![e5Um7dj[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/UhA9m6Y.jpg "e5Um7dj[1].jpg")
Surely you have to admit that, whilst not literary masterpieces, they're infinitely better than most if not all young adult trash
>>7639364
Shoo
>>7639373
But they're at the very least competent, anon!
>>7639364
they're pretty much average examples that somehow hit the mainstream jackpot.
Absolutely. There's nothing wrong with Harry Potter in and of itself. The problem is that it's become so wildly popular that a whole generation sees it as the be-all-end-all of literature. I'm 22 and most of my friends have read all the Harry Potter books but barely anything else. And those that consider themselves "readers" just read the abundant YAF garbage that it spawned.
>>7639364
I went to the Yale University bookstore and bought and read a copy of "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone." I suffered a great deal in the process. The writing was dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs." I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing.
But when I wrote that in a newspaper, I was denounced. I was told that children would now read only J.K. Rowling, and I was asked whether that wasn't, after all, better than reading nothing at all? If Rowling was what it took to make them pick up a book, wasn't that a good thing?
It is not. "Harry Potter" will not lead our children on to Kipling's "Just So Stories" or his "Jungle Book." It will not lead them to Thurber's "Thirteen Clocks" or Kenneth Grahame's "Wind in the Willows" or Lewis Carroll's "Alice."
Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.
Our society and our literature and our culture are being dumbed down, and the causes are very complex. I'm 73 years old. In a lifetime of teaching English, I've seen the study of literature debased. There's very little authentic study of the humanities remaining. My research assistant came to me two years ago saying she'd been in a seminar in which the teacher spent two hours saying that Walt Whitman was a racist. This isn't even good nonsense. It's insufferable.
>>7639401
You should really lighten up. Don't worry, there are plenty of pretentious assholes ready to take your place in society. Just look at /lit/
>>7639364
not literature
>>7639443
Of course they are. How could you say they're not?
>>7639448
just because something is in book format does not make it literature, anon.
car manuals are not literature.
>>7639457
viewed in a certain context, yes, car manuals can be literature
>>7639364
There's plenty of better YA
>>7639474
It's a true shame that you, in all fairness it must be admitted, cannot produce even a single example to back that statement up. Good effort despite everything.
>>7639401
I love you Bloom
Dickens woulda loved Rowling probably
>>7639401
You speak to my heart. <3
>>7639498
You also speak to my heart. <3
>>7639468
as one anon said, "sure it's literature... that doesn't make it good literature"
this shifts the argument but simply highlights the semantic camoflauge of an inherently subjective field, that being said, Harry Potter is not a good series and is not better than YA trash because that's exactly what it is, subjectively famm
>>7639501
someone called Rowling "dickensian" in that she started the story in the uncle's house instead of hogwarts, that way, readers will sympathize with harry, just like oliver twist. that's what Rowling is, basically a reposter
>>7639401
Someday he's just not going to be here anymore. I don't think I'll even find out about it on the national news. I'll just Google his name to see if Hum's being published yet and there will be an date of death in the wikipedia article. Will this year be the year, /lit/?
>>7639364
They're children's books. Not even YA but literal children's books.
>>7639712
They evolve from children's books into YA as they go along, pretending there's no difference to you, so as to put on an air of intelligence, achieves the opposite effect
>>7639376
I respect them only because JK did a pretty decent timeline thing with the time turner. Usually when people do time travel shit, they fuck it up beyond belief. she did quite well.
>>7639703
>hbwdiyl
The only reason people ehre think it's better than Twilight is because Twilight is for girls.
>>7639364
If we're handing out awards for biggest piles of shit, then I guess I see your point...
>>7640838
That's what a lot of new "literature" is anymore.
The series fell off after the 3rd novel.
I've heard it's a good starting point for learning a foreign language (after basic rules and vocab) because of the recognizable story, plentiful translations and progressive difficulty throughout the series. Is this true or should I look elsewhere while beginning to learn, say, french?
>>7639613
there's a lot of reposting going on between great expectations and Harry Potter.. the sirius black character, Havisham as Lestrange, Pip as Harry, cupboard bedroom and all. It's not like Rowling is the greatest but I would always rather see a kid reading HP than, say, comic books.
>> woof
>>7639427
>Not recognizing the Harry B
Get the fuck off this board
>>7639401
>Doesn't read entire series
>Critical of prose when all of HPs value is thematic
>Realizes life really is just a series of opportunities to shit on King
>It's insufferable
>>7639401
>As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs." I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous
This is just plain not true. I don't understand what he meant
