Disliking Harry Potter being OK...

[CapnTylor]

So, to revive the last thread, which was deviously banned for absolutely no fair reason...

How about an intelligent discussion on Harry Potter. Obviously, not liking or even hating something is perfectly fine and not trolling whatsoever.

So, what do you guys dislike about Harry Potter?

Personally, I think it is the first fantasy series epic of the 21st century.

[Leader Desslock]

I can't call it the "first fantasy series epic of the 21st century" because it's not an epic, not by the literary definition.

It's a good book series. I've read some better, and a whole lot worse. I think Rowling's a skilled storyteller, in the precise meaning of that term. I think the HP series has been a good tool to encourage reading in kids. I don't think the HP series is a significant work of literature, however much I've been entertained by it. I don't think Rowling will be remembered as one of the great novelists of her age. She's just written some good stories, you know?

[KatayokuのTenshi]

deviously banned for absolutely no fair reason...

Please do not start threads like this. They are a form of trolling and that is not allowed on this forum. Leinhart, this is a warning. Please just enjoy your time here and and stay out of trouble.

<_<

And the “Harry Potter Hate Thread” before that one was full of racism for some reason.

[Alice Catherine]

I think what was wrong with the last thread was that Leinhart went about it all wrong...tearing someone's skin off and whipping them with it is not welcome on AN.

On-Topic: Meh. I like Harry Potter but the ridiculous hype it got REALLY set people up with what a complete letdown DH was.

[Ikari Warrior]

Yeah, I don't hate Harry Potter. That other thread by Leinhart was out of line, though. I actually wish for nothing but the best for J.K. Rowling. I'm a little envious that she pulled this idea off before I did. Book 1 came out right when I started writing my own series. I never read it out of spite. The movies were pretty decent, though the order of the phoenix was really boring.

[CapnTylor]

DH was kind of a cop-out. But, then again, looking back, so were the first two.

But what makes something a masterpiece, Dess? I mean, it's not really an epic no, but where is the line between good book and significant literature?

[Ikari Warrior]

But what makes something a masterpiece, Dess? I mean, it's not really an epic no, but where is the line between good book and significant literature?

It is not an Epic in the sense that it isn't something like Homer's Odyssey or Vergil's Aeneid. The Harry Potter series isn't a series of epic poetry. If I didn't know better, I'd say Dess was cracking wise.

As far as significant literature, I'd say that it'd have to be studied for 50+ years as something world-changing and earth-shattering. The series is undeniably popular, but what does it do for the world?

A similar comparison would be the Lord of the Rings trilogy. That's been around since forever (sorry to make you feel old, Dess, lol), but I couldn't say that it's significant literature, despite the widespread popularity.

[Jae Hoon]

Comparing the LOTR to HP should be a crime punishable by having to listen to Brook Hogan for a week straight.

LOTR is a much better written series then HP.

[CapnTylor]

Comparing the LOTR to HP should be a crime punishable by having to listen to Brook Hogan for a week straight.

LOTR is a much better written series then HP.

It's written differently...

[lunarvesperia]

No i dont like HP,also the movies,but it must be because it is not the style of story i prefer to read.The movies are worse for me imho,because of the annoying protagonists :P
Always my opinion,ofc,i dont say that general.

[Caine]

I think that HP is an excellent work. Any book that generates that much hype (not to mention money) deserves recognition.

[Holy Knight]

I think that HP is an excellent work. Any book that generates that much hype (not to mention money) deserves recognition.

I agree completely.

I've read some very well writen and thought out stories, but they weren't as enjoyable as the Harry Potter series. Despite the fact that the HP series will never be held as exemplary of the diversity and richness of the English language, at least it shows that a story can be enjoyed.

What I mean is, for all the intricacy, intellect and depth that a book like Crime and Punishment holds, it still isn't as much a joy to read as Harry Potter.

Of course, you could counter with "Harry Potter was popular because it is the equivalent of a Hollywood blockbuster for the masses: inane, common humour and a simple story with a simple premise", but that would be dismissive of what constitutes a good story.

