Troll Fest in Harry Potter Forum

nesf

Faith wrote:

Nobody reads HP thinking that it's "literature". Nobody attempts to compare it to any of the great classics.

You just compared it to The Lord of the Rings in your previous post which some people would consider to be a great classic of the genre that Rowling wants to write in. They are children's books that adults read for some reason. They aren't even that good for a children's book.

Some people even consider it to be representitive of the "best" of the fantasy genre and Rowling as one of it's premier writers. She's overhyped and overpraised, her books are what they are and you can find merit in them or whatever once you choose the books you compare them to carefully. Really though, it's the Famous Five with wizards and trolls.

Terry

I read the Iliad once.
I never picked up a book after that.

Thrill

nesf wrote:

You just compared it to The Lord of the Rings .

To be fair, she didn't. She wasn't comparing the two sets of books, she was defending the HP forum. If you read back through some of the previous posts you'll see how LOTR came to be mentioned.


Just because the Harry Potter books doesnt meet the high standards of what some consider to be superior works doesn't mean they are rubbish to everyone. Saying Umberto Eco's books are good, or even better than other works, is only a matter of opinion.

After all, nearly 330 million copies of the HP series were sold. Someone must like them.

Terry

thrill, arguing literature with someone who has read books considered to be classics is like arguing music with a muso or movies with a film student.
Pissing into the wind.

nesf

thrill wrote:

To be fair, she didn't. She wasn't comparing the two sets of books, she was defending the HP forum. If you read back through some of the previous posts you'll see how LOTR came to be mentioned.

Eh, she indirectly compared them in that she implied that the HP series could have a legacy because the LOTR has a legacy. The LOTR was an abberation in how long its legacy has been (above and over it's own merit imho but some would disagree with me).

thrill wrote:

Just because the Harry Potter books doesnt meet the high standards of what some consider to be superior works doesn't mean they are rubbish to everyone. Saying Umberto Eco's books are good, or even better than other works, is only a matter of opinion.

After all, nearly 330 million copies of the HP series were sold. Someone must like them.

Popularity does not imply quality. Bread and circuses for the masses and all that.

Thrill

psi wrote:

ts kinda like calling the firemen after the fire has burned he house down. I predict a quick demise for HP forums after the last book. No loss either.

Psi predicted a quick death for the HP forum now that the last book has been written. Faith was only saying that just because it was the last book doesn't mean the forum will die and, perhaps unfortunately, used LOTR forum as an example of how a forum can still carry on afterwards. The reason I say unfortunately is because some might mistake her post as an attempt to compare the books. Thats what I think has happened.

In a later post she says....

Faith wrote:

Nobody reads HP thinking that it's "literature". Nobody attempts to compare it to any of the great classics. It is, at its core, a fantastical children's book

She quite clearly doesn't think the books are on the same level literature wise. whether the forum remains active or not is another issue and only time will tell. Rumors about the other movies, who'll star in them etc could keep it alive for another while yet.

nesf wrote:

Popularity does not imply quality.

I've never read a Harry Potter book and was only able to watch about half an hour of the first movie before changing the channel. I certainly didn't think it was quality. It's just that a lot of people seem to find it good entertainment.

Sully

Im with thrill on this. Thats exactly how I picked up that comment by Faith.

Anyway, the end of the matter is: Some parts of our society like the book, both Children and Adults, and some do not. Its a fact of life. We dont all enjoy and like the same things.

We have our opinions, even if they differ. Mocking someone for their opinion, imho, is just low.

Nehpets

zabbo wrote:

Elites almost ruined the book for me, by not spoilering 'Hermione Dies'

If that is true, I owe you a kick in the balls.

Kenny_D

Nehpets you are a bigger knob for not putting spoiler tags in the quote. You just spoiled that for me, not Elites

Tar.Aldarion

Stupid guy PMing people with spoilers. Although they don't actually bother me too much, it's the reading of the books I enjoy.
Miss Rowling may not be a fantastic writer but her books are quite enjoyable to read and just lol at the book snobbery. Man, I've read 3-4 books a week for 15 years, I should develop mine some more.

