Rating: 
Summary: Mixed Feelings
Review: "Harriet the Spy" was one of my absolute favorite novels when I was younger, so I thought I'd give this "companion" a try. It was, well-interesting. The writing was less complex than the original (I don't know whether "dumbed down" fits or not), the characters were different, and one of the sub-plots seemed pretty obvious. But it was a nice story, and it was nice to have another little taste of Harriet's adventures, even if they were from another author's perspective. I would reccomend it only if you "want more" about Harriet, and don't really care about the writing style.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't be fooled by bogus "reviews".
Review: 1. At the beginning of the book, Harriet is still eleven, where she was at the end of Fitzhugh's trilogy. She begins seventh grade, not eleventh -- and much is made of this, as her boy pal Sport must go to a different school this year. It's not trivia; it is a subplot device. Harriet turns twelve halfway through the book. Like Harriet, I was born in October, and we Librans take great umbrage at the mangling of such simple facts. Ask any child: It is a long, LONG way from eleven years of age to eleventh grade.2. The Midwest Book Review's comments show no understanding of why Ericson's effort is substandard. Yes, it's true, Harriet is still "sleuthing", as they say, but Louise Fitzhugh's books are not mysteries. "Sleuthing" was never the point; Harriet's aspirations as a writer were more in focus (in "The Long Secret", she was attempting poetry, even). "Harriet The Spy" is about conformity and rebellion -- the conflict between personal convictions and the expectations of society. The Midwest Book Review seems to have Harriet M. Welsch confused with Encyclopedia Brown. 3. "Midwest Book Review" has contributed 8287 book reviews as of today . . . and it appears every single one is five stars. Each one of those 8287 five-star reviews must be deemed worthless, in light of their careless approach and highly-suspect rating system. I also seriously doubt 20001 actual human beings voted these reviews "helpful". This rebuttal of mine, however, is sincerely meant as helpful . . . and there's no payola behind it, either.
Rating:
Summary: Don't be fooled by bogus "reviews".
Review: 1. At the beginning of the book, Harriet is still eleven, where she was at the end of Fitzhugh's trilogy. She begins seventh grade, not eleventh -- and much is made of this, as her boy pal Sport must go to a different school this year. It's not trivia; it is a subplot device. Harriet turns twelve halfway through the book. Like Harriet, I was born in October, and we Librans take great umbrage at the mangling of such simple facts. Ask any child: It is a long, LONG way from eleven years of age to eleventh grade. 2. The Midwest Book Review's comments show no understanding of why Ericson's effort is substandard. Yes, it's true, Harriet is still "sleuthing", as they say, but Louise Fitzhugh's books are not mysteries. "Sleuthing" was never the point; Harriet's aspirations as a writer were more in focus (in "The Long Secret", she was attempting poetry, even). "Harriet The Spy" is about conformity and rebellion -- the conflict between personal convictions and the expectations of society. The Midwest Book Review seems to have Harriet M. Welsch confused with Encyclopedia Brown. 3. "Midwest Book Review" has contributed 8287 book reviews as of today . . . and it appears every single one is five stars. Each one of those 8287 five-star reviews must be deemed worthless, in light of their careless approach and highly-suspect rating system. I also seriously doubt 20001 actual human beings voted these reviews "helpful". This rebuttal of mine, however, is sincerely meant as helpful . . . and there's no payola behind it, either.
Rating: 
Summary: I may be a purist...
Review: And I *may* shudder, but I don't specifically know what to make of this Harriet sequel.
Sure, I was excited to hear of it. As a "Harriet" fan, this looked exciting and new and interesting, but as I read it, only one of my thoughts stayed the same: it was, well, new.
Ms. Ericson has the general idea of Harriet and her friends in mind, but I was surprised at the somewhat lack of details that Louise Fitzhugh incorporated into her Harriet trilogy. Harriet's life is detailed and textured, but in this, Harriet's life is only so much of that. Ms. Ericson also tries to bring Harriet into 2002 -- using slang like "sucks" and so on, Harriet and her pals are not the same they were back in 1965 when Harriet made her debut with a bang. I'm sure Ms. Ericson wanted to make Harriet come back with a bang, but it didn't completely work the way it was supposed to.
Give this to your kids to read. But if you're familiar with Harriet yourself, you might think to stay away, or just consider it different from the Harriet M. Welsch you know and love.
