanics 'Enginologists'? Use the fucking words. Unless you´re Joyce, which he patently isn´t.
NormanArches 4 months ago
paulski1966 - I'm assuming that by stating the Rowling books aren't coherent you've read them? As an adult?
I saw a couple of the films. Whilst I expect you to point out that adapting books for the screen is a process in which the book is bound to lose a lot of its subtleties and interority, the flying sports day, simplistic characterisation and giant spider - all fantastic stuff for kids - were it´s hardly like trying to film Ulysses.
NormanArches 4 months ago
@NormanArches - So you are basing how coherent a 7 volume 3300+ page piece of work is on "a couple of the films"?What did you find incoherent?You simply state that they were not trying to film Ulysses - obviously. But its this type of thing that bugs me, you're comparing apples and oranges. The Potter series makes no claim to being Ulysses (i' afraid I'm with Woolf and Lawrence when it comes to Ulysses), it simply claims to be an entertaining story - In the vein of Lewis, Dahl, Le Guin et al
paulski1966 4 months ago
Kaut kāds idiotisms..
Kristinathehobbit 4 months ago
Nobody mentioned the C. S. Lewis quote yet? “A children's story that can only be enjoyed by children is not a good children's story in the slightest.” A good story is a good story no matter what your age is.
I love reading light-hearted works, and some of them include kid's books. I think it's fine to have a bit of variety. Loved the way Lee said, "I'm a 40 year old man!"
zorroazulapex 4 months ago 2
@zorroazulapex Lee isn't actually criticising adults who read or have read children's books per se. He's just reacting to the sheep-like way in which people got obsessed with Harry Potter and tried to make everyone else read them as well.
HoosierMF 4 months ago 18
@HoosierMF "sheep-like" ahaha. If you aren't a teenager, that's a pretty damn embarrassing comment.
theEarlofChip 1 month ago
@theEarlofChip Why is it?
HoosierMF 3 weeks ago
The ambiguous start of my last post might look like I´m criticising Stewart Lee. Not my intention. I was agreeing with him 100%. Is it better for adults to read HP books than The Sun or sit on front of QVC? Probably.Is it better for them to read HP than a proper book, for adults?
No fucking way. Like the 'symbologist' in Dan Brown. Google it for me, I can´t be fucked.There´s no such thing, is there? I´m sure the discipline of sign theory is called semiology.There´s another written for retards.
NormanArches 4 months ago
@NormanArches I'm curious as to what you define as a "proper book for adults". Dan Browns are targeted at adults only, so are they better to read these then, or is it limited to just classics, and if that is the case, what about classic children's literature such as Kipling , Dahl, Wind in the Willows and Alice in Wonderland, would you prefer adults read a Jilly Cooper or an Danielle Steel to these? I'm assuming that by stating the Rowling books aren't coherent you've read them? As an adult?
paulski1966 4 months ago
Comparing people who read HP books with Blake writing his Songs for a local church group competition misses much - these people read children´s lit and Blake was writing it at full mental stretch. There´s also the fact that the Songs are, quantitatively, a small part of Blake´s work - so he´s also talking about the 'epics' like Milton and Jerusalem, where the real meat is; it also glosses over the fact that the songs, unlike Rowling´s boy´s own stories, are intellectually coherent.
NormanArches 4 months ago
@ukulazy "Its no coincidence that the worlds most successful writer is also the worst."
What a dick you are... ukulazy
chalkus 4 months ago
@chalkus What a stupid cunt you are. I write an intelligent comment, you respond with insults and nothing else. Don't bother replying - go and read a book. 'Effective methods of suicide' preferably.
ukulazy 2 months ago
@ukulazy Excuse me?? I merely quoted the words you were using, emphasised by the use of speech marks.
Not only are you a "stupid cunt" but you are also a forgetful "cunt".
Scurry away now little man
chalkus 2 months ago
@chalkus racist cunt.
ukulazy 2 months ago
@ukulazy Of course... not only are you stupid but cliched!!!!
chalkus 2 months ago
@ukulazy That is the best you can do.... what a useless moron you really are.
chalkus 1 month ago
"Tyger, tyger, burning bright
In the forests of the the night
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?"
ChromaAurora 5 months ago
Weirdly enough i say the exact same thing to people here in America, and they get pissed off at me. And somehow i also have read William Blake poems.
pieicedtea 5 months ago
harry potter and the tree of nothing :)
lizardkingsajrs 5 months ago
harry potter changed as the audience grew up. neil gaiman writes about magic all the time and his most celebrated works are aimed at adults.
punchultimate 5 months ago
I can see the Harry Potter fanboys have been here. 55 dislikes.