[earsofdoom]

I dislike Harry Potter but not to the extent some peaple do, i just find it to "kiddy" Im used to reading/playing games with spell casters who are more mature and like to kill peaple with deadly spells that are like a mini apocolypse, reading about Elminster (is that how its spelled?) from forgotten realms was always far more entertaining to me then watching a young boy attending a secret magic school.

[Ikari Warrior]

all throughout the potter flicks, I always laugh when someone points their wand at someone else. I'm like "dude, it's just a stick." I mean, I know it has more meaning than that, but waving a small stick at someone threateningly just makes me lawl.

[CrossboneGundam]

I've never been interested in Harry Potter. I don't like it. That doesn't mean I'm going out of my way to list all the things I don't like about it, though.

[Leader Desslock]

But what makes something a masterpiece, Dess?
For me, I'd say... the author's insight into the human condition, and their ability to express that insight in such a way that the reader can grasp a truth that otherwise would have eluded them. That'd be one kind of masterpiece. I'd say 1984 is a decent example of this type of masterpiece.

Another kind of masterpiece would be something that just shows extraordinary talent of expression. Catch-22 is a good example of this kind of masterpiece. From a writer's perspective, what Heller's doing in Catch-22 is fairly astounding.

There's the "breadth of vision" sort of masterpiece, I suppose. Lord Of The Rings is that sort of masterpiece, as would be the Dune, I think.

Wrap all three of these into one, and you get the kind of talent that someone like Terry Pratchett has. Or Geoffrey Chaucer. Or Edgar Allen Poe. These are (or will be, in Pratchett's case) foundational names in literature.

What Rowling's got going for her is that she's an extraordinary Storyteller, which I've capitalized for a reason. What I absolutely don't mean by that sentence is "she sure does write a good book, don't she?" I mean that she is a Master of the Storytelling Art, much like Stephen King. It's a branch of literature. They're both exceptional Storytellers, and while I certainly think their names will be remembered for ages and their stories will delight audiences for as long as there are people who can read Modern English, I don't think either of them has really changed the direction of literature in the way that someone like Chaucer, Shakespeare, Samuel Clemens, Edgar Allen Poe or Jonathan Swift has done.

I mean, it's not really an epic no...
The Epic is a specific literary form, and the Harry Potter series is not written in that form. It is not an epic. That is not an insult to the Harry potter series. The word "epic" doesn't just mean "really big and good". Most of the great works of literature don't happen to be epics.

...but where is the line between good book and significant literature?
...as I've said, I think of "significant" literature as the kind of work that changes the world, or at least peoples' perspective of it, or the way writers depict it. I don't think Rowling's done that. I think she's entertained a wide audience tremendously well. So did the writers for Bonanza, but I don't think the adventures of Adam, Hoss and Little Joe will be studied alongside Beowulf any time soon.

Scooby Doo and the gang, on the other hand...

If I didn't know better, I'd say Dess was cracking wise.
Nope, I was being straight up. People bandy about the word "epic" a little too loosely for me to have faith in the American educational system these days.

A similar comparison would be the Lord of the Rings trilogy. That's been around since forever (sorry to make you feel old, Dess, lol), but I couldn't say that it's significant literature, despite the widespread popularity.
I'd argue that LotR is definitely significant literature, in that Tolkein almost singlehandedly created the Fantasy genre as we know it today. Lots of folks wrote Fairy Stories before Tolkein, and gods know he used a lot of those Fairy Stories as his source material. But what Tolkein did was to take that loose and largely unrelated body of folk material, unite it into a common and sensible worldview, then use that as the backdrop for his narrative. Or, well... sort of. He was a language geek, so he used it as the backdrop for his invented languages, which then shaped his narratives. But you get the point - nobody had ever done that quite the way that he did, and very few people have done it since, or at least, very few people have done it effectively: Frank Herbert, Asimov & Clarke maybe.

Much the way that Poe shaped literature by defining the Detective Novel, Tolkein shaped literature by defining the Fantasy genre. I'd say that's significant.

[earsofdoom]

Much the way that Poe shaped literature by defining the Detective Novel, Tolkein shaped literature by defining the Fantasy genre. I'd say that's significant.

A bit off topic but Poe's Novel that defined the detective story was about a knife weilding monkey killer wasn't it? Poe was always the auther i wrote my english reports about whenever we were studying famous authers.

