Well, November was quite insanely busy for me, what with the culmination of my schoolwork for the semester, as well as fulfilling a variety of presidential duties for Tau Beta Pi (my engineering honour society) and conducting my job search in tandem with graduate school applications (in case the job thing doesn’t pan out). I had been planning to review the novel of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, to complement my movie review, but neither of them has gotten done until now. I reread the book right after I saw the movie, though, so I’m still good to go. Even though it was a month ago. [sigh] Where does the time go?

And don’t forget, it’s all British spellings in this review.

Also, I’m not going to give much background on the functioning of the wizarding world, since I covered it pretty well last year in my review of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s/Philosopher’s Stone (http://www.epinions.com/content_48412266116).

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is the second instalment in J. K. Rowling’s projected seven-book Harry Potter series. In it, young Harry Potter, now aged twelve, is eagerly looking forward to returning to Hogwarts School of Wizardry, even though he hasn’t heard from any of his friends during the summer holiday. Then, the house-elf Dobby appears in his house and implores him not to return to Hogwarts. Dobby manages to create a very sticky situation for Harry, but also sheds some light on the apparent communications blackout. Events continue to conspire against Harry in his efforts to get back to Hogwarts, but he and Ron Weasly manage to do so in particularly dramatic fashion. But all is not well at Hogwarts. As the year progresses, people are subject to terrifying attacks in the school corridors, people speak ominously of the Chamber of Secrets and of the monster that dwells within, and Harry finds himself in the thick of it. The two boys must work with their best friend Hermione Granger to solve the mystery.

The trio of core characters remains the same. That is to say, they are the same three characters; they themselves are not static, but rather continue their development. Harry begins to explore his abilities as a wizard, in particular the fact that he is a Parselmouth. When Harry spoke to a Brazilian Boa Constrictor in the first novel, he did not realise that this was not a common wizarding ability. Several early chapters take place at the Weasly home, giving us greater insight into the family dynamics that shaped Ron’s childhood. And Hermione Granger continues her academic excellence while also interpreting school rules in some rather creative ways that clearly demonstrate her independent streak to be alive and well.

Several new characters appear in this novel as well. Gilderoy Lockhart is the new Defence Against the Dark Arts professor, and also a best-selling author. His golden tresses and award-winning smile make him a favourite among the ladies, while his foppish manner and ineptitude with a wand are found quite noisome by anyone with a Y-chromosome. Draco Malfoy’s father Lucius also makes several key appearances. Lucius is as haughty, insular, and bigoted as his son, but is a great deal more powerful, both socially and magically. And Dobby the house-elf desperately wants to help Harry, but the powerful conditioning (or magic?) that binds him to the family he serves results in vigorous self-punishment every time he tries to do so.

Chamber of Secrets is extremely well-written. J. K. Rowling made some excellent choices in using slightly more difficult words in the text. Hopefully, children will ask someone what these words mean (Older children might even look them up themselves.) rather than just passing them over. Personally, I attribute my strong vocabulary to the fact that I always took the time to learn the meanings of unfamiliar words. The story itself progressed through a variety of twists and turns, and was not at all predictable. And in the end, all of the clues came together remarkably well.

The novel also provided some interesting insight into the history of Hogwarts School and into the command structure of the wizarding world. We learn more about the establishment of Hogwarts, over a thousand years ago, and how the dynamics among the four houses were influenced by the relationships among the four founders of the school. We also discover some details about precisely what is and is not permissible under the laws of the Ministry of Magic.

As much as I liked Chamber of Secrets, I have to point out a few flaws. First of all, Hermione’s vapid adoration of Lockhart seemed very much out of character, as Miss Granger is extraordinarily intelligent. In addition, it was established in the first book that Harry’s scar reacts when Voldemort is nearby, or when the dark wizard plots against Harry. I don’t want to give anything away, but suffice to say that there were times when that scar really should have been bothering him, but this was never brought up. Also, there is a typo near the end of the novel (page 245 UK, 332-333 US) where it states that Lord Voldemort is the “last remaining ancestor of Salazar Slytherin,” when in fact the former is the latter’s descendant. This was corrected in later editions. On the other hand, I must give credit where credit is due, for J. K. Rowling’s correct use of the often misused word, “nonplussed.”