Liked just to piss them off.
99butcher99 5 months ago
So Lee has read all of Blake's work, including Songs of Innocence, which Blake based on the meters of nursery rhymes and children's songs. Its a good job that the romantic visionary and poet wasn't reading nursery rhymes at 32 years of age eh? That would be embarrassing.
paulski1966 5 months ago 49
@paulski1966
You do realise what you just did? You compared William Blake to JK Rowling. Time to retire to a monastery and ponder on your misdeeds for the next 30 years.
textthing 5 months ago
@textthing - er no i didn't, i compared Blake to the millions of adults that have also at some point read childrens literature whilst in adulthood, who Lee seems to feel are an embarrassment. Or perhaps you'd prefer that I pointed out that Blake read children's literature as research for his body of work to ensure its accuracy, something that Lee - by his own admission - didn't. So perhaps you could retire to a monastery and pull your literary head out of your snobbish arse?
paulski1966 5 months ago
@paulski1966
My comment was facetious - but oh what a tirade of rage! I should do it again!
Blake drew on cultural material to produce his body of work. Adults read Harry Potter because advertising tells them it's the thing to do. Harry Potter is cultural junk - airport fiction for kids. What is your point?
textthing 5 months ago
@textthing Your comment wasn't facetious, it was inaccurate, there's quite a considerable difference. And hardly a "tirade" of rage is it. I'd also be curious to see all of this advertising for the books, especially that targeted specifically towards the adult audience, and especially for the earlier books. And my point was explained in my last post - the irony that Lee uses an author to demonstrate "adult" reading who has been guilty of the very thing he is lambasting others for.
paulski1966 5 months ago
@paulski1966
Which is what?
textthing 5 months ago
@textthing errrrr - the point was that its ironic, i'm struggling to think how i can explain this point in any more simplistic terms ?
paulski1966 5 months ago
@paulski1966
Yes, you've said that a number of times. How is it ironic?
textthing 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@textthing Did you miss this "Lee uses an author to demonstrate "adult" reading who has been guilty of the very thing he is lambasting others for." Yet again how simple do i have to explain this? Still yet to see all of this advertising telling adults to read the potter books, or are you just choosing to ignore this point?
paulski1966 4 months ago
@paulski1966 isn't that about childhood rather than "for children"
redwarrj1 2 months ago
@paulski1966
Nursery rhymes are somewhat more enduring and well crafted than a Harry Potter book, so it wouldn't have been very embarrassing at all, really.
FractalZero 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FractalZero - "Nursery rhymes are somewhat more enduring and well crafted than a Harry Potter book" - clearly you've read the Harry potter books then in order to make that comment. I also fail to see how you can comment on how enduring something is when you are referring to work that is as little 4 years old. There's also the small issue of stating opinion as fact as well.
paulski1966 2 months ago
@paulski1966 You mean William Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience, taught in schools and university's all over the country?
Oh dear.
Tiger, tiger, burning bright In the forests of the night, What immortal hand or eye Could frame thy fearful symmetry?
bowen192 2 months ago
@bowen192 - No, I meant Songs of Innocence, it was published 5 years before Songs of Innocence and of Experience (which I appreciate contains all of the poems from Songs of Innocence) which was published when Blake was 37. I also believe Blake used the archaic spelling of tiger, hence - Tyger, Tyger, burning bright, in the forest of the night; - this was also not in Songs of Innocence, but in Songs of Experience.
paulski1966 2 months ago
@paulski1966 :O
bowen192 2 months ago
@bowen192 ?
paulski1966 2 months ago
@bowen192 *Universities
trialsted 2 months ago
@paulski1966 It's good thing he has children otherwise he would find it embarrassing.
Camuscan 2 months ago
@Camuscan - Read what i wrote again. It was in reference to Blake reading children's literature, not Lee. Blake had no children. So your point is?
paulski1966 2 months ago
@paulski1966 But Blake wasn't reading nursery rhymes purely for his enjoyment -- he was researching for a serious work. That's nowhere near the same thing.
llsrx 2 months ago
@llsrx so its acceptable for adults to read children's literature for research purposes then. So, say if you were writing a comedy sketch where you were berating the quality of said book then it would be perfectly acceptable, infact pretty much necessary, to read the piece of work you were discussing, even if it was for children. But its nowhere near the same thing is it!
paulski1966 2 months ago 8
@paulski1966 dyu think its ok for father to buy it for his daughter?
jamesgd7 1 week ago
Comment removed
mmscott9 2 months ago
@mmscott9 - Notice that you also removed this comment (however i still have it). If you had any basic knowledge of reading then you'd note that at no point did i say Songs of Innocence were nursery rhymes. Also whilst SoE is meant to contrast SoI, they were not initially published together (it was 5 years before they were) so to say SoI is only intended to be read as a counterpoint to SoE is incorrect. To put it bluntly - you're the moron.
paulski1966 2 months ago
@paulski1966 NB the comment was deleted because I knew it was incorrect. The amount of pettiness oh here is astounding, that people are fuming that their intellects have been challenged by an act that is purposively self righteous and condescending.
