Harry Potter sucks

[ghyle]

I agree, J. D., there are so many much better writers of fantasy. This is not to say that that J. K. Rowling must by definition be rubbish, because there are degrees of writing, and there is always a place for those near the top of the field.

It is like arguing that we must only like those who are major writers, and that, if we like a writer's works, that writer must be a major writer. There is a place for lesser poets, as there is for any lesser writer.

For the record, I enjoy Harry Potter, but I am not going to claim masterpiece status. Give us ten years from now, and we shall see a clearer indication of whether the books are worth it (taking the ten-year rule as my benchmark).

[Commonmind]

You will find that a reasoned, well-thought-out post on any subject here will get you far more respect that a rant, Marvolo. Most of your audience have read a lot of SF/F, and are not ignorant. Make your points by all means, but if you make them reasonably, you will get into discussion - and that's what most of us are here for!

As many times as I've tried to say this very same thing I've never been able to say it so simply and so to-the-point. Thank you Pyan.

[pyan]

Bows: blushes

I think it's the title of this thread - it seems to inflame passions on both sides. If it had been called "Is Harry Potter really as good as they say?", I don't think there would have been half the inflammatory language.

[Leisha]

I personally don't like them because they're badly underwritten and full of plotholes. Nothing to do with any desire to take a contrary point of view

Just curious Pyan -- what plotholes did you notice? I think the main one I see is the (I think this is the correct term for it) "idiot syndrome", where the book/s would be shorter if the main characters just asked someone about whatever it is they need to find out. An example of this, I think anyway, is when Harry still has no clue about what job his parents used to do for a living; I mean, wouldn't it be easier if he'd asked Lupin? But rather than that, Harry has to keep quiet and keep us waiting till book seven to find out.

Well, that's just one of many plots that could be answered and not left dangling if JK made Harry a little more investigative and nosy (he seems nosy enough in regards to everything else).

But, however, I'm still a fan of the series and will faithfully be buying my copy of number seven in July (even though it took me the first five books to get into the series!).

[Rane Longfox]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

As for why I listed "It isn't written well," as an absurd reason... they are written well. Books like the Harry Potter books and Stephen King's Cell or The Dark Tower V, VI, and VII are written masterfully. Most authors would kill to have the ability to draw people in like JKR and SK have. I just don't see the validity of that argument.

Evidently not... Rowling's writing has improved considerably as the series has progressed, but in the first two books the atmosphere she was trying to create wasn't there. It's hard to explain, but you had to be told, rather than feeling it. Mostly because, I suspect, at that point she was still trying to write kid's books, whereas now she's got a wider audience, her writing has had to improve. In the later books it has, she is now an excellent writer.


Now, masterfully... that's a whole different kettle of fish. Very few authors can claim that.
Vonnegut was masterful. Heinlein was. Lovecraft was. Vandermeer is. Gaiman can be when he makes the effort. King showed... flashes. Rowling is not masterful. Sorry.

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by Rane Longfox

Evidently not... Rowling's writing has improved considerably as the series has progressed, but in the first two books the atmosphere she was trying to create wasn't there. It's hard to explain, but you had to be told, rather than feeling it. Mostly because, I suspect, at that point she was still trying to write kid's books, whereas now she's got a wider audience, her writing has had to improve. In the later books it has, she is now an excellent writer.


Now, masterfully... that's a whole different kettle of fish. Very few authors can claim that.
Vonnegut was masterful. Heinlein was. Lovecraft was. Vandermeer is. Gaiman can be when he makes the effort. King showed... flashes. Rowling is not masterful. Sorry.

I think people should reorganize their idea of masterful then. Isn't the point of story telling to get the story across? People buy and read books that they can understand and enjoy. Book sales are our ruler to judge how many people read and understood the book, because most sales are generated through good reviews, press, and recommendations. So, if a list of people who are "masterful" is also a list of people who sold drastically less copies than King and Rowling... shouldn't the perception of what is masterful writing be rethought?

[pyan]

Enid Blyton, Agatha Christie and Danielle Steel, to name three, have sold more books than JKR - does that makes them masterful writers? Contrariwise, Clifford the Big Red Dog has sold more copies than To Kill a Mockingbird - are you saying that, according to your definition, Clifford is a more "masterful" book?

