You know, there is something to be said for JKR's writing.

[conuly]

She may overuse her adverbs, she may consistently tell instead of show, she may very well need an editor - but damn if she doesn't have a gift for writing fairy tales. I mean, that actually sound like they could be traditional fairy tales!

Comments

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

That's all I've been saying, silly. Substance vs. form. Forest vs. trees. I have my own complaints with her (and everyone's) writing.

[conuly]

Have you read her books yet? Because if you haven't, we're still not talking about it.

But if you have - seriously, if she'd restrict herself to writing fairy tales, short stories, and things of that nature, I think she would be brilliant at it. Unfortunately, her skill at writing novels really could use some improvement.

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

Here's what I have read:

The first 50 pages of the first book
The last 50 pages of the fifth book
The first half of the sixth book

But reading one page is enough to see her genius. I have never said (nor would I) that her writing is grammatically flawless. I have said she is a great writer. There is a difference.

[conuly]

So, why haven't you finished the series yet? I mean, aside from the cutest kid in the world who isn't related to me, what else is keeping you?

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

Capitalism. And, of course, LiveJournal, Destroyer of Worlds.

[conuly]

Fair enough, but you should at least finish one of the books before we discuss it. That's just courtesy and sense.

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

Courtesy? I feel it is disourteous to insult my judgement of what I have already experienced. Reading more only strengthens my view, whereas you refuse to consider it until I jump through your arbitrary hoops.

[conuly]

The woman has written seven novels. I have based my judgment of her writing on reading all seven. (Okay, I came to my conclusion before she'd finished the series, but trust me - book 7 wasn't the one to change my mind.)

You consistently tell my my opinion is wrong, but I do not believe that you've read enough of her work to have a good feel for it. Work that is not even compelling enough to force you to finish it! When I find a book I love, a book by an author I consider great, the power of the internets and my lack of money/time does not prevent me from finishing it, even if I have to stay up really late.

This isn't arbitrary. It's absolutely unreasonable of you to expect me to discuss a book with you that you haven't finished reading, and I do not wish to do so, either.

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

My lack of interest in children's fantasy in general or, until recently, her children's fantasy story in particular have nothing to do with her imagination or talent at expressing it. The subject matter simply didn't interest me. Nowadays, I have more pressing concerns which again do not reflect on her at all.

I don't expect you to discuss her with me. I don't even expect you accept that she is a great writer. I do expect you to stop boycotting the opinions of those who haven't met your criteria of entitlement. "You are only allowed to disagree with me if you have read X number of words," your argument goes. It's specious.

[conuly]

If she's not even a great enough author to engage you, she's not a great author. Regardless of the subject matter, regardless of whether or not you're "interested in children's fantasy" - a great author should engage you in their material regardless.

I wouldn't be boycotting your opinion in particular except that you are not content to say "I don't even expect you to agree with me that she's great". Instead, you want me (but don't expect me) to accept that she's great. It's insulting language, especially from somebody who, yes, has not read the books. No, you're not allowed an opinion on her works until you finish reading them (or at least one of them), just as you're not allowed an opinion on Monet unless you've seen more than 5 square inches of Water Lillies.

[conuly]

Although of course it doesn't generally count when you really do have important things to deal with, you've only been having this conversation with me (or not - you know what I mean) well over a year now. Two years? I don't know.

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

That's all I've been saying, silly. Substance vs. form. Forest vs. trees. I have my own complaints with her (and everyone's) writing.

[conuly]

Have you read her books yet? Because if you haven't, we're still not talking about it.

But if you have - seriously, if she'd restrict herself to writing fairy tales, short stories, and things of that nature, I think she would be brilliant at it. Unfortunately, her skill at writing novels really could use some improvement.

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

Here's what I have read:

The first 50 pages of the first book
The last 50 pages of the fifth book
The first half of the sixth book

But reading one page is enough to see her genius. I have never said (nor would I) that her writing is grammatically flawless. I have said she is a great writer. There is a difference.

[conuly]

So, why haven't you finished the series yet? I mean, aside from the cutest kid in the world who isn't related to me, what else is keeping you?

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

Capitalism. And, of course, LiveJournal, Destroyer of Worlds.

[conuly]

Fair enough, but you should at least finish one of the books before we discuss it. That's just courtesy and sense.

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

Courtesy? I feel it is disourteous to insult my judgement of what I have already experienced. Reading more only strengthens my view, whereas you refuse to consider it until I jump through your arbitrary hoops.

[conuly]

The woman has written seven novels. I have based my judgment of her writing on reading all seven. (Okay, I came to my conclusion before she'd finished the series, but trust me - book 7 wasn't the one to change my mind.)

You consistently tell my my opinion is wrong, but I do not believe that you've read enough of her work to have a good feel for it. Work that is not even compelling enough to force you to finish it! When I find a book I love, a book by an author I consider great, the power of the internets and my lack of money/time does not prevent me from finishing it, even if I have to stay up really late.

This isn't arbitrary. It's absolutely unreasonable of you to expect me to discuss a book with you that you haven't finished reading, and I do not wish to do so, either.

[rpeate.livejournal.com]

My lack of interest in children's fantasy in general or, until recently, her children's fantasy story in particular have nothing to do with her imagination or talent at expressing it. The subject matter simply didn't interest me. Nowadays, I have more pressing concerns which again do not reflect on her at all.

I don't expect you to discuss her with me. I don't even expect you accept that she is a great writer. I do expect you to stop boycotting the opinions of those who haven't met your criteria of entitlement. "You are only allowed to disagree with me if you have read X number of words," your argument goes. It's specious.

[conuly]

If she's not even a great enough author to engage you, she's not a great author. Regardless of the subject matter, regardless of whether or not you're "interested in children's fantasy" - a great author should engage you in their material regardless.

I wouldn't be boycotting your opinion in particular except that you are not content to say "I don't even expect you to agree with me that she's great". Instead, you want me (but don't expect me) to accept that she's great. It's insulting language, especially from somebody who, yes, has not read the books. No, you're not allowed an opinion on her works until you finish reading them (or at least one of them), just as you're not allowed an opinion on Monet unless you've seen more than 5 square inches of Water Lillies.

[conuly]

Although of course it doesn't generally count when you really do have important things to deal with, you've only been having this conversation with me (or not - you know what I mean) well over a year now. Two years? I don't know.