[Leader Desslock]

Yes, but be careful - as any Pratchett fan knows, it can be dangerous to call an orangutan "a monkey". :lol:

[Alice Catherine]

Comparing the LOTR to HP should be a crime punishable by having to listen to Brook Hogan for a week straight.

LOTR is a much better written series then HP.

QFMFHT.

(filler)

[Solid_Snake]

I mean that she is a Master of the Storytelling Art, much like Stephen King.

Stephen King> JK Rowling. AMIRITE?

[Ikari Warrior]

I'd argue that LotR is definitely significant literature, in that Tolkein almost singlehandedly created the Fantasy genre as we know it today.
I stand corrected, and would like my death sentence commuted :lol:. I was thinking that Lord of the Rings was pretty significant, but I didn't know HOW significant, and didn't want to make such a claim without doing the proper research which (I assume) you've done, or had done years ago.

[Leader Desslock]

Stephen King> JK Rowling. AMIRITE?
I think so, but I grew up in his neck of the woods, so I might be biased.

I think King's got more depth as an author. Rowling appears to have really nailed the whole "growing up in the British school system" angle, but King's written about a much broader range of characters and settings, in a much wider range of formats, from short stories to novels to serials. I think King's work is more realistic, his characters and situations less contrived.

Maybe in time, Rowling will demostrate the same level of talent. I haven't seen her do that yet, however.

[Mort]

I think so, but I grew up in his neck of the woods, so I might be biased.

I think King's got more depth as an author. Rowling appears to have really nailed the whole "growing up in the British school system" angle, but King's written about a much broader range of characters and settings, in a much wider range of formats, from short stories to novels to serials. I think King's work is more realistic, his characters and situations less contrived.

Maybe in time, Rowling will demostrate the same level of talent. I haven't seen her do that yet, however.

I think to be fair to Rowling you would have to wait and see what she does next. She started off with a long story that lasted many books. She has yet to really write more then one story. While Steven King has written many more books over decades. With most of them stand alone novels.

I would like to see Rowling leave behind Harry Potter's world and write something new. I think if she manges to this she could end up with a wide range body of works. I read all the Harry Potter books and saw the writing get better as they went along.

[Bernard_Monsha]

I think that HP is an excellent work. Any book that generates that much hype (not to mention money) deserves recognition.

By that definition the Pokey Little Puppy and Dr. Phil's books should be in the same class.





Maybe in time, Rowling will demostrate the same level of talent. I haven't seen her do that yet, however.

I hope no one ever reaches the bloated state of Stephen Kings authorship. He is the only author that can spend 5 pages on the description of a lamp and give it all vivid life of Ben Stein offering color commentary on the radio of a poker game.

Tolkien is another overrated author, his work tends to be disjointed and overbearing. Give me C.S. Lewis to read any day of J.R.R. Tolkien.

On the Harry Potter books, I put them in the same class as L. Frank Baum's books. People will watch the movies but the books will gradually fade away and only the movies will be remembered in 50 or so years.

[Leader Desslock]

I think to be fair to Rowling you would have to wait and see what she does next.
I'll give her a shot, but at this point she'd have to write like Louis L'Amour just to get in the race. By the time King was Rowling's current age, he'd already written everything up to and including The Dark Half. That includes The Stand, Carrie, The Shining, It, Misery, Firestarter, Christine, The Dead Zone, The Running Man, and countless others. By the time he was her age, Kin had over a dozen feature films made of his works.

I'm eager to see what Rowling does next, but got some serious catching up to do.

[Kevin]

By the time he was her age, King had over a dozen feature films made of his works.

Have you watched any of those movies? Most do not do his stories justice.

[Leader Desslock]

^ Yeah, I have. Most of them range from merely awful to truly abysmal. In his defense, he had very little control over the content or presentation of his material for those early works.

King's novels don't really lend themselves to screenplay adaptations, in my opinion. I've liked a few of them, but most are pretty painful.

[Bernard_Monsha]

Have you watched any of those movies? Most do not do his stories justice.

Have you read Lawnmower Man? The movie could do little to damage that story. Also you have to give Salem's Lot proper respect, the chief vampire gave me nightmares when I was 6 and James Mason pwns all other screen henchmen.

