Well along with the current theme of threads I’ll ask mine.
I will make no bones about it, I hate the series and I resent everything about it. It is truly shitty writing and horrible storytelling. I have loved Fantasy authors for years. I defended David Eddings saying that he was a good writer for the 15-17 mindset. The Belgariad is a well told series without Tolkeinien sophistication. And people cannot forgive his childishness. But people said it was bad because it did not have adult sophistication as a theme.
But somehow those some people defend Rowlings. That is not Fantasy, that is pure masturbation. There is no story beyond. Kid is oppressed, kid finds a secret power, kid faces powerful enemies but a deus ex machina saves him. The first goddamn book, how does he defeat the bad guy? He cowers on the floor and the badguy dissolves because his mommy loved him.
That is crap that is not writing, that is not typing, that is self-stimulation. I would like to say it is Judy Blume crap, but Judy Blume is actually very good writing for the intended readers, it is near genius in subtlety. Harry Potter is written to the same demographic but written badly. It is a bad bad children’s book. And then several more books follow the scum stream.
And that is so far below the insult it is to the quality Fantasy authors. People trample children to give that hack more millions because it is a cultural phenomenon. And pretend that because they are reading that it is good. Kinda like pretending that microwave Eggs Hollandaise is better than learning to cook Huevos Chorizo Ranchero because it costs more.
I like how he refers Harry Potter in the bottom ‘For reasons he won’t mention’ gee I wonder if he got tired of the teeny brigade fighting for their favorite just like they did for Justin Guarini, so he threw it in there.
I don’t think that that list you link to is particularly good. However, I agree that the Harry Potter series is overrated. It’s not bad, but I agree that it’s not as great as it’s claimed to be. It would be better to compare it with other children’s (and young adult’s) fantasy series, rather than with books written for adults. I think that if I were to rate the Harry Potter books against all the other children’s (and young adult’s) fantasy series written in English over the past century and a half, the Harry Potter books might barely rate in the top twenty.
I know this may be really hard for you to comprehend, but stay with me…
Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it isn’t good. I’m not saying that everything that is popular is automatically good, but I think you’ve lost touch with reality if you believe that millions and millions of people are pretending they think it’s good.
See, we all have things things called opinions. These opinions are unique to us as individuals. I would not lie to you. Some people think some things are good while other people think those same things are bad. Really, honest and true.
I promise you that it doesn’t make you smarter that you don’t like things just because they’re popular. I also promise that even if you dislike it for your very own opinion (those things I mentioned earlier), you’re still not edgier and smarter and more urbane than everyone else. They just like it and you don’t.
I don’t hate it like the OP but I am extremely underwhelmed by Harry Potter. I read the 1st book and saw the first 3 or 4 movies and I really think there is just nothing there for me. I find it almost completely uninteresting. Though the 2nd half of whichever movie featured the time-travelling was pretty good. IME you have to either be below a certain age (twenty----threeish?) or be one of those people who is really proud of being a nerd to like it.
Take most of what you said about Harry Potter, and that’s how I feel about The Wheel of Time. Yuck. The series reminds me of all the horrible writing and manipulative bullshit plot devices used in the Sword of Shannarra series, but stretched out over 9 (it is 9, right?) books instead of 3. What a pile of garbage.
Harry Potter is a glorious achievement compared to 90% of the complete crap shoved into the fantasy genre. Admit it to yourself; the genre is mostly a chore, and fans of it typically happened to have one of the rare greats as their first experience and are desperately trying to find something that good again.
There’s this misconception that those of us who enjoy Harry Potter are depriving ourselves of fantasy that is just SOOOO much better. This is arrogant. I’m sure you have a huge list of fantasy novels that are so much more well received by whatever nerdy book club you are a member of, but really that’s not for me. I don’t read a lot of fiction but I like HP books because they are easily accessible, and (surprise!) I actually think that they are well written. So sue me.
I’m no fantasy aficionado like you, but it is fun to enjoy something with my girlfriend who I can’t get to watch five minutes of LOTR with me. As she describes it, she doesn’t like “epic” stuff. Now HP is still pretty epic to me, but there’s obviously some appeal there that people with differing tastes can enjoy.
It sounds like you feel about HP about how I feel about the Twilight books. They seem pretty silly to me, but do I care that hordes of people are really enjoying them? Nope. Let them have fun. I could sit on my pedestal and point all the Twilight fans toward “real” vampire fiction, like say my favorite TV show “Buffy the Vampire Slayer”. But that wouldn’t make me many friends.
Feel free to keep looking down your nose at those of us who enjoy inferior books. In the meantime my girlfriend and I will continue to enjoy the books and the movies and never even consider reading the books you like. Cheers.
He gave reasons as to why the writing is sub-par. Like say how the use of Deus Ex Machina is considered by most people to be lazy writing. Like bringing in an army of ghosts to save your ass at the last second. So it is not just that he doesn’t care for it so it sucks. He mention how he does not care for Judy Bloom but he says it is good work.
What bothers me is that the movies are also very mediocre and yet many people I know went to see the new one at midnight? WTH? Has the world gone mad?