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by pyan

Enid Blyton, Agatha Christie and Danielle Steel, to name three, have sold more books than JKR - does that makes them masterful writers? Contrariwise, Clifford the Big Red Dog has sold more copies than To Kill a Mockingbird - are you saying that, according to your definition, Clifford is a more "masterful" book?

Don't knock Clifford.

Besides, the main point of writing is to tell and story so that people can read and understand it. Many people want to read Danielle Steel. She is masterful, no doubt, otherwise why would people continue to buy it? I have never read a Danielle Steel novel, but the sheer volume of people who religiously buy her books tells us something, doesn't it?

I think the vast majority of this criticism results from literary snobbery. Writer A is a much more profound author but has sold drastically less copies than Writer B because of the difficulty of Writer A's work. Obviously, to me, Writer A needs to learn to write clearly and form his ideas in a simple and easily understood way so that more people can get the message Writer A is trying to convey.

C'mon, this isn't Rocket Science. And don't knock Clifford.

[Lenny]

Johnathon Strange and Mr. Norrell is a masterpiece. Yet it is written in early 19th Century English prose, and so is a tough slog.

If Susanna Clarke had written:

Mr. Norrel walked over to his bookcase, and took down a book. He took it to his table, lit a candle, and sat down to read. Ten miles away, in the Cathedral, the statues began to talk.
... instead of how she did write it, then it would be a complete waste, and would have sold few and far between.

In my opinion the Harry Potter books are good. The have engaging plots, and twists, and are not books you want to put down. Yet writing wise, Susanna Clarke beats JK hands down. Hers is by far the better book, but is written in a much harder to read style.

[pyan]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

I have never read a Danielle Steel novel, but the sheer volume of people who religiously buy her books tells us something, doesn't it?

Millions of people buy Big Macs, as well............

[HoopyFrood]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

Besides, the main point of writing is to tell and story so that people can read and understand it.

Not always, no. I can read and understand a lot of books, but that doesn't mean they will instantly attract me, or make them a masterly piece of work. I consider authors to have great ability in their craft when they can manipulate words and use language in new and engaging ways. Or create a plot that is interesting and arresting throughout. J.K's writing isn't terrible, but she doesn't have a way with words like some other authors. The plot of Harry Potter is different, but not completely original...you still have the battle between good and evil, a prophecy, a teenage protagonist who has great responsibility heaped onto his shoulders. I need an author to do more than just write a story that I can understand in order for me to enjoy it and consider it great.

[Marvolo]

Rightly so, but there is another underlying point.

Many of the authors people rave about as being "masterful" are not so because people on a wide scale don't understand the intended meanings of the novel so clearly. Why do literature classes debate over symbolism and metaphors in classic novels? Because they are written in ambigious ways. My whole point in this diatribe is that best selling authors like J. K. Rowling, Stephen King, Danielle Steel, and the creator of Clifford the Big Red Dog, write their stories in clear ways so that huge amounts of people can read and understand and get the story the author intended.

This, to me, is what deigns a masterful author. We all get the story that King and Rowling intended. Not everyone will get the story that Vonnegut intended. The authors that many would consider masterful don't quite get their stories across in such certain terms. People debate over the intended meanings and classes are held discussing the finer points of these books. That is all well and good. But masterful to me is writing a story I can read between dealing with my two children, after working all day long, and after pondering over what my next writing attempt will be. By my definition, King and Rowling are masterful.

That isn't necessarily all of ya'lls definition, but hey, thats why I rule. C'mon, ya'll know I rule.

Also, to the Big Mac comment: Aye, millions buy them. But that is food and this was a discussion on which authors we consider masterful. How Big Macs equate into this is only for Pyan to understand.

[Lenny]

Don't forget to add the films into the whole shabang, too. They've definitely added a large number onto the already huge population of readers.

[Marvolo]

Also, as to the "insulting" tone of the earlier posts, let us all remember that the title to this thread is "Harry Potter sucks"

It sort of sets the mood aye?

[Lenny]

Ah! But let us also remember that it was made by a spamming author who seems to make a living out of insulting every other author he can, and writing books about cyborg-dragons, I think it was.