[Leader Desslock]

^ It wasn't the chief vampire that game me nightmares from Salem's Lot, it was the boy's friend floating outside the window, slowly scraping his nails on the glass. That gave me some heavy-duty nightmares as a kid.

I read Salem's Lot some years after seeing the movie, and I was surprised how conservative a horror novel it turned out to be. Of course, that was the point of it, but I still thought it'd be more ... I dunno, terrifying? I mean, The Shining (novel) had me on the edge of my seat, but Salem's Lot was more of a fun read.

[Caine]

By that definition the Pokey Little Puppy and Dr. Phil's books should be in the same class.


Really? How did you arrive at that conclusion?

[Ken-Ohki]

My complaint with Harry Potter is I find it boring and annoying. The first book was interesting, an easy read. I finished it in about a day and a half, including all the time I spent going to class, sleeping, and eating. A cute book I suppose. The second book had the same villain as the first . . . um . . . ok. Why not? Silly kid is STILL not talking to his teachers, silly kid is more trouble than his enemies, doesn't listen to what he's told, hides things from faculty, and should be expelled and or eaten by big nasty . . . something. I was frustrated. Ok, people tell me the second book is the worst.

I watch the third movie and I'm unimpressed. Same villain again eh? Okey dokey. You have a time machine what???? :blink:

In writing they call this deus ex machina. Sure it's set up that way several points in the series but it's still deus ex machina which is where, unable to find a way for Harry and co to fix the problem they'd gotten themselves into (again not talking to teachers, hiding things from faculty, should be expelled, etc.) we simply have a higher power/device fix everything for them. I find it poor writing and it bores me.

4th movie

You're kidding. This guy sets up ALL this effort to make a port key when he could physically grab Harry (he's a trusted teacher) lock him up somewhere nasty, and keep him there till he's needed. Instead we have this incredibly stupid overly complicated mess where he has to cheat for Harry just so he can grab a port key in the end? Doesn't anyone else look at this and say what the blooming hell? People watch this and like it? I'm confused.

5th movie, seriously I'm done. Seriously, I'm done. I'm not even going to waste my time watching this. It's already proven itself childish. Sure, we can watch it for all the cute stuff, see who likes who, enjoy the magic, whatever. I'm annoyed and bored by the entire thing already and have no desire to be bored and annoyed further. Plot holes frustrate me, deus ex machina frustrates me, above all this kid who refuses to talk to his teachers, refuses to ask trusted mentors for help, and breaks rules whenever he feels it's ok frustrates me. I want to strangle the kid, sorry.

So, if it's ok to dislike Harry Potter I hope you see why I dislike it. I can't get passed what I see as serious faults with the story. I'm not interested in seeing the same villain again and again until the final book when whatever happens between them I just no longer care.

Enjoy Harry Potter for what it's worth. It got a lot of people to read, good. Just leave me out of it.

[IsaacBrock]

Here is what I think: Everything that LD said is spot on.

I think that Rowling is a great story teller, but I think King has her beat by a long shot.

After reading the Dark Tower series, seeing how characters that I thought were long gone (Father Callahan) just showing back up, and how other novels and short stories that he has written, and heck, even King himself show up in the world of Roland, Susan, Jake, Eddie, and Oy just made me grin from ear to ear.

[Solid_Snake]

Have you watched any of those movies? Most do not do his stories justice.

Not to mention he dabbed his hands into film. Which gave us: 'Creepshow' and 'Maximum OverDrive.'.

PS: I thought 'The Dark Half." movie adaption was neat. George A Romero is an awsome director. And I wish we could have gotten' him to actually do more King movie adaptions.(He was going to do Pet Semetary, From a Buick 8 and a few other I'm forgetting.)

I'm getting too off topic I'm sure.

[Bernard_Monsha]

Really? How did you arrive at that conclusion?



Any book that generates that much hype (not to mention money) deserves recognition.

Are you saying the Pokey Little Puppy does not generate hype or sales?