Dude, it’s fun to go to a movie you like with a group of people who are as enthusiastic about it as you are. Also the movies are generally very well received critically in addition to being huge commercial successes.
I suspect a little bit of jealousy that some of the “real” fantasy franchises can’t generate the same excitement and fan base than HP can, but you can be that if something you liked became massively popular you’d be first in line for the midnight show.
If you don’t like it that’s fine, but I just hate this “why is something I don’t like so popular” attitude. Of all the stupid things people do in large groups you are going to complain about an innocent franchise that people have fun with? Even if there are better fantasy books and movies I’m just not seeing the evil here.
But he assumes that because he thinks it sucks, everyone else is merely pretending to like it. I know it isn’t a popular notion on this board to think this, but it is possible for YOU to think that something isn’t good yet that isn’t the definitive word on the subject. I cannot comprehend why someone would like Tom Waits and I think that he sucks, but I’m not going to dismiss him as an artist and think that everyone else who says they like him is just fooling themselves and lying. That’s absolutely absurd.
No you suspect wrong. What ‘real fantasy’ franchises did I say were better films?
Actually, I worked in the film industry for a long time. I have seen many films that were terrible gross a lot of money. It is pretty normal. I mean terrible film by something that nobody, 20 years later, would ever think to watch this movie. Time is the best test for any art. (IMHO) But I’ve never seen anyone do it six times in a row. Sleeps, did you not read in the OP and in my post the example of the OP, not LIKING Judy Bloom novels, but saying they were good novels.
Here is another example.
I personally don’t “like” The Godfather. I just don’t like it. It is an incredible film. Very well made. Great acting, directing. well everything. I still don’t like it. But I do say that is is a high quality film. I even watch it occasionally because it is so well made.
Both the OP and I can distinguish the idea of ‘liking’ something and the works inherent quality.
So it is NOT a matter of us equating ‘I don’t like’ with “that is of low quality”. Please stop throwing that accusation around.
It’s not jealousy, at least not on my part. I’m not a huge fantasy fan. I don’t dislike it particularly either.
I do think that HP is popular because it is ‘lite’ fantasy. It’s not hard core enough to turn some people off and it is ‘fantasy enough’ for some or most fantasy fans to enjoy. Sometimes this does not work. Baz Lurhman staged Madam Butterfly in a populist style a while back. (not long after Moulin Rouge) It was too opera for the non-opera people and too pop for the opera fans and so it didn’t stay around too long. So that is a tough line to walk.
Time will tell about the books and films. It almost always does.
Do you keep missing where I question why a sane person would believe that millions and millions of people would PRETEND to like something after seemingly arriving at that notion because they think something is terribly written? Either the OP has a loose grip on reality or an ego the size of a continent.
I get that he gave reasons why he thinks it sucks. I get where he can admit that he’s not a fan of Judy Blume but understands her success. What I can’t understand is why he feels he is qualified to decide for everyone else in the world whether or not ANY book is terrible or not based on HIS OPINIONS.
I honestly don’t know how to break it down any more than that.
Sorry, your oversimplification obscures two important plot points here - and I’ll stick to merely the first book rather than pointing out the fact that the magical power of love is an overriding theme throughout the series -
He and the readers may not know just why Voldemort died in the attempt to kill him, but it is clear from the very beginning of the book that there is SOMETHING about Harry that Voldemort cannot co-exist with. The fact that this mechanism - however ill-defined in the first book - is instrumental in the climax of the story is not a deus ex machina, it is an already-revealed property of the character.
His aim in the first book is not to kill Voldemort (whom he doesn’t even know is the villain at the time) but to save the Sorcerer’s Stone from the thief who’s trying to take it. The fact that he is pure-hearted enough to obtain the stone (although ironically, the stone would have been safer if he wasn’t, since Dumbledore’s hiding mechanism would have kept it out of Quirrel’s/Voldemort’s hands) courageous enough to not give up the stone even in the face of what appears to be mortal danger is what made him the hero of the book.
Is this incredibly sophisticated? Perhaps not. But sincerity and courage have been part of the Western heroic ideal for centuries, so why shouldn’t such character traits make Harry Potter popular? As for Rowling’s writing, the first book contains an engaging mystery adventure to which the readers are essentially given all the clues and challenged to put it together (that is, with Quirrell as the answer, not Voldemort, whose return comes out of left field), complete with a red herring (Snape). Standard literary devices, to be sure, but does Rowling genuinely use them badly?
There are hallmarks of great writing, some which are applicable to all writing, and some which only apply to certain genres. There are also indications that a book is poorly plotted and is generally not well-written, and again some of these apply to all writing, and some only to specific genres.
Any story that uses a deus ex machina is very probably badly written. Either the problem should have been rewritten, or the solution, or both. Pulling a god or godlike being out of the author’s ass is simply not fair to the reader. The story might very well have some excellent parts in it, but the story, as a whole, has to hang together. The solution must be something that is reasonable, or logical, and it must be something that’s indicated before it appears. In mysteries, authors who claim, in the last chapter, that the victim was killed by some obscure South American poison that nobody knows of, and none of the characters had any South American connections, are rightly denounced. In fantasy stories, characters who suddenly can perform magic beyond their normal capabilities without any explanation are also regarded as an author’s way of writing herself out of the corner she’d written herself into.
