Differences in the UK and US Versions of Harry Potter Books

I am a beginner at reading Harry Potter books. Just finished, Philosopher's (U.S. Sorcerer's 1) Stone. It is very good. But did not realize the differences between the UK and USA versions of Harry Potter.
 
http://www.uta.fi/FAST/US1/REF/potter.html

Might go and read the UK version of  Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone.
Bet writing these books would drive JK Rowling crazy.

BTW...

Everyone should check out www.jkrowling.com

It's an actual site now, and pretty cool.

Personally I find it sickening that publishers feel the need to dumb down books for the American market. That's what I think is happening too. I don't think it's a case of simply adapting to accomodate culturla differences. Hell - even if it was that's pretty bad. If you read a book it supposed to take you to another place. If a reference or word is unfamiliar - fantastic! I've just been introduced to something new. I was horrified to hear that in the US shows like Cold Feet, The Naked Chef, The Office are run with subtitles. Have we really become that lazy and that xenophobic that we can't make the effort

                                                                                                                                                                                       

WHAT?!?!?!

Are you telling me, after all my hard reading work; after all my standing in line; after all my time reading... I NOW have to go back and re-read them ALL because the US versions of ALL these books are different than the UK?!?!?!
How different?!!?!?
 

I personally wouldn't get too carried away here. Yes, lots of words were changed but I  think the English essense is still there. In the case of the Potter books, I wouldn't really call it dumbing down. Though I guess if I had been the publisher, I would have just had a glossary. I have not heard about subtitles for those other shows. My Mom watches some of these and has never mentioned this.

The only time I ever recall seeing an embedded subtitle on a British show (aired in the US) was one episode of The Naked Chef where Jamie was mumbling something about rocket and they put what he was saying on the screen.  I'm sure they just did that because he was impossible to understand...not because Americans are idiots.   

As for changing some of the vocabulary in the Harry Potter books...I would assume they did it because the origianl assumption was that children would be reading the books....American kids don't know what a queue is, etc., so they just "Americanized" the vocab so the kids would understand.  It happens with so many books...I was just rereading "Diary of a Mad Bride" (originally written in US), and the main character complains that her wedding cake will come from Mr. Kipling if she can't find a baker in time.  I'm sure the original wording was Betty Crocker or Entenmann's, but those things don't translate to the UK, so they changed it to something UK-relevant.

But if books and such are changed from the culture they originate from to match the culture they are marketed in...then how do you ever learn the actual differences?

I learned *English* by reading books by Brit authors that hadn't been Americanised.  That's how I knew what a queue was and a lorry and boot and biscut and all the other differences.  You figure out the word based on the others around it.  At least that's how I was taught. 

 
Agreed, peedal!
I hope I'm right when I say that's the way I learned things as well; I don't recall hearing that they changed all the Narnia books, etc. when I was a kid...

One of the great influences on my early life was "Catcher in the Rye".  Imagine how much poorer I would have been if the British publishers had modified it in any way for a British audience!

But if books and such are changed from the culture they originate from to match the culture they are marketed in...then how do you ever learn the actual differences?

I learned *English* by reading books by Brit authors that hadn't been Americanised.  That's how I knew what a queue was and a lorry and boot and biscut and all the other differences.  You figure out the word based on the others around it.  At least that's how I was taught. 

I'm not saying ALL books should be changed to suit the countries in which they are published...I was just guessing at the logic of WHY the Harry Potter series has been changed.  I'm sure the original intent was to help young readers, not to dilute the cultural value of the series.

Imagine if they "dubbed" The Simpsons everytime some sort of seriously American reference came on and they changed it to the British equivalent.     

****

This isn't in direct reply to your post, lola!  I didn't see till afterwards that yours got in there just ahead of mine! 

Imagine if they "dubbed" The Simpsons everytime some sort of seriously American reference came on and they changed it to the British equivalent.     

****



I really agree with this one. I know its jumping topic to Film & Media, but they broadcast Rab C Nesbitt in the south of England and nobody knows what he's saying half the time here in estuary land. If they did the same by broadcasting forien english language telly in the US people would just get used to it.

Yeah, I know I'm way off topic! 

"If they did the same by broadcasting forien english language telly in the US people would just get used to it."

They DO broadcast "foreign English-language telly in the US".  Even if you don't have cable or satellite, you can still catch

Are You Being Served, 

The Naked Chef,

EastEnders,

Fawlty Towers,

Upstairs/Downstairs,

Waiting for God,

One Foot in the Grave,

Last of the Summer Wine,

As Time Goes By,

The Good Life,

The Vicar of Dibley,

My Hero,

Keeping Up Appearances

and many other which I'm sure I'm forgetting at the moment.  These (and more) are available on most PBS stations and Americans DO watch them WITHOUT needing subtitles.   

It's not a matter of not understanding a British accent (no matter what the dialect)...it's a matter of mumbling or speaking speed.  Take EastEnders for example.  Americans KNOW the characters are speaking English, but it's more difficult to understand them than it is to understand, say, Hyacinth and Richard from Keeping Up Appearances, because the EastEnders speak rather quickly and don't enunciate.

I've read both the English and American versions of the books (and re-read them, many times! ) and I have to say, the differences are not that great!  You certainly still get the "feel" of the books, and the story is unchanged.

J K Rowling explains a couple of the edits on her website.  (Do I sound like I'm shlling?  I am!  There are one or two puzzle things on the site I still haven't found/figured out, so I'm desperate for someone else to go on and maybe find the stuff I haven't!)

They DO broadcast "foreign English-language telly in the US".  Even if you don't have cable or satellite, you can still catch

Americans DO watch them WITHOUT needing subtitles.   

I think we are agreeing here, Lola  . Were both saying the same thing; no need to Americanize media as Americans dont need it.

There used to be a channel on NYC cable that broadcast lease time progaming to forien broadcast companies, and not just limited to english language or translated stuff. It was great, totaly mad. they had a show about a chinese monkey god (not the japanese "Monkey" so many here grew up with ), another Italian show called san genaro which was like sonny and cher with a giagantic wedding cake everyone in the audince would clap and sing to.

It made no sense to me but it was great TV! Makes about as much sense, anyway as most of the the pap they serve up on US telly.