[Ikari Warrior]

George A Romero is an awsome director. And I wish we could have gotten' him to actually do more King movie adaptions.(He was going to do Pet Semetary, From a Buick 8 and a few other I'm forgetting.)
I knew the Potter flicks were missing something :lol:

Seriously though, if there's any one thing that the movies are doing right, it's using the same cast/crew for all the movies, rather than swapping out actors and directors willy-nilly. The obvious exception being dumbledore since, well, even hollywood can't stop death...yet (referring to the actor not the character).

[Caine]

Are you saying the Pokey Little Puppy does not generate hype or sales?

On the same level as HP?

(are we playing questions only?)

[KatayokuのTenshi]

Same villain again eh? Okey dokey. You have a time machine what???? :blink:

In writing they call this deus ex machina. Sure it's set up that way several points in the series but it's still deus ex machina which is where, unable to find a way for Harry and co to fix the problem they'd gotten themselves into (again not talking to teachers, hiding things from faculty, should be expelled, etc.) we simply have a higher power/device fix everything for them. I find it poor writing and it bores me.

Don’t Deus Ex Machina usually come out of nowhere?
Oh no we’re in trouble now!
Good job we invented that … thing, and here it is!

The whatever it was called time thingy was obviously there from the beginning, if you couldn’t tell then it must have bored you to sleep early. -_-; It’s more like … “Chekhov’s Gun” …maybe. Except that it isn’t hanging on the mantelpiece, you have to figure out that it’s there.

And that villain didn’t even make an appearance in that film.

You're kidding. This guy sets up ALL this effort to make a port key when he could physically grab Harry (he's a trusted teacher) lock him up somewhere nasty, and keep him there till he's needed. Instead we have this incredibly stupid overly complicated mess where he has to cheat for Harry just so he can grab a port key in the end? Doesn't anyone else look at this and say what the blooming hell? People watch this and like it? I'm confused.

You forget that the perpetrator is a raving loony, it probably wouldn’t have satisfied his sense of style to do it so simply. Plus if he’d grabbed him early on he’d have to hide what he’d done all year. And who do you suspect when someone goes missing? Not the new guy surely!? If he grabbed him at just the right time then there would be no chance of him being rescued or escaping while they wait until they can perform the act… I guess that’s the reason.

I'm annoyed and bored by the entire thing already and have no desire to be bored and annoyed further. Plot holes frustrate me, deus ex machina frustrates me, above all this kid who refuses to talk to his teachers, refuses to ask trusted mentors for help, and breaks rules whenever he feels it's ok frustrates me. I want to strangle the kid, sorry.

But that’s …his character, the angsty little screw up who can’t trust people easily, who feels that everything is a personal attack against him (to be fair a lot of people are personally attacking him) and yet…he still manages to fight this (apparently) terrifying foe. Because he’s a better person? …I guess people like that?

[Bernard_Monsha]

On the same level as HP?

(are we playing questions only?)

Not really, Pokey Little Puppy sold more copies and is more widely read and has real staying power.

[Ken-Ohki]

I think this explains very well how I feel about the use of Deus ex Machina in the 3rd book.

http://www.sluggy.com/daily.php?date=050918

Seriously, it strained my suspension of disbelief to breaking.

A villian who's a raving loney doesn't excuse the story from having such a gaping plot hole. The entire purpose of this overly complicated plan is simply to keep Rawlings from finishing the story in 8 pages, she needed an excuse to add suspense. I felt cheated.

And if it's "his character" to be an angsty untrusting little screw up then keep me further away, little whiny brats like him deserve to become dragon dung.

[superplough]

The entire purpose of this overly complicated plan is simply to keep Rawlings from finishing the story in 8 pages, she needed an excuse to add suspense. I felt cheated.

In my opinion the main reason for the "overly complicated plan" was in order to make Harry's death look accidental. Voldemort wanted to kill Harry and restore himself to full power, but he wanted to do it without the rest of the wizarding world finding out. It was meant to look like Harry died while competing in the Triwizard Tournament. Unfortunately for him, his wand failed him, and Harry was able to escape and inform Dumbledore of Voldemort's resurrection.

However, there is no saving grace for the seventh book. That was just crap.

[The Million Dollar Prons]

Seventh book owned you suck

[TheCrowsCry]

I tried to get into it but I couldnt, I dont really have any other reason.