Even though I loved Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, I definitely enjoyed Chamber of Secrets more. Part of the reason is because the latter is more strongly plot-driven, and completely focused on a linear story; Philosopher’s Stone contained much more exposition as it was laying the groundwork for the additional instalments. Chamber of Secrets is appropriate for anyone over the age of ten, and it features exciting action, realistic character interactions, and a particularly dramatic climax. So, there’s really no reason for you not to read Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, as long as you have read Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone first.

“And now for something completely different…”

It’s time, once again, to make an exhaustive comparison between the British and American versions of this novel. Yay! I’ve sort of broken it up into different thematic sections, and I hope you find it interesting. Also, I’ve tried to avoid repeating anything that I already mentioned last year. As a side note (because it didn’t fit anywhere else), it is worth mentioning that at several points in the novel, letters written from one character to another are reformatted in the American version to stand out more, which was not done in the British version.

Spelling Changes
Sometimes, the spelling of a word has changed in some minor way in the evolution of American English. “Artefact” became “artifact,” while “storeys” (in referring to a building) was replaced by “stories.” I’ve always preferred to refer to the colour “grey,” but the American convention is “gray.” “Offence” was changed to “offense,” and “aeroplane” to “airplane.” An “s” becomes a “z” in fertiliser/fertilizer, immobilise/immobilize, paralyse/paralyse, and finalise/finalize. Americans use “program” instead of “programme.” The double “l” is condensed to a single occurrence in duelling/duelling. “Griffon” changes to “griffin,” but I find this strange because I’ve always spelled it “gryphon.” “Sombre” is changed to “somber,” much as “sabre” becomes “saber.”

Word Grammar Changes
As you may know, there are three kinds of compound words. Open compound words, like “baby’s breath,” (a type of flower) feature two words separated by a space. Hyphenated compounds are separated by a hyphen instead, like “hook-nosed.” Finally, a closed compound has no separation, such as “bartender.” That said, a number of these are changed from one to another between British English and American English. If you have some math skills, you’ll see that there are six possible transformations. I will name them, and then write the original British version. The type of transformation will make it evident what the American version is.
Open to Hyphenated: He Who Must Not Be Named, You Know Who, strawberry and peanut-butter
Open to Closed: hare lip
Hyphenated to Open: bow-ties, Japanese-golfer, door-key
Hyphenated to Closed: lop-sided, criss-crossing, come-uppance
Closed to Open: frogspawn
Closed to Hyphenated: upended

Subtle Word Differences
A lot of words get changed in very slight ways. For example, “ice-creams” became just “ice cream.” In addition to the change in compound form, you can see that the word is no longer pluralized. That is evidently because the British are more likely to refer to “an ice cream,” while we would just talk about “ice cream” or “some ice cream.” Several instances of “round” were changed to “around,” when referring to placement of objects. I noticed that “apothecary’s” became “apothecary.” The word “amongst” sounds rather archaic to American readers, so it was changed to “among.”

Changed Words
A variety of British words simply don’t occur in American English. “Joint” was changed to “loin” when referring to a cut of meat. “Headlamps” become “headlights,” and the “windscreen” a “windshield.” “Mad” was changed to “crazy,” and “nutter” to “maniac.” A “pigpen” takes the place of a “pigsty.” “Wellington boots” are evidently the same thing as “rubber boots.” When something is “wonderful” or “excellent,” the British might call it “brilliant.” Yule-tide gifts are brought not by “Santa Claus,” but by “Father Christmas.” The “plug hole” is a simple “drain.” I absolutely adore the word “wonky,” but most Americans seem to prefer “lopsided.” The British wait in “queues” rather than “lines.” In a sentence that referred to the “boot” of the car, which contained Ron’s and Harry’s “trunks,” “boot” was changed to “trunk,” and then “trunk” was changed to “luggage” so that the word would not be repeated like that. Embarrassed British people might be more inclined to “flush” than to “blush.” And unruly children “pull” faces rather than “make” them. A “waste bin” becomes a “waste basket.” The British “fancy” their favourite things instead of “enjoying” them. A sickly person is “peaky” instead of “pale.” A British news report may indicate that Saddam Hussein is stockpiling “jump-jets,” instead of “missiles.” Things that the British “miss out” are simply “forgotten” by Americans. Nerdy teenagers are “spotty” rather than “pimply.” Someone in a hurry might “chivvy” instead of “bustle.” British bathrooms have “cubicles” in place of “stalls.” The British would rather “prise” something than “wrench” it. “Pudding-basin” was changed to “pudding-bowl.” When speaking of one’s abilities, the British say “rubbish” instead of “lousy.” A child running across a field would be “scarpering” rather than “scampering.” And the “sides” of a car are referred to by the British as “wings,” giving rise (I’m sure) to a lively debate on whether Ford Anglias actually have wings, or if it’s just a literary device.

