[endthematrix]

It's her work, she can do with it as she pleases. I don't read the books, and my wife drags me to the movies. I enjoy them and can see why millions of kids do. On the religious side, I can see why the books cause controversy, but the effort expended (although worthy) should be used elsewhere.

[nopardons]

As I said, I just can't read the books, I like the movies,though. The religious KOOKS who rail against her books are just silly. If they think her books are in anyway subversive, then they should rail against a pantheon of children's books and fairy tales, because tons of them are also filled to the brim with witches ( both good and bad ) and wizards, etc. too.

All she's done it take some from here and some from there and a little bit from that one and a bit more form this one,mixed it all together, thrown in a wee bit of new stuff of her own and BAM, she has her book.

Think that living/talking paintings is something new and clever? Well, it was about 120 or so years ago, when William S. Gilbert put it in "RUDDIGORE or the Witches Curse", but was a bit long in the tooth, by the time the same thing was inserted into "ME AND MY GIRL", in the late 1930s...and neither of those things are children's books; just a very well known English operetta and a musical comedy. "ME AND MY GIRL" was revived, BTW, in 1985,or '86 and ran for years and years in London's West End and also on Broadway.

And that's just one wee thing...I can names 100s of others.