Rating: 
Summary: I was pleasantly surprised
Review: From the time I was 9 years old, Harriet the Spy has been one of my all-time favorite novels. Even as a 35-year-old, I enjoy re-reading it occasionally. When I heard about Harriet Spies Again I was dubious, and even moreso after reading the other customer reviews. However, since I work in a library and try to read a broad range of books, I decided to give it a try. Surprisingly, I was really drawn into the story and I, for one, was surprised by at least part of the ending. Harriet is a more pleasant character, and I like her relationship with her parents and the cook better in this novel. I also liked the introduction of the girl who lives across the street.
I also liked this book because I'm always fascinated by characters' lives after a book ends. Sometimes when I can't sleep at night I make up new adventures for my favorite book characters. For someone like me, this book was a lot of fun. My daughter, who is almost 11, actually liked it better than Harriet the Spy (heresy in my own mind, but I can accept her opinion). She said that, to her, it made more sense.
At any rate, I'd advise anyone who loved Harriet the Spy to give this book a try and to go into it with an open mind. There will never be a book quite like the original, but in my opinion this is a worthy successor.
Rating: 
Summary: An older Harriet is in eleventh grade
Review: Helen Ericson's Harriet Spies Again provides a companion volume to Harriet The Spy, albeit by a different author. An older Harriet is in eleventh grade - and still pursuing mysteries. While her character has changed - she isn't the isolated youngster of the original title - her interest in sleuthing has only expanded. Readers will find this a satisfying continuation of Harriet's misadventures.
Rating:
Summary: Not my Harriet
Review: I guess if you like books about caricatured "feisty" children, you may like this. If you have already read _Harriet_, read this ONLY if 1. You believe Harriet learned nothing from her whole year of 6th grade. 2. You believe Ole Golly was a sham from the beginning, and didn't know what she wanted from life or how to achieve it, and was really a sniveling, inept harridan. If you have read __Harriet__, __The Long Secret__, and __Sport__, read this alleged sequel only if, in addition to the above, you believe Sport's father is actually a self-indulgent, neglectful man, no matter what the several hundred pages of __Sport__ indicated. If you have not read __Harriet__, and you like rapidly produced kids' novels with token spitfires, you will get through this quickly, and probably find it satisfying the same way vending machine desserts can be, on occasion, enjoyable. Ericson did not get inside Fitzhugh's characters, and no one should have expected her to--why the estate gave her permission to use the characters is beyond me. (Hey!! That's a MUCH better mystery than the one in the book...Fitzhugh never had any children, who IS the estate, anyway?) I give it one star for being better than watching television, and one star for the cover art.
Rating:
Summary: Harriet gets another life
Review: I had no idea that Harriet the Spy had a sequel in this book written by keen fan Helen Ericson. She has Fitzhugh's style down pretty well, but alas, there is no substitue for character and plot development. There are simply too many unlikely events to make this story very believable, unlike all the original Fitzhugh books featuring Harriet, Janie, Sport and the rest. These characters come alive, as written by Fitzhugh, through ordinary actions made special through great characterisation. If Helen Ericson continues to write about Harriet, I hope she spends more time around kids to hear what they are saying rather than thinking up odd plot devices.
Rating:
Summary: Harriet gets another life
Review: I had no idea that Harriet the Spy had a sequel in this book written by keen fan Helen Ericson. She has Fitzhugh's style down pretty well, but alas, there is no substitue for character and plot development. There are simply too many unlikely events to make this story very believable, unlike all the original Fitzhugh books featuring Harriet, Janie, Sport and the rest. These characters come alive, as written by Fitzhugh, through ordinary actions made special through great characterisation. If Helen Ericson continues to write about Harriet, I hope she spends more time around kids to hear what they are saying rather than thinking up odd plot devices.
Rating:
Summary: Ole Golly returns!
Review: I have been a Harriet the Spy fan for 30 years, however, I never enjoyed the sequels (The Long Secret and Sport) as they did not answer my questions surrounding Ole Golly's departure and my curiosity of her new life. Finally, my questions have been answered. I found Helen Ericson's "companion" book to be a delightful read. Ole Golly returns and we finally get a glimpse of life "ever after" for Ole Golly and Harriet. Harriett is a little older, a little wiser, but still the same old spying Harriet that I remember. Fans of Harriett who always wondered what became of Ole Golly will appriciate Ericson's effort to tie up the loose ends. Fans who remember Louis Fitzhugh's sequels may be a bit confused, as the story line blurs Fitzhugh's original timeline of the three Harriet books.
|