SoI has a deeper meaning than to be contrasted with SoE. There are far more to the works than that.I agree with the underlying rant against this sheepish mentality though which Lee actually argued rather than a dislike of the subject matter itself.
mmscott9 2 months ago
@mmscott9 "The amount of pettiness oh here is astounding" - you referred to people on here who agreed with a statement you claimed was incorrect (but which was only down to you misreading it) as morons - how would you expect people to respond to that? If you knew your comment was incorrect, why type it in the first place? And where is anyone "fuming that there intellects have been challenged" exactly?
"SoI has a deeper meaning......" Eh, i know - which is why i pointed this out to YOU.
paulski1966 2 months ago
@paulski1966 Real life experiences and his feelings towards the social and economic climate of C17 and 18th shaped Blake's works, and so gives Songs of Innocence far more weight in substance than commercialised, over hyped meaningless nonsense like the Harry Potter books, which was the basis of Lee's entire rant.
mmscott9 2 months ago
@mmscott9 Obviously you've read the HP series in order to refer to them as meaningless nonsense? "commercialised, over hyped" - its always hilarious to read this phrase associated with the HP series. You do realise that the first book had an initial print run of 500 - the entire promotional campaign consisted of sending some copies to critics. Hardly commercialised or over hyped. The hype around HP started because of the quality of the books and the awards they won, simple as that.
paulski1966 2 months ago
@paulski1966 Hype began due to a juggernaut of a marketing machine, with material that could easily be - marketed.
mmscott9 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mmscott9 So you have read the books then?
"began due to a juggernaut of a marketing machine" - feel free to back this statement up with some evidence, such as the TV campaign for any of the first three books. Or an ad campaign in the national press, or an internet campaign maybe, or anything that points to a "Juggernaut of a marketing machine".
paulski1966 2 months ago
I like the HP series and I don't think there's anything wrong with getting in touch with your inner child (in a metaphysical sense you reprobates). But I still had a good chuckle at Stewart Lee's bookish snobbery.
neilswann80 5 months ago
Ok so the joke here is that Harry Potter books are shit and I know this because I haven't read them. Wow.
LightspeedJack 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Does it not feel that Stewart Lee is getting rather lazy - Jeremy Clarkson, Dan Brown, Harry Potter, Chris Moyles etc. it all seems like choosing easy targets whilst pandering to the target audiences need to feel intellectually superior - I look forward to his searing routines on Cold Play and Simon Cowell.
paulski1966 5 months ago
Ehm, is he supposed to be a comedian? Was that part of stand-up comedy act?
Dawnlight1 5 months ago
i was the 500th liker :)
bradbrock1 5 months ago
You're shit Steward Lee.
Mlll555 5 months ago
Comment removed
Quantemic 5 months ago
@Quantemic You've read Harry Potter haven't you? Which is OK, even if you are an adult. I think!
FSMnoodle 5 months ago
Stewart Lee is the atheist's Jesus, but Richard Herring is the atheist's God.
wigster1978 6 months ago
"No I haven't read it, 'cos I'm a 40 year old man" Brilliant!
StoneageDinosaurs 6 months ago
I like Harry Potter and I like Stuart Lee's comedy...
Guess what?
THEY AREN'T MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.
WhamBamThankYouMadam 6 months ago
Harry Potter is possibly the most overrated thing ever, more so than religion and (until recently) US credit.
jarzhinio 6 months ago
Comment removed
jarzhinio 6 months ago
i work in a bookshop and i've always said....."harry potter is for kids".
ady24 6 months ago
im not that bother realy..too busy reading the beano
gotahavehouse 6 months ago
what scares me about J k Rowling is how the fuck can someone become so rich by doing something so unimportant.....Its as if someone has brainwashed millions of people into running out and buying the books and seeing the movies ,,about what ?? about fuck all...i agree with everything lee says here i thought i was alone
gotahavehouse 6 months ago
@gotahavehouse Wait, what?! You think literature is unimportant...?
Treefingrs 6 months ago
@Treefingrs
yes when its about hob goblins and wizards..I wouldnt care if i ever set eyes on or heard of harry twater or the hobbits ever again,,,my point was the writer has basicaly by