Sully

As far as im aware - thats not actually true. From everything I heard,

Hermonie does not die...

Thats all ill say for now.

Amz

Sully why are you even saying things like that? Saying she doesn't die is just as much of a spoiler!

Cop on and practice what you preach.

Crumble Froo

GYARR!!! >_<

bah, dammit, i should just log offline til ive read it a few times...

and tar.alderion... i would have to say, i'd regard anyone that can captivate people as much as ms rowling has... that can make someone care so much about the characters, and be so impatient to find out what happens them, has to be a good writer, there's no two ways about it.

the books are probably over hyped, yeah, but still, they did reach that level of hype in the first place for a good reason.

Tar.Aldarion

People thinking a book is good because of the story does not automatically make the writer technically good.

Crumble Froo

well, i find the LOTR story very good, but the style of writing just completely failed to captivate me, to make me care about the characters, to need to know what was gonna happen next... whereas ms rowling's did... *shrugs* just my 2c.

sioda

Gotta agree with Narco here LOTR does not have the engaging nature that HP books do. But on topic tolling spoilers just to piss people off is just shíte IMO

Sully

Amz wrote:

Sully why are you even saying things like that? Saying she doesn't die is just as much of a spoiler!

Cop on and practice what you preach.

Fair point, didn't realise what I said. Thanks for pointing it out.

Marksie

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

People thinking a book is good because of the story does not automatically make the writer technically good.

No but if it is credited, as the first book was, with increasing the literacy levels of 8-12 year olds then it is worthwhile and much better than A. S. Byatt for example. For whom snobbery and literary style precludes for me reading past page 5, booker prize or no booker prize.

nesf

thrill wrote:

I've never read a Harry Potter book and was only able to watch about half an hour of the first movie before changing the channel. I certainly didn't think it was quality. It's just that a lot of people seem to find it good entertainment.

I accept your point on LOTR, it's not a big issue anyway tbh.

The books (and films) are a triumph of marketing. I really do honestly respect that. She exploited a gap in the market and dug her claws in deep etc.

The thing is, this is just like the Da Vinci Code. Criticising the book or author led you to be labelled as a book snob etc because the masses adored it. It's the kind of blind populism and people confusing a criticism of the book with being a criticism of the reader (which are not the same god damn thing!).

The HP books are pulp. Nothing more. There is nothing wrong with enjoying pulp novels, they are aimed at the lowest common denominator and normally a person can get some enjoyment out of them even though they might find the prose painfully cliched and "by the numbers". But some people are so bloody insecure about themselves that someone else pointing out a favourite book of their's is pulp just puts them on the defensive thinking it's an attack on their intellect or something.

If you can't take some gentle cajoling over reading a children's book as an adult then you need to work on being secure about what you enjoy tbh.

nesf

narco wrote:

well, i find the LOTR story very good, but the style of writing just completely failed to captivate me, to make me care about the characters, to need to know what was gonna happen next... whereas ms rowling's did... *shrugs* just my 2c.

Tolkien didn't aim for the lowest common denominator, Rowling did pretty much. She's actually trying to market her books and has aimed them squarely at a certain demographic and succeeds versus Tolkien who's purpose was less to captivate and keep you turning pages and more about telling a story in a created world as a setting for an invented language of his.

It's not a criticism of Rowling really, her aims are very different and to be fair to her she does turn out page turner children's fantasy books. There's not much else to them really though.

Minto

Amz wrote:

Sully why are you even saying things like that? Saying she doesn't die is just as much of a spoiler!

Cop on and practice what you preach.

I'm fairly sure

Hermione

doesn't die now, you should have put 'she' in spoilers, lol!

Sully

Minto wrote:

I'm fairly sure

Hermione

doesn't die now, you should have put 'she' in spoilers, lol!

Carefull now - spoiler "die" and "she" -- its a sensitive issue.