Changed Expressions
Several idiomatic expressions simply cannot make the crossover from British English to American English. Those who “are hard-done-by” in England, “have it bad” in America. When a character said, “Bit rich coming from you,” it was changed to “You should talk.” A “knitted tank top” becomes a “sweater vest.” Those who “take it in turns to ride” would just “take turns riding.” Interestingly, the British “pince-nez” must be referred to by Americans as a “pair” thereof. In Britain, people can simply “mind” dangerous objects; Americans must “watch out for” them. The British expression “Good on you” is akin to our “Good for you.” “The girls’ toilet” became “one of the toilets in the girls’ bathroom.” I was rather surprised to see that one who “goes to the loo” in Britain rather indelicately “has a pee” in America. A “dirty great” spider transformed itself into a “great big filthy” one. Elsewhere, “dirty great” is changed to “massive.” A ghost who was floating “on the cistern” moved her position to “above the tank.” Things which are “prised open” are simply “opened.” The British expression to “go, crocodile fashion” is replaced by the single word “march.”

Prepositions
Many prepositions and other incidental words are used differently between the two versions of the English language. Where an American person might be “stopped from doing” something, the British are just “stopped doing” it. In the British version, it was said that Mr. Weasly would have to put himself “straight under arrest” if he raided his own home, while the American version omits the word “straight.” Ron asks Harry to “check no one’s watching” in the British version, but he asks him to “check that no one’s watching in the American.” In the British version, Harry is referred to as “Gryffindor Seeker,” but as “the Gryffindor Seeker” in the American publication. I have to admit that I don’t quite recall the passage, but “slipped over” was changed to “slipped.” In another place, “but nor” was reduced to “nor.” In Britain, an infant creature in an egg can be “hatched out,” while Americans would most likely just “hatch” it.

Other Grammar
All manner of minor grammatical changes were made when Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets was prepared for American release. The British definitely use few commas than Americans. They do not use commas between two adjectives modifying the same noun, or preceding the “and” or “or” in a series listing. Americans use the comma in both instances. An entire half paragraph (page 104 UK, 136 US) in almost entirely rewritten because the grammatical structure was completely at odds with American standards. To be honest, I don’t think the phrasing really worked in British, either. The names of the houses are treated as plural nouns in the British, but as singular in the American. Thus, it is said that “Gryffindor have won” instead of “Gryffindor has won.” Also, the “serpent of Slytherin” was changed to “Serpent of Slytherin,” although I’m not entirely certain why.

Questionable Changes
There were a number of places where I don’t fully understand why a change was made, or I don’t approve of the change, or they failed to make a necessary change. For example, there is no earthly reason why “fortnight” should be changed to “two weeks.” The former is a perfectly acceptable word in American English, and I happen to be particularly fond of it. Hermione suggests that Ron use a different owl to respond to her letter, since “another delivery might finish your one off.” This is not changed for the American version, but it seems clear to me that in American English, this should read “finish yours off.” “Pack of toffees” is also left unchanged, and I think it should probably be a “packet” instead. Rather inexplicably, a book that someone is holding at one point was changed from “Break with a Banshee” to “The Standard Book of Spells, Grade 2.” When the snake rears up in front of Justin Finch-Fletchley, Harry tells it to “Leave him alone!” instead of the British “Leave him!” I think the latter sounds more commanding and impressive, so I don’t think they should have changed that. At one point in the British novel, Hermione is referred to as being “jumped-up.” In the American conversion, it was changed to “jumped up,” but it still doesn’t make any sense to me. Is this a phrase that I’m just not familiar with? If so, please tell me what it means.

All right then, that’s all I’ve got. Go read the book.

Recommended: Yes

Write a Review