[valalight]

I liked it ^.^ unlike every one else in my Gen I started reading it when I was in 9th grade, not when I was in elementary school, so I got in to it a little late, but it was a great diversion from my crazy hormonal life.

[Jae Hoon]

Are you saying the Pokey Little Puppy does not generate hype or sales?

Lets not forget such great books such as Paris Hiltons book were best sellers.

[Ketaru]

I actually saw the first two movies for the first time these past few weeks and I'm surprised to say they weren't as bad as I thought they were going to be (..."movies" is to say I haven't read the books yet).

I kind of have a problem with how the story setting seems so archaic, despite the fact it's supposed to take place in the late 1990s. It tries to incorporate some modern quirks (like adding a year number to the end of a flying broomstick brand), but to me, that just doesn't mesh well, seeming almost hokey to me.

[Waga]

I can't call it the "first fantasy series epic of the 21st century" because it's not an epic, not by the literary definition.

It's a good book series. I've read some better, and a whole lot worse. I think Rowling's a skilled storyteller, in the precise meaning of that term. I think the HP series has been a good tool to encourage reading in kids. I don't think the HP series is a significant work of literature, however much I've been entertained by it. I don't think Rowling will be remembered as one of the great novelists of her age. She's just written some good stories, you know?

You're right. Even if it was an epic it woldn't be the first Fantasy epic of the 21st Century. But I think Harry potter is a classic case of world building. Though it lacks the literary dimension of books considered masterpieces, it has the ability to transcend critical dissection and go straight into our hearts.
I think that a book should be judged by how much you enjoy it as much as by dissecting the narrative technique. Critics often overlook this instead churning out a load of generic and often superficial analysis, that favours impressive soundbites and stretched arguments over sunstance and logic. An example is Harry potter. A lot of Critics spent less than a day reading it in order to give a quick exclusive article on the book before their rival counterparts. They didn't spend their time properly reading the book and thinking through it's merits. By that rational an average reader with capable logic makes for a better critic of a book than a professional critic. After all how can you enjoy a book or come out with a full, well thought out analysis under such a harsh atmosphere and limited time constraint.
Harry Potter is by no means my favourite book but I think some critics fail in giving it a proper critique whilst others like Stephen King, do.

[reccura]

Seventh book is great, seeing how the plots from the first to the sixth books are well connected. Rowling describes every detail, so every reader fully understands. Aside from the grammatical errors I saw, I think the story's altogether great. Can't wait to see the sixth movie ;)

[Amuro]

Disclaimer: If my post makes even less sense than usual, it's because i have a broken finger and trouble typing.

I never finished the series, as it dropped off my radar after Order of the Phoenix, but I do think that it succeeded at being a very immersive/addictive narrative through its setting in an abnormal boarding school where life, both academic and social, actually resembled the idealized concepts of academic and social life.

For example, the Potions class actually involved throwing a long list of ingredients into a pot and getting some substance that had some impressive use. This exciting fantasy contrasts with the "mundaneness" of a real-world Chemistry class, which involves memorizing various information which the student finds difficult to relate to practical use. At the same time, the contrast between good students in Potions class and bad students resembled the real contrast in a Chemistry classroom.

It's also pleasing how the school was also a center for all sorts of social events/festivals that were actually attended and taken seriously. In this sense it more resembles a college than a grade school (I've never attended a boarding school, admittedly). However, even in colleges, not to mention in grade school, there is a majority of students who spits on social events and chooses to sit in their dorms doing drugs (or watching anime). While some of Harry n the gang's actions are a nod to this sort of behavior, the Hogwarts student body as a whole embraces things like the Quiddich tournament and various other things that go on. Life is very-much idealized. Things actually work. Students learn and socialize in a utopian way as a general rule. The exceptions are just that, exceptions.

So far, however, the children's fantasy book series that I have the fondest memories of was The Unicorn Chronicles by Bruce Coville. The main problem with that series is that the second book was released all-the-way-back in 2000-or-so, and the third book has been a no-show. Supposedly it's coming out next year, but I highly doubt that I'll bother reading it. Are you familiar with it by any chance, Leader Desslock?