Crumble Froo

TheGooner wrote:

Hi Folks

Plenty of opportunity for cats in cloaks pics here but bare with me a sec.

why hasnt this been done yet?

billy the squid

All was well

Tar.Aldarion

Marksie wrote:

No but if it is credited, as the first book was, with increasing the literacy levels of 8-12 year olds then it is worthwhile and much better than A. S. Byatt for example. For whom snobbery and literary style precludes for me reading past page 5, booker prize or no booker prize.

My favourite thing about Harry Potter is that it gets people to read and actually queue up for a book. Much respect for miss Rowling.

Villaricos

nesf wrote:

The HP books are pulp. Nothing more. There is nothing wrong with enjoying pulp novels, they are aimed at the lowest common denominator and normally a person can get some enjoyment out of them even though they might find the prose painfully cliched and "by the numbers". But some people are so bloody insecure about themselves that someone else pointing out a favourite book of their's is pulp just puts them on the defensive thinking it's an attack on their intellect or something.

If you can't take some gentle cajoling over reading a children's book as an adult then you need to work on being secure about what you enjoy tbh.

I enjoyed that rant because it comes from someone who clearly has no interest in Harry Potter and argues from a lack of knowledge of the series. The Harry Potter books are not pulp, to compare them to LOTR yes does an injustice to LOTR but akin to that to compare them to The DaVinci Code does Harry Potter an injustice.

No one is claiming Rowling is a great literary master and no one will. But if you read and understood her novels you would see the cleverness within them, in the well developed characterisation, in the complexity of the overall plot of the seven books and the skill it took to imagine and piece together all this.
The thing I noticed most about reading the final book was how much it related to events in the first and how well she knotted together her first and her last.

Yes she has had gaping plot holes, no it will never appeal to literary snobs but it is a story that captured the imagination of millions and for that she should be given credit. There is a lot more to these books than broomsticks and magic wands.

JC 2K3

Pulp my ass. nesf, did you even read beyond the first book?

The films, the merchandise, the marketing, they're all a load of bollocks, however, this does not reflect in the slightest what the books are all about.

Her writing may be filled with clichés and repeated words, but the character developments, the plot, the themes, the deeper meanings to what she writes and the brilliant progression from childrens books to a books for an older audience over the course of the series. It's magnificant.

bounty_hunter

Villaricos wrote:

I enjoyed that rant because it comes from someone who clearly has no interest in Harry Potter and argues from a lack of knowledge of the series. The Harry Potter books are not pulp, to compare them to LOTR yes does an injustice to LOTR but akin to that to compare them to The DaVinci Code does Harry Potter an injustice.

No one is claiming Rowling is a great literary master and no one will. But if you read and understood her novels you would see the cleverness within them, in the well developed characterisation, in the complexity of the overall plot of the seven books and the skill it took to imagine and piece together all this.
The thing I noticed most about reading the final book was how much it related to events in the first and how well she knotted together her first and her last.

Yes she has had gaping plot holes, no it will never appeal to literary snobs but it is a story that captured the imagination of millions and for that she should be given credit. There is a lot more to these books than broomsticks and magic wands.

+ 1

Couldn't have put it better Villaricos.
Nesf, something tells me you haven't even read the full series, so how about you do that first and then come back and rant about them once you actually have a valid basis for your complaints?

ecksor

Well, doesn't this all look very off-topic. Move it to one of your lowbrow pulp forums.

randylonghorn

lol at the heat in the discussion!

To my mind, anything that has got thousands of kids away from their games consoles and actually reading a book can't be bad.

Have read them myself, usually on a beach / on holidays when I didn't want anything too taxing, and will probably get round to reading this one eventually.

No, ofc they're not "great literature", but they're well imagined and there are a lot worse writers out there. "Pulp" is a bit harsh, tbh.

And I don't understand why people rant at Rowling for making big money out of them. She started writing as a single mother trying to make a living. She struck lucky, and hit the big-time. Would that we all had such luck ... or is that what sticks in peoples' throats?

EDIT: Oops, sorry, Ecksor! Had kinda forgotten what forum this was in!