The Harry Potter franchise has some very likable aspects. This doesn’t alter the fact that Rowling is a poor writer. The Trials and Tribulations of Harry At Home are so over the top that it just defies all logic. If Rowling had allowed Harry’s aunt to show a little bit of affection, even if she was ashamed of Harry’s magical heritage, that would have been far more believable. And Harry is a natural at the school sport, without really having to earn his ability. If he’d had some small skill, and had tried out for the team but failed the first year, it would have been a much better story. Piers Anthony had some wonderful ideas and plots, but couldn’t write his way out of a paper bag at least 20 years ago, when I gave up trying to read his books. Just because a book is fantasy doesn’t give it a pass from meeting the normal storytelling requirements.
I don’t think that the list mentioned in the OP is a particularly good list of epic fantasy. There are some really great series mentioned, and some crappy series, too.
Appreciate the OP, but have to say I don’t find the HP success to be particularly depressing because the books succeeded on their own terms. What I mean is that JK Rowling pitched the first one into a publisher who took a chance on it and it turned out that people liked it. Sort of a natural success.
This seems a different model of success to other artists in music, film, tv etc where giant media conglomerates shove millions of dollars behind formulaic mediocrity, advertise it out the ass in n dimensions until people are just forced to submit. I guess you could argue that this is what HP has become, but it didn’t start like this at all.
It would be nice if all the kids were reading quality books like a Wizard of Earthsea, but I’m not losing sleep over it. Reminds me of seeing a critic on TV saying that all of Britain’s social problems could be solved if everyone would just read Middlemarch.
That linked list of fantasy books in the OP is a bit iffy - some stinkers on there.
Please excuse me if someone already said this. It’s too late in my day to read long posts about whether or not the writing is quality.
Yes, I have read all the HP books. Yes, I enjoyed them. Yes, I agree that the writing quality isn’t the best.
But, they are books. Kids read them. Adults read them. My 80 year old grandfather has read them.
I can’t find anything depressing about the success of something which gets such a vast group of people interested in reading. I know quite a few people who hadn’t read a book in years, until the HP books became popular. My ex-boyfriend hadn’t read a book since high school (other than textbooks). His mother, sister, and I finally convinced him to just give them a try. He read the first 4 books in one weekend. He cut a vacation short so he could be home when our preorder of the 5th book arrived in the mail. The Harry Potter books opened him up to reading again and because of that, I got him reading Redwall and Discworld books also.
So, absolutely not. It’s not depressing at all. It’s wonderful.
Now, if only I could get my lazy-ass nephews to pick up a damn book and put down the friggen video games. Grrrr.
It’s unfortunate, in a way, that the term “fantasy” is already in use for the genre involving magical swords wielded by guys with names like “Thrantorg the Bold,” because it would be an even better name for the genre perfected by Rowling in the HP series. As it is, the term “wish-fulfillment fiction” (or perhaps “directed daydream”) is the best I can come up with.
I think that the reason these books are so popular is because they don’t try to express any particular idea, or reveal any particular truth. They don’t try to depict the world, or the human soul, or whatever it is that other books try to be about. They are just a straight-up wish-fulfillment fantasy about being the most important person in an enormously engaging world.
Check it out: Someone mentioned that it would be more reasonable if Harry had had to work a bit to be good at quidditch. Well, it certainly would have been more realistic, but do you really want realism in a daydream? How often does a kid’s (or grownup’s) fantasy of hitting a home run in the World Series include a detailed imagining of long hours of weight training and batting practice prior to the big moment?
By the way, I love these books. But they are absolutely crack cocaine for the imagination. It’s little wonder they’re so popular. You can say that it’s not good for us to read such daydreamy tripe, and perhaps you’re right. But the subject matter is exactly what kids fantasize about before they grow up and learn to fantasize about money, power and sex. Harry Potter is basically Penthouse Forum for the prepubescent. And even though it’s the mental equivalent of eating straight cake frosting, I for one find it somewhat life-affirming to discover that plenty of adults are still capable of finding such innocent daydreams compelling.
That’s pretty much my attitude, although I wouldn’t say “anything”. I’d be a little depressed if it was The Adventures Of Harry Potter In The KKK or something of the sort that was so popular.
But as it is, it’s harmless entertainment that’s drawn a lot of people into reading more.
as someone who read a lot of fantasy when he was younger, I can attest that I was sucked into HP from the very first book. At the time, I happened to pull a copy off the shelf at a friend’s house, without knowing anything about the series, and was utterly engrossed.
For all it’s flaws, to me it still remains a compelling book.
REAL fantasy geniuses, like JRR Tolkien, would NEVER have an army of ghosts come to the aid of Aragorn in the climactic battle in “Return of the King.” And if he did, fantasy nerds would throw the book down in disgust and never read it again.
I know what you meant, but it IS a bad example because that is from the movie not the book. He used the ghosts to defeat the “Corsairs of Umbar” and take their ships; the ghosts were gone when Aragorn arrived at the main battle.
